<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Niche Modeling &#187; Climate</title>
	<atom:link href="http://landshape.org/enm/category/climate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://landshape.org/enm</link>
	<description>The Power of Numeracy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 21:47:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>10 of 11 emails not threats</title>
		<link>http://landshape.org/enm/10-of-11-emails-not-threats/</link>
		<comments>http://landshape.org/enm/10-of-11-emails-not-threats/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 21:47:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Climate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://landshape.org/enm/?p=5943</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ANU Climate Science girlie-men exaggerated the threats as well: In a six-page ruling made last week, Mr Pilgrim found that 10 of 11 documents, all emails, “do not contain threats to kill” and the other “could be regarded as intimidating and at its highest perhaps alluding to a threat”.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://landshape.org/enm/10-of-11-emails-not-threats/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Levitus data on ocean forcing confirms skeptics, falsifies IPCC</title>
		<link>http://landshape.org/enm/levitus-data-on-ocean-forcing-confirms-skeptics-falsifies-ipcc/</link>
		<comments>http://landshape.org/enm/levitus-data-on-ocean-forcing-confirms-skeptics-falsifies-ipcc/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 13:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Climate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://landshape.org/enm/?p=5918</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The IPCC, in the AR4 working group one, stated what could be called the central claim of global warming, the estimate of the net radiative forcing. "The understanding of anthropogenic warming and cooling influences on climate has improved since the TAR, leading to very high confidence that the effect of human activities since 1750 has been a net positive forcing of +1.6 [+0.6 to +2.4] W m–2." Remember a forcing is an imbalance that causes heating, like a hot plate heating a saucepan of water. Read more [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://landshape.org/enm/levitus-data-on-ocean-forcing-confirms-skeptics-falsifies-ipcc/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>23</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Finkelstein the new face of totalitarianism</title>
		<link>http://landshape.org/enm/finkelstein-the-new-face-of-totalitarianism/</link>
		<comments>http://landshape.org/enm/finkelstein-the-new-face-of-totalitarianism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Mar 2012 06:27:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Climate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://landshape.org/enm/?p=5878</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Members of the Independent Inquiry into Media Regulation at Sydney University. In the middle is Chair of Inquiry Ray Finkelstein centre, Chris Young (left) and Prof. Matthew Ricketson (right) When I started in 2005 fighting to defend normal scientific standards over the exaggerations and biases of climate science extremism, I never thought it would end up in a fight for free speech over left-wing totalitarianism. Apparently, based on the Finkelstein Media Inquiry, it has come to this. Some Read more [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://landshape.org/enm/finkelstein-the-new-face-of-totalitarianism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Scafetta vs the IPCC</title>
		<link>http://landshape.org/enm/scafetta-vs-the-ipcc/</link>
		<comments>http://landshape.org/enm/scafetta-vs-the-ipcc/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 07:55:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Climate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://landshape.org/enm/?p=5860</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great new application from WUWT contrasts the predictions of two models of global warming, Scafetta's empirical resonance model and the IPCC general circulation models. I was asked to make sense of this from Rahmstorf and Foster: http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/6/4/044022, referenced here at RC: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=10475. I haven't read the paper in detail, and I find I have to do that to really assess it. So I can only comment on the general approach. Although Read more [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://landshape.org/enm/scafetta-vs-the-ipcc/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Snowballing Bias and Corruption</title>
		<link>http://landshape.org/enm/snowballing-bias-and-corruption/</link>
		<comments>http://landshape.org/enm/snowballing-bias-and-corruption/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 23:56:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Climate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://landshape.org/enm/?p=5797</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One of the themes we have dealt with repeatedly is bias: in global warming reporting and research, especially statistical bias. Bias in the media against the Ron Paul campaign is becoming a big issue. Above is a clip of people telling Dana Bash, a CNN news reporter, what they thought of her biased reporting. One incident was were Dana reported that Republicans in general were worried "like I am" that RP would continue on and hurt her presumptive nominee Mitt Romney. In another hilarious Read more [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://landshape.org/enm/snowballing-bias-and-corruption/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ron Paul on Global Warming</title>
		<link>http://landshape.org/enm/ron-paul-on-global-warming/</link>
		<comments>http://landshape.org/enm/ron-paul-on-global-warming/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 04:22:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Climate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://landshape.org/enm/?p=5792</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[November 20, 2008 Ron Paul said in a New York Times / Freakonomics interview: “I try to look at global warming the same way I look at all other serious issues: as objectively and open-minded as possible. There is clear evidence that the temperatures in some parts of the globe are rising, but temperatures are cooling in other parts. The average surface temperature had risen for several decades, but it fell back substantially in the past few years. Clearly there is something afoot. The question Read more [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://landshape.org/enm/ron-paul-on-global-warming/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Global Satellite Temperature for November 2011</title>
		<link>http://landshape.org/enm/global-satellite-temperature-for-november-2011/</link>
		<comments>http://landshape.org/enm/global-satellite-temperature-for-november-2011/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2011 06:58:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Climate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://landshape.org/enm/?p=5757</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Global temperature TLT anomaly for RSS MSU is almost back to zero at 0.03C. The most reliable estimates of temperature have gone nowhere for over 30 years.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://landshape.org/enm/global-satellite-temperature-for-november-2011/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Precautionary Principle as Deus ex machina</title>
		<link>http://landshape.org/enm/precautionary-principle-as-deus-ex-machina/</link>
		<comments>http://landshape.org/enm/precautionary-principle-as-deus-ex-machina/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Nov 2011 04:27:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Climate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://landshape.org/enm/?p=5754</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Andrew Bolt picked up on one of the emails from Climategate 2 that gives a fascinating insight into the collusion between academia and the WWF in the manufacturing of environmental scares. It also shows the role of the precautionary principle as a "deus ex machina", a device of dubious merit for solving tricky problems in a plot. Step 1. At 12:21 13/09/99 -0400, Andrew Markham, director of World Wildlife Fund's Climate Change Campaign, writes to Mike Hulme at UAE: >Meanwhile, Hurricane Read more [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://landshape.org/enm/precautionary-principle-as-deus-ex-machina/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Climategate Bits</title>
		<link>http://landshape.org/enm/climategate-bits/</link>
		<comments>http://landshape.org/enm/climategate-bits/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 20:33:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Climate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://landshape.org/enm/?p=5739</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Have you listened to the Ray Hadley audio here ripping into Tim Flannery? Bolt doesn't go into detail, but its well worth the 20min listen. Apparently Flannery fabricated the whole Crikey story about a media setup over his Hawksbury River house, with interviews with the local resident in question to prove it. Ray calls him "low scum" and a "liar" repeatedly. Strong stuff. Off to court we go again. Climategate2: This from Mike Hulme is interesting recommending CSIRO as being reliable for Read more [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://landshape.org/enm/climategate-bits/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Climategate 2: What Climate Scientists Really Think About You</title>
		<link>http://landshape.org/enm/climategate-2-what-climate-scientists-really-think-about-you/</link>
		<comments>http://landshape.org/enm/climategate-2-what-climate-scientists-really-think-about-you/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:44:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Climate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://landshape.org/enm/?p=5737</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lovely “David Jones” subject: RE: African stations used in HadCRU global data set to: “Phil Jones” Thanks Phil for the input and paper. I will get back to you with comments next week. Fortunately in Australia our sceptics are rather scientifically incompetent. It is also easier for us in that we have a policy of providing any complainer with every single station observation when they question our data (this usually snows them) and the Australian data is in pretty good order anyway Read more [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://landshape.org/enm/climategate-2-what-climate-scientists-really-think-about-you/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

