A satisfactory model of complete ignorance - by Richard... Wednesday, February 17, 2010

A satisfactory model of complete ignorance - by Richard... Wednesday, February 17, 2010

This one, I couldn't resist. In June 2006, the EU decided to commission a project under the heading: "What poor information can tell: Analysis of climate policies under large uncertainty about climate change."

The research investigated "the usefulness of imprecise probability concepts for assessing and processing the large and diverse uncertainty that needs to be considered in climate policy analysis. Imprecise probabilities are constituted by entire sets of probability measures." 

I think I understand what they are talking about (just), but in case you have problems, they go on: "They provide a satisfactory model of complete ignorance, which is an important prerequisite for quantifying poor states of information such as encountered in climate change research. Classical probability theory faces severe difficulties in this field as the debate around quantifying uncertainties in the IPCC Assessment reports shows."

The project consisted of a theoretical part mainly conducted at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, USA and an applicational part to be executed at the Potsdam Institute of Climate Impact Research, Germany (return host). 

And you will be pleased to learn that the theoretical part consisted of an analysis of the decision theoretical as well as evidential basis of imprecise probabilities in the light of climate change. In the applied part, it investigated how the presence of ambiguity, i.e., imprecise information, can alter the results of model-based analyses of climate protection strategies and policy instruments.

It seems they had their work cut out. Fortunately, the work – completed in May last year – only cost us €245,365.00 – excluding VAT of course. Mind you, I could have provided "a satisfactory model of complete ignorance," absolutely free of change.

CLIMATE CHANGE – FINAL PHASE THREAD

Print ready

A climate change person - by Richard...

Following up on my previous piece (which seems to be becoming a habit), another reader tells me to have a look at Anita Swarup, the author of the Oxfam report on Tajikstan. It turns out that the lady has "form".

Formerly a "communications officer" for the Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, she subsequently became freelance, as a describing herself at a UNESCO International Conference on Broadcast Media and Climate Change in Paris in September 2009 as: "Research, advocacy and communications – Climate Change."

In her Carbon Capture bio (above), she is described as a "climate change person," telling us that she is an Oxfam International regional research report author, "who has worked as a consultant on climate change for Oxfam , Unicef and other organisations." 

Interestingly, the Oxfam Tajikstan report was edited by John Magrath and Richard English. Magrath is a writer and researcher who has worked for Oxfam GB for over 20 years in a range of roles, including press officer and executive assistant to the Director. For the last three years, he has researched climate change implications for Oxfam's work. English is the campaigns manager for Oxfam.

Thus, we have a report "researched" and written by a climate change advocate, and edited by another "researcher" on climate change, overseen by a campaigns manager for an organisation that is active in climate change activism. And it was going to report anything else, other than climate change was a problem?

More than ever, this underlines the unreliability of NGO reports – in particular from advocacy groups such as Oxfam, whose work is not worth the paper it is printed on.

CLIMATE CHANGE – FINAL PHASE THREAD

Print ready

Where our money goes - by Richard...

In January 2007, the University of Sussex was awarded an EU contract worth €147,691 – excluding VAT – "for benchmarking of policy measures for gender equality in science".

The study was "to identify and analyse the success of key women and science policies and actions in the Member States and associated countries, with a view to benchmarking existing policies and highlighting examples of good practice."

I just though you'd like to know that.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

Compassion fraud - by Richard...

Featured prominently in today'sGuardian and dutifully mirrored by the BBC is a tale of woe, headlined: "Tajikistan facing water shortages and climate extremes, report warns". The strap line reads: "Falling supplies due to rising temperatures and retreating glaciers could spark conflict between water-stressed countries in the region, says Oxfam."

Few will actually read the Oxfam reportand fewer still will have the background knowledge to understand how fundamentally dishonest it is. In pursuing its own distorted agenda on climate change, the charity is exploiting the misery of the peoples of Tajikstan, wilfully distorting the cause of their plight.

A taste of that dishonesty, writ through the entire 24-page production, comes at the very end, where the pompously is of quite staggering proportions:

Oxfam International's experience in more than 100 countries around the world that a combination of active citizens and effective state action is the best way of securing development and poverty reduction. It is also best way of preparing for climate change. Tajikistan's civil society organizations need to be involved in the development of concrete proposals on the content and direction of national adaptation and mitigation policy. There needs to be a concerted campaign, supported by both government and civil society organisations, to broaden awareness of the challenges of climate change and the need for action to the public at large.

For a different and altogether more candid "take", however, you need only turn to theCrisis Group summary, dated 12 February 2009:

Since the civil war (1992-97), government advisers and international donors have repeatedly called for sweeping reforms to address food security, diversify the economy, dismantle opaquely run state monopolies and stop the looting of state coffers. Nothing has happened.

Significant improvement is highly unlikely under President Rakhmon's leadership, and may well take a generation. Whether Tajikistan can last that long is an open question. Donors need to address corruption in a coherent and unified way if they want to avoid seeing the country slip back into failure. A new framework for aid, based on strict conditionality, is urgently needed.

The government pays little, if any, attention to these problems. Ministries and state bodies that are of direct political or financial interest to the top leaders and their allies function well, notably the security bloc, along with the highly profitable state-owned aluminium smelter and several other state firms. Other sectors, particularly social welfare, health and education, are ignored and underfunded.

Some 70 percent of the population lives in abject poverty in the countryside, and hunger is now spreading to the cities, particularly Khujand, once one of the most prosperous and politically influential parts of the country. In the past few years increasing numbers of young Tajiks have left the country to work as seasonal labourers, primarily in Russia and Kazakhstan. 

In 2008 the number reached a new record, in all likelihood over one million, or at least half of the country's labour force. Their remittances exceeded $2 billion, almost half of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP). The annual departure of Tajikistan's most dynamic and enterprising citizens has up to now provided Rakhmon with an economic lifeline, not to mention a political safety valve by removing those most likely to oppose the regime.

With the onset of the world economic crisis, however, labour migration is likely to diminish sharply in 2009, and along with it the remittances that are so vital to the country's economic stability.

Even a straight factual report tells you the country is in dire trouble and the most superficial level of research tells you that, of all the problems confronting the peoples of Tajikstan, "climate change" is the least of them.

And should that actually be a problem, the Oxfam nostrums verge on the surreal: "There needs to be a concerted campaign, supported by both government and civil society organisations, to broaden awareness of the challenges of climate change and the need for action to the public at large."

With a corrupt, dictatorial government, thieving as much of the aid that comes its way as it can – totally heedless of the welfare of its people – there is no civil society. This is a country where journalists have to use assumed names to avoid being picked up by the secret police. The idea of the government mounting an "awareness" campaign on climate change would be laughable, if it were not so utterly absurd.

As to "climate change", it is true that the country has experience some terrible weather over the last few years. Though the winter of 2007-8, it went through an unprecedented (in recent times) period of cold, similar to the Dzud which is has been blighting Mongoliaand is still at crisis point.

Back in Tajikstan, in February 2008, the UN had to step in with a "flash appeal," calling for an immediate international infusion of $25.1 million. "At least 260,000 people are in need of immediate food assistance," the appeal stated grimly. "Moreover, the government reports that up to 2 million people may require food assistance through the end of the winter, if limited food and fuel supplies in rural areas are not replenished," it continued.

In August 2008, Reuters was reporting that the UN World Food Programme (WFP) was to supply Tajikistan with $10 million worth of food to avert famine, as the prices of bread and vegetable oil had more than doubled. It noted that the Tajik economy and infrastructure were still in tatters following the civil war in the 1990s. A foreign debt of more than 40 percent of gross domestic product was adding to its woes.

Over 2008-9, Tajikistan was hit by another harsh winter and, in March 2009, the minister for economic development and trade was reported as admitting that the chronic power shortage in the country was bound to have a "cumulative effect" on the economy. The National Bank estimated the weather-related economic loss at $250 million in January and February alone, a calamitous figure in a country where the annual state budget was roughly $610 million.

And, when it came to the "water shortages" which the current Oxfam report highlights, experts were then expressing concern that once all the snow that fell this winter started to melt, the country's already over-taxed sewer and water-supply systems would collapse. It was not the "shortage", per se that was a problem but the lack of infrastructure that left 41 percent of the population without access to reliable drinking water.

Needless to say, coverage of the crisis by state-controlled media outlets was "muted", with a notable lack of criticism of official policies. 

Even then, the pain continued. In January of this year, there was a report of an earthquake in southern Tajikistan, leaving 20,000 people in an area bordering Afghanistan to face a freezing winter weather without permanent shelter. Yet, a year later, we have Oxfam dribbling on about "climate change".

Meanwhile, as the crisis in Mongolia intensifies, leaving millions at risk of starvation, we hear not a word from Oxfam or any other British charity. One of our forum membersraised it with the joint Disasters and Emergencies Committee, only to be told that, "few of our agencies have a presence anywhere in China and none has approached us to enter discussions over the possibility of an appeal."

Thus, while the plight of the people of Mongolia is ignored, no expense is spared by Oxfam to exploit the people of Tajikstan (and our compassion) in pursuit of an overtly political agenda, aided and abetted by a section of the media – and, of course, the BBC. 

There is something particularly loathsome about exploiting other peoples' misery to pursue an agenda, while ignoring others because it does not fit with the narrative. In doing this, Oxfam has crossed the line. Alongside the climate specialists who are committing scientific fraud, we now have a British charity committing compassion fraud. Can it sink any lower?

CLIMATE CHANGE – FINAL PHASE THREAD

Print ready

Mirror image - by Richard...

Newsmax seems to be one of the few news outlets that publicises the latest attitude survey on "climate change".

In what is almost a perfect mirror image of April 2008, the poll currently finds that 35 percent of US voters now believe global warming is caused primarily by human activity while 47 percent think long-term planetary trends are mostly to blame, down three points from the previous survey in January. Eight percent say there is some other reason, and 10 percent aren't sure. 

In April 2008, 47 percent blamed human activity and only 34 percent named long term planetary trends. Despite billions of dollars and countless hours of effort by the warmists, that is all they can achieve.

Meanwhile, it looks as if the greenies have sussed me. But don't you love the first comment: "Tim, outstanding sleuthing!" Er... like they've at last been reading EU Referendum and put two and two together. Outstanding!

That's the weakness with these idiots. They tend to read – and believe – their own propaganda. They rarely pop over the fence to see what the opposition is doing. Me, I read their crap all the time – military history helps. During the '42-43 desert campaign, Montgomery had a picture of Rommel on the wall of his personal caravan. "Know thine enemy" – one of the primary rules of war.

And now, creeping round the back, we get a US majority ditching their garbage. It's like stealing candy from a baby – they didn't even see it coming. But the politicians are going to be a tough nut to crack – but then, so was Rommel.

CLIMATE CHANGE – FINAL PHASE THREAD