<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	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:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Back from England</title>
	<atom:link href="http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/18/back-from-england/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/18/back-from-england/</link>
	<description>by Steve McIntyre</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 22:30:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phillip Bratby</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/18/back-from-england/#comment-235828</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Phillip Bratby]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 15:29:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=11446#comment-235828</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Do we know who the British participants were?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do we know who the British participants were?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Navy Bob</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/18/back-from-england/#comment-235825</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Navy Bob]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 13:28:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=11446#comment-235825</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just did some googling and found the source of geronimo&#039;s post. Some pretty incredible stuff here. Don&#039;t know if others are aware of this, but it was a real eye opener to me.

http://www.lavoisier.com.au/articles/climate-policy/politics/illarionov2004-5.php]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just did some googling and found the source of geronimo&#8217;s post. Some pretty incredible stuff here. Don&#8217;t know if others are aware of this, but it was a real eye opener to me.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.lavoisier.com.au/articles/climate-policy/politics/illarionov2004-5.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.lavoisier.com.au/articles/climate-policy/politics/illarionov2004-5.php</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Navy Bob</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/18/back-from-england/#comment-235822</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Navy Bob]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 13:08:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=11446#comment-235822</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is quite a revelation. Is it possible to get the original &quot;10 questions that were published nine months ago&quot; and the additional questions asked at the two-day seminar?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is quite a revelation. Is it possible to get the original &#8220;10 questions that were published nine months ago&#8221; and the additional questions asked at the two-day seminar?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: geronimo</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/18/back-from-england/#comment-235816</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[geronimo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:05:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=11446#comment-235816</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This would be this David King we&#039;re talking about.

Andrei Illarionov, former chief science adviser to President Putin:
… in respect to the presentation made by representatives of the so-called official team of the British government and the official British climate science, or at least how they introduced themselves at the seminar. I personally was surprised by the exceptionally poor content of the papers presented…
Simultaneously, they revealed an absolute—and I stress, absolute inability to answer questions concerning the alleged professional activities of the authors of these papers. Not only the ten questions that were published nine months ago, but not a single question asked during this two-day seminar by participants in the seminar, both Russian and foreign, were answered.
When it became clear that they could not provide a substantive answer to a question, three devices were used… The British participants insisted on introducing censorship during the holding of this seminar. The chief science adviser to the British government, Mr. King, demanded in the form of an ultimatum at the beginning of yesterday that the program of the seminar be changed and he presented an ultimatum demanding that about two-third of the participants not be given the floor.The participants in the seminar who had been invited by the Russian Academy of Sciences, they have been invited by the president of the Academy of Sciences Yuri Sergeyevich Osipov. Mr. King spoke about “undesirable” scientists and undesirable participants in the seminar. He declared that if the old program is preserved, he would not take part in the seminar and walk out taking along with him all the other British participants.
He has prepared his own program which he proposed, it is available here and my colleagues can simply distribute Mr. King’s hand-written program to change the program prepared by the Russian Academy of Sciences and sent out in advance to all the participants in the seminar.
A comparison of the real program prepared by the Academy of Science and the program proposed as an ultimatum by Mr. King will give us an idea of what scientists, from the viewpoint of the chief scientific adviser to the British government, are undesirable. In the course of negotiations on this issue Mr. King said that he had contacted the British Foreign Secretary Mr. Straw who was in Moscow at the time and with the office of the British Prime Minister, Blair, so that the corresponding executives in Britain should contact the corresponding officials in Russia to bring pressure on the Russian Academy of Sciences and the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences to change the seminar’s program.When the attempt to introduce censorship at the Russian Academy of Sciences failed, other attempts were made to disrupt the seminar. At least four times during the course of the seminar ugly scenes were staged that prevented the seminar from proceeding normally. As a result we lost at least four hours of working time in order to try to solve these problems.
During these events Mr. King cited his conversations with the office of the British Prime Minister and had got clearance for such actions.
And thirdly, when the more or less normal work of the seminar was restored and when the opportunity for discussion presented itself, when questions on professional topics were asked, and being unable to answer these questions, Mr. King and other members of the delegation, turned to flight, as happened this morning when Mr. King, in an unprecedented incident, cut short his answer to a question in mid sentence realizing that he was unable to answer it and left the seminar room. It is not for us to give an assessment to what happened, but in our opinion the reputation of British science, the reputation of the British government and the reputation of the title “Sir” has sustained heavy damage.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This would be this David King we&#8217;re talking about.</p>
<p>Andrei Illarionov, former chief science adviser to President Putin:<br />
… in respect to the presentation made by representatives of the so-called official team of the British government and the official British climate science, or at least how they introduced themselves at the seminar. I personally was surprised by the exceptionally poor content of the papers presented…<br />
Simultaneously, they revealed an absolute—and I stress, absolute inability to answer questions concerning the alleged professional activities of the authors of these papers. Not only the ten questions that were published nine months ago, but not a single question asked during this two-day seminar by participants in the seminar, both Russian and foreign, were answered.<br />
When it became clear that they could not provide a substantive answer to a question, three devices were used… The British participants insisted on introducing censorship during the holding of this seminar. The chief science adviser to the British government, Mr. King, demanded in the form of an ultimatum at the beginning of yesterday that the program of the seminar be changed and he presented an ultimatum demanding that about two-third of the participants not be given the floor.The participants in the seminar who had been invited by the Russian Academy of Sciences, they have been invited by the president of the Academy of Sciences Yuri Sergeyevich Osipov. Mr. King spoke about “undesirable” scientists and undesirable participants in the seminar. He declared that if the old program is preserved, he would not take part in the seminar and walk out taking along with him all the other British participants.<br />
He has prepared his own program which he proposed, it is available here and my colleagues can simply distribute Mr. King’s hand-written program to change the program prepared by the Russian Academy of Sciences and sent out in advance to all the participants in the seminar.<br />
A comparison of the real program prepared by the Academy of Science and the program proposed as an ultimatum by Mr. King will give us an idea of what scientists, from the viewpoint of the chief scientific adviser to the British government, are undesirable. In the course of negotiations on this issue Mr. King said that he had contacted the British Foreign Secretary Mr. Straw who was in Moscow at the time and with the office of the British Prime Minister, Blair, so that the corresponding executives in Britain should contact the corresponding officials in Russia to bring pressure on the Russian Academy of Sciences and the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences to change the seminar’s program.When the attempt to introduce censorship at the Russian Academy of Sciences failed, other attempts were made to disrupt the seminar. At least four times during the course of the seminar ugly scenes were staged that prevented the seminar from proceeding normally. As a result we lost at least four hours of working time in order to try to solve these problems.<br />
During these events Mr. King cited his conversations with the office of the British Prime Minister and had got clearance for such actions.<br />
And thirdly, when the more or less normal work of the seminar was restored and when the opportunity for discussion presented itself, when questions on professional topics were asked, and being unable to answer these questions, Mr. King and other members of the delegation, turned to flight, as happened this morning when Mr. King, in an unprecedented incident, cut short his answer to a question in mid sentence realizing that he was unable to answer it and left the seminar room. It is not for us to give an assessment to what happened, but in our opinion the reputation of British science, the reputation of the British government and the reputation of the title “Sir” has sustained heavy damage.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: toby</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/18/back-from-england/#comment-235814</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[toby]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 08:37:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=11446#comment-235814</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Does anyone still seriously doubt that the planet is warming? Even the UAH satellite data shows warming, and that is processed by Roy Spencer and John Cristy, two of the contrarian breed.

http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/

The explanation bruited around in contrarian circles is that the warming is natural, driven by cycles like the PDO. Any month now it will start cooling back to 1960s levels .....]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does anyone still seriously doubt that the planet is warming? Even the UAH satellite data shows warming, and that is processed by Roy Spencer and John Cristy, two of the contrarian breed.</p>
<p><a href="http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/" rel="nofollow">http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/</a></p>
<p>The explanation bruited around in contrarian circles is that the warming is natural, driven by cycles like the PDO. Any month now it will start cooling back to 1960s levels &#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Top Posts &#8212; WordPress.com</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/18/back-from-england/#comment-235799</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Top Posts &#8212; WordPress.com]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 00:08:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=11446#comment-235799</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...]  Back from England Arrived back in Canada last evening after a very stimulating and interesting trip to England – two speeches, lots of [...] [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...]  Back from England Arrived back in Canada last evening after a very stimulating and interesting trip to England – two speeches, lots of [...] [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mpaul</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/18/back-from-england/#comment-235798</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[mpaul]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 23:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=11446#comment-235798</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dominic, this is OT and Steve doesn&#039;t like to clutter up threads.  But if you go to the most recent &#039;unthreaded&#039; discussion, which I think is http://climateaudit.org/2010/06/15/unthreaded-39/ you can ask the question there.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dominic, this is OT and Steve doesn&#8217;t like to clutter up threads.  But if you go to the most recent &#8216;unthreaded&#8217; discussion, which I think is <a href="http://climateaudit.org/2010/06/15/unthreaded-39/" rel="nofollow">http://climateaudit.org/2010/06/15/unthreaded-39/</a> you can ask the question there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: geo</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/18/back-from-england/#comment-235788</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[geo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 16:45:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=11446#comment-235788</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That Statistical Climatology thing seems to be roughly every three years (last two in 2007 and 2004).

In their hearts, I don&#039;t think they&#039;ve really gotten past the idea that they can marginalize their critics by the recursive method of keeping them &quot;out of the club&quot; as much as possible and then pointing at that as proof they aren&#039;t credible.

It&#039;s the childrens &quot;The man with the power&quot; chant applied by childish academics.


Do you know the man?
What man?
The man with the power.
What power?
The power of voodoo.
Who do?
You do.
Do what?
Know the man.
What man?
The man with the power. . .]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That Statistical Climatology thing seems to be roughly every three years (last two in 2007 and 2004).</p>
<p>In their hearts, I don&#8217;t think they&#8217;ve really gotten past the idea that they can marginalize their critics by the recursive method of keeping them &#8220;out of the club&#8221; as much as possible and then pointing at that as proof they aren&#8217;t credible.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s the childrens &#8220;The man with the power&#8221; chant applied by childish academics.</p>
<p>Do you know the man?<br />
What man?<br />
The man with the power.<br />
What power?<br />
The power of voodoo.<br />
Who do?<br />
You do.<br />
Do what?<br />
Know the man.<br />
What man?<br />
The man with the power. . .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry Woods</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/18/back-from-england/#comment-235782</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Barry Woods]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 14:54:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=11446#comment-235782</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Aimed at Professor King, sorry, a bit too rhetorical....]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aimed at Professor King, sorry, a bit too rhetorical&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Bagley</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2010/07/18/back-from-england/#comment-235780</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jonathan Bagley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 14:01:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateaudit.org/?p=11446#comment-235780</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If Barry Wood&#039;s comment is aimed at me, I should clarify. I&#039;ve gathered that it is generally accepted that the earth has been cooling for the past decade. Prof King claimed that new methods of accurate measurement show this to untrue. I know the more important question is whether the climate change is man made, but we cannot decide that if we don&#039;t know precisely how hot the earth is.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If Barry Wood&#8217;s comment is aimed at me, I should clarify. I&#8217;ve gathered that it is generally accepted that the earth has been cooling for the past decade. Prof King claimed that new methods of accurate measurement show this to untrue. I know the more important question is whether the climate change is man made, but we cannot decide that if we don&#8217;t know precisely how hot the earth is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
