WEB

Other things to do at present, than worry about ABC's poor news standards. Will post any replies from ABC to on going investigations. Back in a little while.

Update October 2...WEB extended!

Update 1 September...WEB extended! Gerard Henderson's Media Watch Dog continues to do a magnificent job in keeping an eye on our ABC. See also ACM for reports on ABC's one sided coverage on climate change.

Update...a link worth a look....via DJ (cheers Mate)
"we think Bruce Hill and Radio Australia appear to have some explaining to do."
http://www.grubsheet.com.au/?p=2965

NaNO information in AM's nanoparticle article

An article that places ABC's new service amongst the world's worst for spreading mis-information.

More nano-sunscreen claims revealed

"Yesterday the ABC revealed that at least 10 Australian sunscreen brands that claim to be free of nano-materials have unwittingly been using nanoparticles in their products.

Neither the safety nor the risks of nano-materials in sunscreens is scientifically proven."

What does the Cancer Council say?

Nanoparticles and sunscreen

Nanotechnology has been used in sunscreens for many years. To date, our assessment, drawing on the best available evidence, is that nanoparticulates used in sunscreens do not pose a risk. However, we continue to monitor research and welcome any new research that sheds more light on this topic.

Sunscreen formulas and their components are regulated through the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). In early 2009, the TGA conducted an updated review of the scientific literature in relation to the use of nanoparticulate zinc oxide and titanium dioxide in sunscreens.

The TGA review concluded that:

• The potential for titanium dioxide and zinc oxide nanoparticles in sunscreens to cause adverse effects depends primarily upon the ability of the nanoparticles to reach viable skin cells; and
• To date, the current weight of evidence suggests that titanium dioxide and zinc oxide nanoparticles do not reach viable skin cells; rather, they remain on the surface of the skin and in the outer layer of the skin that is composed of non-viable cells.

Missing News: Current warming not unprecedented

News of this interesting paper in the journal Geophysical Research Letters missing from the ABC.
"Despite an increase since 1850 AD, the mean SST in the 20th century is still within the range of natural variability during the past 2700 years."

GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 39, L14705, 5 PP., 2012
doi:10.1029/2012GL052749

Sea surface temperature variability in southern Okinawa Trough during last 2700 years

Key Points

• The 20th century warming in SOT is still within variability of late Holocene
• A strong coupling of KC, EAM and ENSO exists in late Holocene
• MWP has a mean SST lower than RWP and STWP in Okinawa Trough

Most of the temperature reconstructions for the past two millennia are based on proxy data from various sites on land. Here we present a bidecadal resolution record of sea surface temperature (SST) in Southern Okinawa Trough for the past ca. 2700 years by analyzing tetraether lipids of planktonic archaea in the ODP Hole 1202B, a site under the strong influence of Kuroshio Current and East Asian monsoon. The reconstructed SST anomalies generally coincided with previously reported late Holocene climate events, including the Roman Warm Period, Sui-Tang dynasty Warm Period, Medieval Warm Period, Current Warm Period, Dark Age Cold Period and Little Ice Age. However, the Medieval Warm Period usually thought to be a historical analogue for the Current Warm Period has a mean SST of 0.6–0.8°C lower than that of the Roman Warm Period and Sui-Tang dynasty Warm Period. Despite an increase since 1850 AD, the mean SST in the 20th century is still within the range of natural variability during the past 2700 years. A close correlation of SST in Southern Okinawa Trough with air temperature in East China, intensity of East Asian monsoon and the El-Niño Southern Oscillation index has been attributed to the fluctuations in solar output and oceanic-atmospheric circulation.

Lies of the Climate Commission: Part 12

ABC's AM once again offers uncritical coverage of the Climate Commission's latest report.
Meanwhile a few letter writers in The Australian point out some logical fallacies in a puff piece by climate Kommisar Steffen, including this one:

Climate tsar skirts dysfunctional models to scare us
WILL Steffen continues to promulgate misinformation about the climate ("Clean up energy for the sake of our grandchildren", 23/7). Passing over the rotten entrails of dysfunctional climate models that have not lived up to promise, he has moved on to using extreme weather to scare a populace into extreme action.
So Steffen points to recent weather extremes as portents of a coming doom, claiming it's a future we don't have to have, if only we bow at the Climate Commissioner's altar, shake our tail feathers and pay our dues.
When seen in their historical context, however, the numerous wet and dry periods and extreme weather events that have affected the country are unconnected to carbon dioxide levels. Looking at past weather records it's clearly a future we have already had and one our descendants will continue to experience, regardless of what we do today.
The commission continues to push for inconsequential marginal solutions to our weather and energy problems, ignoring the obvious solutions built around effectively dealing with the extremely routine weather events we know about all too well. If the problem was fixed with levees, dams, and nuclear power what would our witch-doctors do for a living?

Marc Hendrickx




The Australian's Cut and paste also adds some cherries missing from Will's basket:
Climate researcher Will Steffen in The Australian yesterday:
OVER the past decade, the Swedes have reduced their emissions of carbon dioxide by about 13 per cent, the best performance of any of the world's wealthy countries. Over the same period, the Swedish economy has recorded a higher rate of GDP growth than any of the OECD's "big seven" economies. So much for the myth taking vigorous action on climate change will damage or slow the economy.

Something Steffen forgot to mention? From Energy in Sweden, 2010, Swedish Energy Agency:
IN 2009, nuclear power supplied 37 per cent of the country's electricity, hydro power supplied 49 per cent and wind power almost 2 per cent, with the remaining 12 per cent being made up of fossil-fuelled and biofuel-based production.

Something else Steffen forgot? The Economist, June 6:
ANNUAL growth as high as 6.4 per cent in the first quarter. Unemployment falling fast. The budget in surplus this year. Public debt heading to below 40 per cent of GDP. How did the Swedes do it? . . . the main answer is the prudent pro-market policies of Fredrik Reinfeldt'scentre-right coalition, which came to power in October 2006.

Missing News: More evidence of climate model failure

Roger Pielke Snr reports on another paper that  "documents the lack of skill in multi-decadal global climate models to skillfully predict climate conditions in the coming years. This paper involves the question of accuracy lost when radiation parameterizations are used at time intervals that are long compared to other physical processes in the models. "The paper is

Sun, Z., J. Liu, X. Zeng, and H. Liang (2012), Parameterization of instantaneous global horizontal irradiance at the surface. Part II: Cloudy-sky component, J. Geophys. Res., doi:10.1029/2012JD017557, in press. the full paper is available at the JGR site by clicking PIP PDF.

Look forward to seeing ABC's coverage!

Gergis Update

ABC is yet to formally cover news that a paper it widely reported on and promoted was flawed and withdrawn from publication by its authors. The only mention that the paper was withdrawn is in editorial notes posted discretely at the end of articles such as this one: EDITOR'S NOTE: Since this story was originally broadcast, errors have been identified in aspects of the data processing which may affect the results of this study. As a result, publication has been delayed and the research has been withdrawn from online publication. Professor Karoly says the data will be recalculated, peer reviewed and published in due course.

They provide the following response to a query we made regarding missing editorial notes from a number of ABC reports, including one on its ITunes site.

Thank you for your email of 21 June. I apologise for the delay in responding; it took a little longer to sort out iTunes than it should have. The segment on the Radio National website now has a prominent editor’s note and the podcast is no longer available on iTunes.

At this stage, neither Radio nor News propose to do any further broadcasts or stories on the subject. If or when the scientists re-release their research, the story will be reassessed in the normal way taking account of editorial priorities at the time.

Thank you for taking the time to write; your feedback is appreciated.

Audience & Consumer Affairs

Received 19/7/2012

Score +1

Suckers for alarm: Latest radiation scare

ABC's alarmist reporter Mark Willacy gets sucked in by a study that claims "the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan may eventually cause up to 1,300 deaths." There is not a skerrick of journalistic scepticism in ABC's report. Andrew Bolt provides some missing background in his criticism of a similar piece published by the Fairfax Press.

Here's the gist of it:

Here’s a few facts omitted from the article - facts which suggest the findings are alarmist trash.

- Jacobson (co-author of the study) is a long-time anti-nuclear activist and global warming campaigner.

- Jacobson’s past absurd claims include asserting that by 2030 “wind, water and solar technologies can provide 100 percent of the world’s energy, eliminating all fossil fuels” - a purely fantastical infrastructure plan that grossly exaggerates the output and reliability of solar and wind power and grossly underplays the cost.

- Jacobson has claimed “nuclear power results in up to 25 times more carbon emissions than wind energy” (a finding contradicted by many experts), basing his calculations on the absurd assumption that the emissions of a nuclear power station should include the emissions of the likely nuclear war that could result...

- Jacobson still assumes the discredited no-safe-dose theory of nuclear radiation, claiming that infinitesimally small levels of radiation spread widely enough will still kill hundreds.

See Andrew's Post for the rest.