<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0mm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0mm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-CA link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Dear Richard<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Thank you for your comments. I remain a data-informed person, not model-informed. Always see through your own eyes, not the eyes of another. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>If you grow up in an environment in which it is fashionable to kill witches, they are everywhere to be found.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>I take it by ‘climate change’ you really mean ‘global warming’. Correct?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>As you will be aware, if you have been following the conversation, that the world has warmed 0.6 degrees in the past century, and barely at all in the past 2 decades. These facts are not in dispute (so far as I know) and the lack of increase is widely known as ‘the hiatus’ and ‘the pause’. Many people are investigating how such a thing can happen and why it does not appear in any of the modelled outputs of future temperature which are now seriously at variance with current measurements.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>I do not have a dog in this fight. I simply observe how the temperatures move and what claims are made. Your assertion that “</span>the planet is getting warmer”<span style='color:#1F497D'> in the face of widespread evidence (from measurements) that it is not, puzzles me. I provided a link to a very useful website <a href="http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/">http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/</a> where one can test any claims of warming (or cooling) by adding data sets. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Here are the northern and southern hemisphere temperatures for the past decade (from HADCRUT4):<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-CA'><img border=0 width=472 height=348 id="Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:image002.jpg@01CFDBEB.38952650"></span><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>I cannot conclude from this that the temperatures are continuing to rise. They are not and there is a lot of discussion about it in the climate community. The CO2 definitely is rising, however, from 380 to 395 in the same time period. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-CA'><img border=0 width=378 height=287 id="Picture_x0020_2" src="cid:image005.jpg@01CFDBEB.38952650"></span><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>The funding for stove projects that depends on carbon dioxide offsets sales is, ultimately, dependent on the sensitivity of the atmosphere to additional CO2. A new paper, the 14<sup>th</sup> recently, has place this sensitivity below the (revised in 2014) number from AR5. Full paper of the accepted manuscript is available, along with data and code</span><span style='font-size:13.0pt'> <span lang=EN><a href="http://thegwpf.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=c920274f2a364603849bbb505&id=aa8efc238b&e=c1a146df99"><strong><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#117BB8;text-decoration:none'>here</span></strong></a></span></span><span lang=EN style='color:#1F497D'> </span><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>That means, ultimately, that the value of carbon offsets is dropping by the month. If a stove programme is dependent on these funds, it is in peril. There is nothing wrong with having improved stove programmes and there is nothing wrong with taking the money offered, but managers should always be aware of the strengths, weaknesses and risks in their game plan.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>There is no point in raising ‘Fox News’ or other ‘petro funders’. I don’t know any petro funders and I do not watch Fox News. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>One third of all humanity’s CO2 emissions have occurred since 1996. The global temperature has remained remarkably steady, though normally the climate always changes. Based on the history of 60 year up and down cycles, it should have increased for about ½ of the time (1996-2006). Modellers are perplexed. I am only noting risks to stove programmes: do not build castles dependent on carbon trading, use it to build capacity that is sustainable.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>An unfortunate diversion for the stove community is the demonic misrepresentation of the charcoal supply and market, largely rooted in fanatical opposition to burning biomass. It’s crazy! No one is advocating wasteful use of resources, but the whole industry is discussed as if it does. It is quite possible to have sustainable charcoal created in a profitable manner, as has been achieved (temporarily for 4 years) in Chad and more recently, Rwanda and Malawi. South Africa, which used to have hardly any trees, now has a thriving charcoal export industry. SW Botswana is drowning in uncharcoalled acacia trees that are invading its grazing lands. The same problem exists west of a line drawn south from Johannesburg delineating an area that extends all the way to Namibia. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Having an intelligent conversation about charcoal as a domestic fuel has become difficult, even as the methods of using it effectively are so badly needed. The drive of this problem is fanatical devotion to climate model outputs that are demonstrably failing to provide useful guidance.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Now that the globe is no longer warming, the scare is that ‘climate change’ (as if that was itself something to fear) is upon us with a vengeance. Well, that is their choice. As I said, I don’t have a dog in that fight. The many claims about ‘change’ are dealt with elsewhere so there is no need to cover them here.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>That main point I was making, and in my reply to Ron it is covered, is that if we don’t get our collective house in order from a scientific point of view, there may be serious and deleterious consequences. There will be no winners.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Crispin<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Crispin outside of fox news and its minions and petro funders, you remain entrenched with the notion that we are not experiencing global climate change. I can see the former two as stupidity fed by corruption but you as one of the most solid rational contributers to this list amaze me with your position. One glance at NOAA , NASA, the Hadley center and many more original sources. Their data and discussion <br>Is to me, fairly irrefutable, documented and vetted-to-death proof of the fact that the planet is getting warmer and that the change is largely anthropogenic in nature. You can start with wikipedia and dive into the sources..10 minutes worth is sufficient. <span style='font-size:12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-CA'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>In every other respect, respectfully, Richard Stanley<br>Sent from my iPhone<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></body></html>