[ RadSafe ] Global Warming

[garyi at trinityphysics.com]

Hi Kristan,

Thanks for sharing that.  Yes, it does make sad sense.  We can't afford renewable energy, 
so the politically correct thing is to deprive citizens of energy that would be affordable.

In case you haven't seen it, here is the code fragment from the IPCC climate model that 
fakes the temperature rise:

    yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]


    valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75         
; fudge factor

The long string of numbers in the second set of brackets is the "fudge factor" applied 
(supposedly) to the raw data. This string of numbers "adjusts" the raw data from 1904 to 
1994 in five-year increments.  You might wonder why the set of negative numbers is present 
early on.  I have read elsewhere that 1934 was warmer than 1998.  If that's true, then it would 
be necessary to lower those temperatures to achieve the desired upward slope on the 
famous hockey stick graph.

The New Zealand climate center has also been shown to fake their results.  Unlike the IPPC 
though, they weren't smart enough to destroy the raw data so it has been used to show that 
there is no alarming temperature rise.  I've read that NASA has for years refused to release 
their raw data, so I conclude that they also are in on the game.

Maybe I'm naïve, but I find it surprising that there aren't any climate centers refuting the 
fraud.  The degree of international collusion, in every field from journalism to politics to 
science, is simply scary.  Despite what we know, there is still a big effort to convince the 
public that there isn't anything fraudulent about Climate Gate.

These people belong in jail.

-Gary Isenhower


On 10 Dec 2009 at 10:03, Kristian Ukkonen wrote:
----snip--------
Now, 20% reneweable.. If you increase total with new NPPs
(like 3 x 1600MW), you need to increase the amount of
reneweable energy production too (3 x 1600MW * 20% = 960MW,
lots of windmills). So it is better to prevent adding of
non-reneweable energy production (even if it is pollution
free). This is what minister Pekkarinen has publicly stated
as the reason for 0-1 permits for new NPPs.

Sad. But the logic does work, if the primary goal is 20%
reneweable energy production and every kWh requires lots of
tax payers money in government support to windmill owners.

   Kristian Ukkonen.