Even the BBC knows that Tuvalu is NOT sinking (why not make headlines)
BBC: Low-lying Pacific islands 'growing not sinking' June 2010
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10222679

A new geological study has shown that many low-lying Pacific islands are growing, not sinking.

The islands of Tuvalu, Kiribati and the Federated States of Micronesia are among those which have grown, because of coral debris and sediment.

Apr 8, 2011 at 11:27 AM | Robert Christopher
I have uploaded it into the correct thread at this afternoon's first attempt!

Turning Tide

Yes, the Tuvalese have been quick to spot the advantages of living on a 'sinking' island, haven't they?

This kind of thing would almost be funny if it weren't for unforgivable posturing stupidity by the likes of Oxfam and its mock climate trials in Bangladesh:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters/2010/nov/12/dhaka-climate-court-criminals

'Educating' the world's poor to sue the West for 'compensation' for supposed climate change impacts on their lives is profoundly dangerous. For starters, how the hell do you do the attribution?

Just consider Bangladesh as a case study.

The lies about AGW peddled by Oxfam and a host of others include, but are not limited to:

Sea level rise

- actually, it is the Gangetic Delta that is sinking (as all deltas do), not the Bay of Bengal that is rising.

- excessive ground water extraction is exacerbating the general subsidence

- excessive ground water is causing the (saline) water table to rise, salinating the soil and damaging crops - this is misrepresented as 'evidence' for SLR

- coastal erosion caused by the extensive felling of mangrove is mis-attributed to SLR

- storm surge damage is exacerbated by the extensive felling of mangrove (which acted as a very good natural barrier). This is incorrectly claimed as 'evidence' for SLR

Worsening conditions at sea caused by climate change are drowning fishermen

- what has actually happened is that inshore waters have been over-fished in recent decades

- fishermen are forced to go further out to sea in search of a catch

- the (very poor) fishermen cannot afford bigger and better boats, so they fish further offshore in unsuitable craft designed for sheltered inshore sailing

- these frequently sink in open ocean conditions and lives are lost

Still cannot add comments to "Terence Kealey on post-normal science" using FF or IE on Vista and /XP

I get "Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage",

Vista diagnostics says there is no problem! Why did my last entry work, I wonder.

Here is the entry anyway, as I have already written it:
=================================================================

Science IS driven by advocacy from many different groups.

In determining the age of the earth, the sedimentation and cooling groups had reached a stalemate. More information was needed!

Scientists, with expertise from many different areas, had looked into this, with varying levels of interest, and came up with nothing useful, until ...

It just so happened that there was a group, with knowledge in radioactivity. Looking at the DETAIL on both sides of the argument, they realised that they could help to give a better explanation and were allowed to do so.

Kealey says scientists are not judges, but judges, in normal circumstances, do not judge the outcome of a trial; they sentence and, beforehand, ensure that discussion takes place between advocates, so
the jury can make its decision known.
It is the jury that decides: guilty or not guilty, after hearing both sides of the argument.
To protect their funding, the Global Warming Activists have destroyed this culture that encourages discussion between advocates, stopped the exchange of information and ideas with specialists outside their field, like the radioactivity group in the example. This is why Climate 'Science' has not progressed (and I use quotes); their club has become isolated from other scientists (and statisticians?), even though they still influence governments, pressure groups and drive a world religion, CAGW.

So who or what is the jury? It is the ability of (twelve?) scientists, good and true, after seeing evidence: all the raw data, any computer code and the reasons why decisions were made in the research, to be able to choose different explanations and BE HEARD. It is the closing down of influencial discussion that is harmful.

The Popper question of falsification is part of this process. We cannot expect this aspect to have been ‘sorted’ by an Authority beforehand; we cannot outsource this responsibility and remain credible.

Also, I expect that not all the radioactivity group were geologists, yet they were allowed to contribute! How did they do that? What a scary idea for the politically motivated and morally superior in the CAGW club.

PS: I didn't know that people smashed Climategate by breaking into people's websites and I don't know which side of the argument he is on here. :)

I cannot add comments to "Terence Kealey on post-normal science" using FF or IE

@LC

It's exactly the same as those religious nuts who proclaim the end of the world every five years or so.

The wonder is the idiots that keep on believing, even when they're proved wrong time after time.

Interesting!

'Our Medieval Warm Period Project is an ongoing effort to document the magnitude and spatial and temporal distributions of a significant period of warmth that occurred approximately one thousand years ago. Its purpose is to ultimately determine if the Medieval Warm Period (1) was or was not global in extent, (2) was less warm than, equally as warm as, or even warmer than the Current Warm Period, and (3) was longer or shorter than the Current Warm Period has been to date. '

http://www.co2science.org/data/mwp/mwpp.php

In another report from the BBCs Richard Black at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13002706 it seems it's now claimed that the Arctic ice will now be gone each summer by 2016 (+/- 3 yrs). This is all based on (yes, you guessed it) a new computer model by the same bunch that made the now infamous 2013 prediction. Do these people never give up?

Breath of Fresh Air -

It couldn't have happened to a more deserving MP: "... he handled the controversies over foxhunting and EU fishing quotas, as well as the government's response to the devastating 2001 foot-and-mouth outbreak. He was promoted to minister for the environment in 2003 and helped launch the government's anti-coastal erosion programme. In 2005, Morley was named climate change minister and described by one newspaper as having "the most impressive green credentials of any Labour minister", before leaving the government in a 2006 reshuffle."

@BBD Oh, and right on cue:

Sinking South Pacific island threatened by climate change

Most pertinent point in the article:

"Mr Dahl said many Tuvalans who wanted to escape their sinking nation, wished to live in either Australia or New Zealand, as they had similar climates."

In other words, most Tuvalans who want to leave actually want a better life somewhere else (which is perfectly understandable) but it's got bugger all to do with the climate!