“GISS land and sea ratios revisited“. When Anthony Watts cross-posts a teammate’s refutation of an earlier post you know that it must have been the source of a lot of embarrassment.
Fellow-denialist Bob Tisdale explains, gently, how Frank Lansner’s ignorant beef about the way GISS produces global temperature estimates from land station records is baseless. Zeke did it better though.
Spot the differences? The "Trick" is revealed! From Climate Observations.
Wott's Up With That? 
As usual WUWT continues make the self same basic mistakes in logic and presents the usual corrupt lines of deliberate misinformation with every posting day in and day out.
As usual his standard chorus of hilarious supporting comments continue to make themselves look like under-educated school children and expose their basic ignorance of the real world, every time they pen a word in support. WUWT does not take kindly to those who point out all basic errors and mistakes.
Please keep up the good work, given the large volume of propaganda published daily at WUWT!
“GRACE’s warts – new peer reviewed paper suggests errors and adjustments may be large” (WUWT,July 20, 2010)
it’s BACKWARDS!!!!!!!!!! “Uncertainty in ocean mass trends from GRACE,” is a paper about Sea Level measurement. The given quote from the abstract:
“Non-ocean signals…near Greenland and West Antarctica due to land signal leakage, can also corrupt the ocean trend estimates.”
‘Land signal leakage’ from Greenland and West Antarctica, must be ice loss gravity anomalies that are corrupting nearby sea level trend estimates!
For another indication that this paper is not a critique of GRACE’s ice loss gravity anomaly measurements, note that the suggested errors are in millimeters!
ANTARCTICA……….The first of Steve’s attempts to discredit GRACE’s ice loss measurements was his post, ‘Amazing Grace’ on June29,2010. This was addressed specifically at Skeptical Science, here.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=278
GREENLAND……….He then, in ‘Greenland Hype Meltdown’ on July 12, applied the same argument (Dismissing dynamic movement, and simply declaring that it’s too cold to melt) to Greenland. This article is also specifically addressed at Skeptical Science, here.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Watts-Up-With-That-concludes-Greenland-is-not-melting-without-looking-at-any-actual-ice-mass-data.html
“GRACE’s warts – new peer reviewed paper suggests errors and adjustments may be large” (WUWT, July 20, 2010)……
This is the heading that belongs above the above. (I’m just trying to increase the comment count.)
[No padding! :-) Previous comment corrected. – Ben]
“Climate change reframed as health issues” (WUWT,July19,2010)
This is a paper in a public health periodical, funded by “Foundation Health Policy” money and determining that health benefits should be emphasized rather than health threats.
BACKGROUND………. “In developed countries such as the United States, the segments of the population most at risk (to the effects of climate change on human health) are the poor, the very young, the elderly, those already in poor health, the disabled, individuals living alone, those with inadequate housing or basic services, etc…”
“The agency found that global warming poses public health risks – including increased morbidity and mortality due to declining air quality, rising temperatures, increased frequency of extreme weather events, and higher incidence of food- and water-borne pathogens and allergens.”
RESULTS………. “…responded more positively to information about the health benefits associated with mitigation-related policy actions than to information about the health risks of climate change”
CONCLUSION………. “In conclusion, we believe that the public health community has an important perspective to share about climate change, a perspective that potentially offers the public a more salient way to comprehend an issue that has proven deeply difficult formany people to fully comprehend…”