which, of course, are being ingored by the DMC:

“ALL OUR MODELS ARE WRONG:” ClimateGate 2.0: A Fresh Trove Of Embarrassing Emails. “There was always an element of tragedy in the first ‘Climategate’ emails, as scientists were under pressure to tell a story that the physical evidence couldn’t support – and that the scientists were reluctant to acknowledge in public. The new email archive, already dubbed ‘Climategate 2.0′, is much larger than the first, and provides an abundance of context for those earlier changes. . . . To their credit, some of the climate scientists realised the dangers of the selective approach politicians demanded, which meant cherry-picking evidence to make it suitably dramatic, and quietly hiding caveats.” Others, however, not so much.

Plus this: “So the mewling infant that we call Climate Science – a 40-year-young offshoot of meteorology – has been thrust into a political role long before it’s capable of supporting the claims made on its behalf. From the archives we can see the scientists know that too, and we can read their own reluctance to make those claims, too. ‘What if climate change appears to be just mainly a multidecadal natural fluctuation?’ muses one scientist. ‘They’ll kill us probably.’”

AFP reports today, “Global warming rate less than feared: study”:

High levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere may have less of an impact on the rate of global warming than feared, a study said Thursday.

The authors of the study funded by the US National Science Foundation stressed that global warming is real, and that increases in atmospheric CO2, which has doubled from pre-industrial standards, will have multiple serious impacts.

But the more severe estimates, such as those put forth by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, are unlikely, the researchers found in their study published in the journal Science….

Schmittner noted that many previous studies only looked at periods spanning from 1850 to today, thus not taking into account a fully integrated paleoclimate date on a global scale.

Critics of the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) have long argued that climate change alarmists have ignored inconvenient data. That is starting to change–and so are the predictions.

We now await Al Gore’s pronouncement that Science is a disreputable publication, AFP a corrupt wire service, and the National Science Foundation a haven of Holocaust denial.

And PLEASE go read this one ...it's a HOOT!  Caribou supposedly roasted by global warming found unharmed

Fareed Zakaria showcased what some are calling a questionable report from the EU on terror attacks. From Breitbart.tv:

The European Union released a report documenting what groups in Europe were responsible for terror attacks on the continent. He points out that only three attacks were from Islamist groups. “the rest,” he said “are from right-wing and left-wing groups.”

There’s something very wrong about Zakaria’s set up here.

How many “right wing” attacks?  Zero attacks. Zakaria should more accurately say “the rest are from left-wing groups” and retract his statement “the rest come from far right and far left groups.” There weren’t any attacks from far-right groups.

Or poerhaps he should have said "the rest are from right-wing and left-wing groups, and kangaroos".

I've always wondered why professed Catholics don't believe in Catholicism.  Not the boots on the ground Catholics.  Not the ones going to Mass and obeying the teachings of The Church.  Mainly, I mean the Catholic Democrats.  Here's Princess Nancy:

Catholic health-care providers in particular have long said they’d have to go out of business without the conscience protections that Pelosi says amount to letting hospitals “say to a woman, ‘I’m sorry you could die’ if you don’t get an abortion.” Those who dispute that characterization “may not like the language,’’ she said, “but the truth is what I said. I’m a devout Catholic and I honor my faith and love it .?.?. but they have this conscience thing’’ that she insists put women at physical risk, although Catholic providers strongly disagree.

The Pelosi model of Catholicism: devout, faith-honoring, and conscience-free.

Can I claim to be a Catholic even though I don't believe in most the Canon?  Can I claim to be a Democrat under the same constraint?  How about a journolist?  If membership means nothing then why does membership mean anything?

edit to add:  I guess I'm NOT alone.  

Matthew Hennessey on people who reject Catholicism yet persist on calling themselves Catholics:

When an alcoholic finally gives up his booze, he no longer refers to himself as a drinker. When a nicotine addict quits puffing, she no longer calls herself a smoker. Yet for some reason, when a person who was raised Catholic stops going to Mass, ceases to accept the teaching authority of the Church, and publicly charges the institution and its hierarchy with both moral and criminal failures, that person is entirely free to continue calling him or herself a Catholic.

I’m looking at you Nancy Pelosi.

I know just enough math to want to learn more.  I LOVE statistical analysis as many of you can attest.  And recent (last 2-3 years) events in my FFL have only tended to sharpen my pencil.  There was a wonderful podcast I played recently from the New York Skeptics Society (Rationally Speaking) discussing scientific "proof", math and Beysianism. 

So it was with a great deal of anticipation that I saved a blogpost called "Statisticians can prove almost anything" to read over my Thanksgiving hiatus from lecturing.  If you've an interest in "lies, damned lies, and statistics" I suggest you read it all.  In a quiet corner.   And unrushed.  It's a tad lengthy and becomes a bit convoluted by I know MY viewers will have no problem.

A sample:

That's exactly what Joseph P. Simmons, Leif D. Nelson, and Uri Simonsohn did in a new academic paper (reported on in today's National Post). They wanted to prove the hypothesis that listening to children's music makes you older. (Not makes you *feel* older, but actually makes your date of birth earlier.) Obviously, that hypothesis is false.

Still, the authors managed to find statistical significance. It turned out that subjects who were randomly selected to listen to "When I'm Sixty Four" had an average (adjusted) age of 20.1 years, but those who listened to the children's song "Kalimba" had an adjusted age of 21.5 years. That was significant at p=.04.

How? Well, they gave the subjects three songs to listen to, but only put two in the regression. They asked the subjects 12 questions, but used only one in the regression. And, they kept testing subjects 10 at a time until they got significance, then stopped.

In other words, they tried a large number of permutations, but only reported the one that led to statistical significance.

Sound like our AGW friends?  You betcha.

Panicked AP Attempts to Memory-Hole Democrats’ #Occupy Endorsements.

The plan was a simple one. The path to Obama’s second term requires that enough voters forget that our current economic woes are the fault of a failed President who enjoyed two years of having every single item on his wish-list passed by Congress. And so the idea was to create Occupy in order to give the MSM the cover they desired to spend every single day up until the election talking about greed and income inequality in order to blame both for the stagnant economy.

The hope was that by repeating this message incessantly, enough voters could be convinced that Wall Street, and by extension, evil Republicans, were to blame for our chronic unemployment, record deficits, and stillborn economic growth. President Obama who?

Fortunately for America, this plan has not only failed miserably it has backfired completely.

Two years ago the corrupt practices of the "scholars" at UEA and PSU became public knowledge, only to be swept under the rug by willing accomplices in the media.  This week they're back with a vengance.

I need to post more on the subject, Beysianism, and a few other things so I'll get started with a shotgun blast of links:

JOHN HINDERAKER: “It recently came out that James Hansen, one of the two or three most prominent global warming alarmists on whose work the IPCC reports rest, “forgot” to report $1.6 million in outside income, as required by his government contracts. Is that significant? Well, yes.”

14,000 abandoned wind turbines.

I like this link - it uses one of my favorite phrases: "Statistically Significant": ClimateGate 2.

A bit of overzealousness: CLIMATEGATE 2 EMAILS: They’re real and they’re spectacular.

more to follow.

first the cut and paste portion of the post.

1.  Packers.

Now.  Moving on.

2.  49ers.  Thursday night matchup with the Ravens - Battle of the Brothers - will be a biggie.

3.  Texans.  Still in the top 4 but fading fast.  VERY fast.  Like Bud down a beer bong.

4.  Patriots.  I ma LOVIN' me some Gronk.

5.  Ravens.  See #2 above.

6.  Lions.  At least until  the time-shigfted game with the Saints.

7.  Bears.  Successful in the face of a brutal schedule.  But one broken thumb away from staying there.

8.  Saints.  Who will move up a couple of spots when they beat the Lions.

We're all familiar by now with the left's caterwauling over the right's refusal to accept non-peer reviewed papers with made up, corrupted, nonexistant and falsified data whith nonreproduce-able outcomes as "settled science" (an oxymoron if ever there was one).

Now the lefties across the pond give us this: