Re: [asa] Global Warming 'Deniers' Article 'Highly Contrived' per Newsweek Editor

From: Janice Matchett <>
Date: Mon Aug 13 2007 - 13:45:49 EDT

At 01:15 PM 8/13/2007, PvM wrote:

>Faulty sources? ....Finding fault with some of these data sources
>ignores the process that is used to correct these data for biases
>and trends not related to climate.

@ Ahhhhhhh - exactly what IS that "process" they use to "correct the
data they ignore" and the faulty data they choose to include? Do
they do it monthly when the AlGoreRhythms are made available to
them? Hahahahahaha ~ Janice

Goddard Institute researchers used temperature data from weather
stations on land..... [snip] Pictured

More inconvenient truths:

"...but I just learned the other day that the Urban Heat Island
Effect (which I had always naively assumed was taken into account) is
not even factored into any of these data sets. I was blown away by
that. The IPCC considers it to be a non-factor. ..."
posted on 08/13/2007

...recent findings that 1934 is the hottest year in the last 107 years...

And think how much more thermal mass we had sitting around in 1998 vs
1934 in the form of highways, parking lots, bldgs... When I lived in
the SW, I learned that a good rule of thumb in gauging summer temps
is that it was approx. 5 degrees hotter in town than it was out in
the country because of all the accumulated heat from structures,
pavement, etc. Plus the heat from a lot more internal combustion engines.

And, then there are all the a/c condensing units displacing indoor
heat to the exterior. When you're dealing in the minutia of tenths &
hundredths of a degree, this stuff adds up & makes a
difference. And, still, 1934 was hotter. A LOT hotter, I
posted on 08/13/2007

In California, the warming rate is much increased by UHIs and land
use measurements. In fact, it may be doubled according to a study by
Patzert and LaDochy.

"The scientists found great variations in temperature patterns
throughout the state. Average temperatures increased significantly in
nearly 54 percent of the stations studied, with human-produced
changes in land use seen as the most likely cause. The largest
temperature increases were seen in the state's urban areas, led by
Southern California and the San Francisco Bay area, particularly for
minimum temperatures. Minimum temperatures at some agricultural sites
showed increases comparable to some urban areas. Rural,
non-agricultural regions warmed the least. The Central Valley warmed
slowest, while coastal areas warmed faster, and the southeast desert
warmed fastest.

The only area to cool was a narrow band of the state's mainly rural
northeast interior. While few stations overall showed decreases in
average and minimum temperatures, 13 percent of the stations for
which sufficient maximum temperature data were available showed a
significant drop in average maximum temperatures, including some urban sites."


Until GISS corrects for these non-climatic effects in California and
other states, the temperature increase in the US will continue to be

Posted by: Douglas Hoyt | August 9, 2007 01:27 PM

Here is my real world example of the Global Warming effects on
Policy. The State of California just passed legislation based on the
Global Warming hysteria that has forced electric bills to be billed
by customer usage of kwh in "usage tiers". Any usage over a certain
mystery amount, that the nuts in the state legislature determined
would reduce Global Warming, results in a penalty rate being charged
to the customer.

My bill this month was $400 higher than last month due to the fact I
consumed electricity into the penalty range of the "usage tier" they
call "energy hogs".
My electric bill went from $200 to $600 even though most days were in
excess of 100 F last month and I set my thermostat at 82 F. I live
near Palm Springs, Kalifornia.
I want a refund! This is the kind of crap the global warming nut
jobs are using to say we are wasting energy and increasing the
temperature of the planet with fraudulent research by NASA and others.

My local barber said his bill was in excess of $1000, a $600 increase
because of bogus science. This is a real world example of consensus
science run amok. My barber will have to pass the cost along as well
as all the other businesses in this state. This is Pure insanity.
How do I as a homeowner pass the cost along? We all are going to the
City Council Meeting next Tuesday and are going to protest the new
electric rates. I am going to bring in the new data from NASA to
debunk their arguments about Global Warming.

You all should be outraged that public policy is based on junk
science. You are going to be paying too. Like they say, California is
usually the leader in liberal policies. If California passes
something, so goes the nation.

Posted by: ScottyDog | August 11, 2007 12:46 PM


To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Aug 13 13:46:34 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Aug 13 2007 - 13:46:34 EDT