|
| |
 |
 |
 |
| |
Articles
and Videos |
|
|
Articles |
Videos |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
Global Warming Will Cause 7 Million Mexicans to Enter
U.S. Illegally.
Roger Pielke Jr. Blog July 27, 2010. The mainstream media is currently
trumpeting an analysis by leftist Michael Oppenheimer for the National
Academy of Sciences. As with all wild-eyed claims of links between
man-caused warming and some far-out effect, Oppenheimer makes the claim that
global warming will cause a mass migration of illegal immigrants into the
U.S. Internationally respected scientist Roger Pielke throws water on the
claim; "To be blunt, the paper is guesswork piled on top of "what ifs" built
on a foundation of tenuous assumptions. The authors seem to want to have
things both ways -- they readily acknowledge the many and important
limitations of their study, but then go on to assert that "it is
nevertheless instructive to predict future migrant flows for Mexico using
the estimates at hand to assess the possible magnitude of climate
change–related emigration." It can't be both. Note: Much, if not
most, of the claims of horrendous damage caused by global warming is at best
wild guesstimates with a lot of bias thrown in to make it sound good. Dr.
Pielke debunks this effort. However, that it was sanctioned by the National
Academy of Sciences does not bode well for the promotion of good science.
|
Global Warming: The Other Side.
KUSI News, January 16, 2010. KUSI meteorologist John Coleman, Cofounder of
the Weather Channel, interviews a series of climatologists to explain the
real and fraudulent science and controversy surrounding Global Warming. An
excellent 5 part series. |
|
|
Weather is Not Indicative of Global Warming.
Tuscaloosa News, July 27, 2010. This summer's heat wave is no more
indicative of global climate change than was last year's record cold wave in
Alabama and several blizzards and record lows in parts of the United States.
But that fact does little to dissuade those on either side of the debate,
especially the climate change 'deniers,' from buttressing their opinions by
whatever they see outside their windows at a given time. Note: This
is true and unusual weather should never be used to indicate overall climate
change. The minimum to use as climate trends is 10 years; 20 years is
better. Even with the abnormally hot 1998 and 2010 included, the climate
temperature has not increased on average for the past 15 years. In fact, it
still shows a slight decline in global temperatures. |
The Pacific Decadal Oscillation Explained.
Nocapandtrade.us,
January 13, 2010. Accuweather's Joe Bastardi provides one of the best
explanations available on the relationship between earth's temperature and
the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), and what is happening now that we are
entering the cool phase of the PDO. It explains far more than the CO2 model
of climate change. |
|
|
Left-Wing Physicist Declares Global Warming Fears A
Fraud.
Climate Depot, July 26, 2010. Leftist Physicist Dr.
Denis Rancourt, a former professor and environmental science researcher at
the University of Ottawa, declares that the entire man-made global warming
movement is nothing more than a “corrupt social phenomenon.” “It is as much
psychological and social phenomenon as anything else.” Rancourt, who has
published peer-reviewed research asserts, “I argue that by far the most
destructive force on the planet is power-driven financiers and profit-driven
corporations and their cartels backed by military might; and that the global
warming myth is a red herring that contributes to hiding this truth. In my
opinion, activists who, using any justification, feed the global warming
myth have effectively been co-opted, or at best neutralized,” Rancourt said.
Note: Finally, the left-wing is catching on to the fraud. Read what
has happened and how the cartel did it in
Rescuing a Broken America. |
Data Fraud and Corruption.
To read newspapers and magazines, as well as TV news,
it appears that the data used to prove man is causing global warming is rock
solid and not open to debate. It is not. In fact, the data is so fraudulent
and corrupted that it should never be used to justify cap and trade
legislation. Yet, that is exactly what is happening. These are just a few of
the examples of fraud. |
|
|
Senate Dems Retreat on Global Warming.
Washington Examiner, July
23, 2010. Lacking the requisite 60 votes, Senate Democrats shelved plans to
take up an aggressive energy and global warming bill before the August
recess and will instead settle on a much smaller bill that deals with the
Gulf oil spill and some smaller "green" initiatives. However, the "green"
initiatives include increasing federal oversight on oil drilling and
cleanup. It would also increase more incentives for hybrid (including
natural gas) cars and more money into Land and Water Conservation Fund.
Note: While good news, watch out for the lame duck session--it could
come roaring back! Also more federal oversight of oil drilling is not
necessary. It is becoming obvious that the Gulf Oil Disaster was caused by
failed oversight of existing laws. Enforce laws already on the books!
More $ going to hybrid cars is not a wise use of a cash-strapped economy;
and more money into the Land and Conservation Fund merely puts more
landowners in jeopardy of federal condemnation actions. |
What's Wrong With Cap and Trade?
An overview by Kristie
Pelletier of the science and climate models of global warming. The models
are wrong and there has been natural warming and cooling for thousands of
years. Cap and trade legislation is not needed.
|
|
|
China,
Coal and the Insanity of Cap and Trade.
U.S. Energy Information Administration, July 22, 2010.
China is both the largest consumer and producer of coal in the world and it
consumption is escalating rapidly.
Putting (cap and trade) “controls” on US energy
use (or European or Australian or New Zealand or Russian or…) will simply
move the usage to China, increasing their economic growth at the expense of
others and moving more energy usage TO COAL and away from more
environmentally friendly fuels and sources. Cap ‘N Tax and Kyoto like
treaties will result in a net
increase in CO2
production as the sources simply move to China. This is NOT a theoretical,
it’s already happening (and in large part has happened. Look at the size and
growth of China steel production, for example.)
Note: It is insane to talk about
cap and trade legislation in the US when it will do no good for the
environment and ruin us economically. Yet, the progressives in Congress are
hell bent to do exactly that. And this comes from the US Dept of Energy! |
Cap and Trade Insanity.
Cap and Trade legislation in the US Senate will destroy the American way of
life--forever. It puts the government in charge of our economy. It forces
the use of renewable wind and solar energy which have serious problems we
are not being told about. Neither are economically feasible with today's
technology and will cost trillions of dollars. The same strategy in Spain
has resulted in huge job losses and escalating costs to Spanish consumers.
|
|
|
2010 Heats Up News Hype Over Global Warming.
Wall Street Journal, July 21, 2010. 2010 is promising to be the hottest year
in recorded history and the mainstream media is predictably trumpeting the
fact. Not only are they proclaiming harsher storms, heat waves (like this
summer) and crippling droughts, they are also claim massive snow storms are
caused by global warming. Of course no mention is made of the doubts raised
about the data integrity by Climategate. Note: No mention that 2007-2008
were the coolest years in forty years, nor that the warmth is caused by an
unusual El Nino that has dominated temperatures since June 2009. However,
that El Nino disappeared last month and it is still warm. It could be a lag
effect since the ocean temperatures are rapidly cooling, which should be
causing a cooling global temperature any time now. To be honest, I thought
it would kick in by now, but it hasn't. Stay tuned. |
The Crippling Cost.
Although Congress tells us that the cap and trade legislation will only cost
an average family less than $200 a year, that is just wrong. Very wrong. It
is the biggest tax increase in the history of the United States. But
Congress is hiding it so you can't see it. Analyses done by independent
organizations shows that it will cost families many thousands of dollars a
year and will drastically lower our standard of living. It hits the poor
especially hard, even with federal rebates. |
|
|
Does New Scientist Foresee Paradigm Shift on Climate
Theory? Suite201.com, July 20,
2010.
Popular international science magazine,
New Scientist
appears to give support to the claim that a recent official inquiry into the
Climategate scandal may rightly be dismissed as a 'whitewash.' The change in
tone from the usually emollient journal has some commentators foretelling a
growing loss of faith in the science behind the global warming scandal.
Note: Yet another liberal magazine is challenging the "independent"
investigations of ClimateGate. Rather than settling whether the CRU is
exonerated, the independent investigations are being labeled a whitewash,
causing even more doubt about the integrity of the CRU. |
The UN IPCC Fraud
The United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is supposed to be the last word on
unbiased science concerning global warming. In fact, the IPCC stifles any
science that contradicts its man-caused mantra. It must not be used to
justify cap and trade legislation. |
|
|
Don't Forget Climategate Just Yet.
National Post, July 15, 2010. Three allegedly
independent inquiries into Climategate have declared Britain's Climatic
Research Unit free of any scientific wrongdoing. Yet, "it would be hard to
conclude any of the reports was truly independent." It turns out that
Geoffrey Boulton, one of the investigators, once headed up the CRU and even
signed a petition before the investigation started that the CRU was
innocent. Another investigator and leader of one of the teams, Ronald
Oxburgh, is also honorary president of Carbon Capture and Storage Assoc.,
chairman of a wind-energy company and much more.
These companies have to have cap and trade legislation passed to survive.
Note: These are huge conflicts of interest. These and other members of
the investigative teams should never have been selected--unless, of course
the British and American governments wanted the CRU to be exonerated. |
The Carbon Footprint.
Carbon dioxide is not, cannot be
a pollutant. It is a miracle gas that is essential for life on earth, and
was ten times more abundant in geologic history. Kristie Pelletier explains
that increased levels of carbon dioxide has been a blessing to ecosystems
and food production. |
|
|
Don't Touch That Thermostat.
WorldNetDaily, July 12, 2010.
"First it was the SUV, now it's your AC. Next it will be your dryer, then
your flat screen TV, and eventually
the power company will have complete control of your furnace's
thermostat in the winter," says
Sussman, an award-winning television meteorologist and author of the book
Climategate. This is not fantasy, this is reality. Millions of smart
meters monitor electricity usage minute-by-minute and can be read remotely.
The remote controlled Smart Thermostats...further enable bureaucratic
control the temperature of your abode. The Smart Grid, which was mandated in
the 2007 Energy bill and funded with 'stimulus' money, is coming next. The
grid will possess interactive broadband capabilities to further control all
of the new generation Energy Star appliances you will be forced to purchase
– like your washer, dryer, water heater, and even your flat screen TV."
Note: There is absolutely no reason or demand for this technology other
than to control everything you do. |
The Sun's Role in Climate Change.
There is far better reason
for global warming -- the sun. Global warming alarmists claim there is not
enough energy change in the sun's output to explain earth's warming. They
are partially correct. But it is not the total amount of energy emitted by
the sun, but the TYPE of energy released. Watch the video to find out why.
Excerpted from the DVD
Global Warming, Emerging Science and Understanding.
|
|
|
Climate Change: A Collective Flight from Reality.
Washington Times,
July 8, 2010. Roger Helmer is a member
of the European Parliament and offers an excellent recap of why man-caused
theory is totally wrong. He then goes on to say: The EU's "Cap 'n' Trade"
scheme has been a disaster. It has imposed high costs on industry, achieved
little or nothing and introduced very severe distortions into the market. It
is argued Cap 'n' Trade is a "market solution." But it's a wholly artificial
market, trading in a virtual commodity, and subject always to the whims of
bureaucrats and legislators. The carbon price in the EU has been extremely
volatile, and often close to zero. Note: Helmer is right on all
counts. The global warming controversy is a hoax and will destroy every
economy that tries to implement cap and trade. |
|
|
|
Climate Science's Watery Reprieve.
National Post, July 7, 2010.
The last of three British
investigations into the notorious Climategate has just been completed. Like
the others, this one exonerated the Climatic Research Center. The report
did, however, "portray climate science as a field filled with uncertainty,
debate, lack of openness, data hoarding and ill-will." That, at least, is
more than the other investigations stated. Note: As a scientist,
these investigations are a shame and are pure whitewash. To my knowledge,
none of investigations (made by non-scientists) asked well-credentialed, but
skeptical scientists, why these emails showed the CRU manipulated
temperature data to achieve their preconceived "proofs" of man-caused
warming, and how they sabotaged the peer-review process. Had the committees
done so, their conclusions could never exonerate the CRU. It is disgusting
and a tragic day for science—and
civilization. Michael
Coffman, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
Dutch Admit More Bad Global Warming Science.
New American, July 6, 2010. The Dutch put
into the 2007 IPCC report that 55% of the Netherlands was below sea level,
when in fact it is only 26%. While not enough to unravel the man-caused
theory, the steady stream of corrections and amendments by groups with a
profound vested interest in global warming generates problems: (1) the
mistakes in evidence made are often such bad mistakes as to cast doubt on
the professionalism of the contributors, and (2) the mistakes invariably
overstate the case for global warming. Note: The credibility of the
IPCC has been in free-fall since last fall, even after hand-selected
investigative committees white-washed the Climategate email scandal.
|
|
|
|
John Christy on Models, Sensitivity and More.
Examiner, July 1, 2010. Dr. John Christy is an atmospheric scientist and
Professor at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a lead author of the
2001 IPCC Report, and winner of achievement awards from NASA and the
American Meteorological Society. In his June testimony to the Inter Academy
Council, Christy testified that he felt the IPCC's overconfidence in climate
models was not justified. He also said: "The first objection I raised
regarding the Third Assessment was that the fabled Hockey Stick was oversold
as an indicator of past climate change. This was well before the critical
work of the
[Congressional]
Wegman Report, National Academy of Sciences, McIntyre’s papers and the East
Anglia emails. Indeed, I urge you in the strongest terms to engage Stephen
McIntyre in your deliberations at a high level as he has accurately
documented specific failures in the IPCC process, some of which I can attest
to, as I was there." Note: Even
as climate scientists abandon the man-caused global warming theory by the
droves, the alarmists have published a blacklist for the media to ignore of
all scientists who disagree with the alarmist's "correct" version of the
science. |
|
|
|
Higher Sea-level Forecast Likely by IPCC.
Sydney Morning Herald, June 30, 2010. The IPCC will "almost certainly" make
an increase in its predictions of sea-level increases due to global warming
in its next landmark report in 2014 due to alleged increases in melting of
the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets. Note: This is a gargantuan
hoax and depends upon the use of apples and oranges comparisons--just like
the infamous hockey stick curve that was exposed as a fraud.
The mean tidal data that go back over 100 years show no increase from the
100 year average 1.8 mm per year increase in the past 20 years. |
|
|
|
Sun Spot Numbers Running Backwards.
June 27, 2010. Just when it looked like Solar Cycle 24 was going to take off
the sunspot numbers turned around and started declining. Scientists have
finally concluded we really do not know what is happening on the sun. In the
past, disappearing sun spots has been a precursor to long term periods of
colder winters and summers. The current sunspots trends could indicate some
long term cooling is on the horizon. There is some irony here, Mother Nature
is turning done the earths thermostat and our government is setting in
motion programs and legislation to stop the earth from warming from CO2
emissions. Either way, there are long term economic impacts. Note:
And, so the insanity continues. |
|
|
|
British Wind Power Falls Short 7.5% So Far in 2010.
Guardian, June 28, 2010. Britain's renewable energy revolution suffered an
abrupt setback this winter when the power supplied from wind, hydro and
other "clean" sources fell by 7.5%, despite years of promises and policies
to end the nation's dependence on fossil fuels and slash global warming
pollution. Why? The wind didn't blow. Britain's green energy policy is
threatened as hundreds of billions of pounds needed to continue expanding
the program are threatened by drastic austerity cuts in overall spending.
Note: The failure of green energy to meet its promises dramatically
illustrates its fatal flaw. It is not dependable so backup energy production
must be maintained, adding a huge additional cost. As with all of the
European green energy plans, the huge alternative energy subsidies are the
first to suffer cutbacks as European nations suffer economic collapse and
implement severe spending reductions. |
|
|
|
Low Solar Activity Linked to Major Earthquakes and
Volcanoes.
Red Country News, March 6, 2010. Not only is the Sun the primary driver for
climate change, but it may even be a significant influence in tectonic plate
movement resulting in cycles of increased intensity of geological events
such as earthquakes and volcanoes. The increased geologic activity occurs
during historically low solar activity, such as we are entering now. Solar
hibernations always bring long lasting cold climate eras to the Earth. We
should expect and plan on a new round of historically large US earthquakes
and globally impacting volcanic eruptions that can occur at any time for the
next 20 years of the current solar hibernation. Note: Although an old
article, if correct, it suggests not only a period of cold, but also
increased geologic activity. |
|
|
|
Sea Surface Temperatures Plummeting!
WattsUpWithThat.com, June 22, 2010. Sea Surface Temperatures
(SSTs) continue their plunge as a predicted La Nina approaches. What seems
to be causing it is an unusually large increase in reflected sunlight over
the last several months, probably due to an increase in low cloud cover. At
this pace of cooling, the second half of 2010 could ruin the chances of
getting a record high global temperature for this year. Oh, darn. Note:
This portends a rapid decline in global air temperatures the last half of
2010, resuming a downward cycle started ten years ago. |
|
|
|
IPCC 'Consensus' on Sun Is Only One Expert.
Climate Change Fraud, June 25, 2010. The IPCC's 2007 'consensus' on the sun
having no affect earth's temperature was based on only one solar scientist
who cited her own paper as the 'consensus.' The IPCC dismissed 6
peer-reviewed papers showing that the did sun play an important role, and
ignored numerous objections to the IPCC's conclusions, saying the solid
contrary evidence and demands for change were "impractical." The six papers
rejected by the IPCC clearly showed a strong role that the balance between
solar winds and cosmic radiation played on earth's cloud
formation and temperature. Note: The IPCC's reputation continues to
plummet as more and more evidence of fraud is exposed. |
|
|
|
Flawed Climate Policy Triggered Prime Minister Rudd’s
Downfall
Sydney Morning Herald,
June 26, 2010. In a stunning coup, Australian Prime Minister Rudd, a global
warming zealot, was removed from office and Australia's new Prime Minister,
Julia Gillard, was named by the ruling majority in Parliament. Rudd's fall
was precipitated by President Obama's foolish last minute effort to create a
watered down Copenhagen Accord last December. Rudd was not invited, yet he
had to agree to a toothless accord. This week he announced tougher
standards, which caused a firestorm of protests which led to a coup to
remove him in the wee hours of Wednesday morning. Julia Gillard is much less
likely to push for global warming legislation. Note:
Cap and trade legislation in Australia has been defeated twice in
Parliament. With the exit of Rudd and declining public support, it is likely
cap and trade is finally dead in Australia. It is ironic that Obama played a
key role to kill it! |
|
|
|
UPI,
June 23, 2010. Over
the past two years accusations of acidification and warming killing coral
reefs is being shown wrong. Corals serve as hosts to algae that feed on its
nitrogen wastes. Through photosynthesis, the
algae then produce the carbohydrates that feed the coral. The theory was
that acidification from CO2 and warming from global warming disrupt this
delicate relationship and the coral dies (called bleaching). This study
shows that certain populations of coral genes (within all the coral species)
adapt quickly to temperature change rather nicely. Other
studies show that even those coral sub-populations
that die due to rapid temperature increase and acidification recover within
a few years. Note: Another
global warming myth seems to be biting the dust. |
|
|
|
More Emails Reveal Relentless Effort to
Shut Out Skeptics.
New emails have surfaced dated 2006 between Susan Solomon with the IPCC and
Rachel Garthwaite of the Royal Society (of England) discussing the speaker
list of an upcoming major IPCC meeting. RG: "we have no intention of
inviting any known sceptics to the meeting, and certainly would not have
invited representation on any discussion panel should we decide to have
one." SS: "Yes, that is the point - they should not be invited to take the
podium as speakers or panelists because that is simply not an appropriate
representation of the state of understanding and uncertainty." Note:
While claiming neutrality on the issue to the public, these two
organizations systematically and relentlessly worked to shut out any
reasoned opposition to their man-caused mantra so the public would not be
"confused." |
|
|
|
IPCC Consensus on Climate Change Phony, Says IPCC
Insider. National Post,
June 13, 2010. The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change misled the
press and public into believing that thousands of scientists backed its
claims on manmade global warming, according to Mike Hulme, a prominent
climate scientist and IPCC insider. The actual number of scientists who
backed that claim was “only
a few dozen experts,” he
states in a paper for Progress in Physical Geography. Note: We have
known for years that the claim was bogus. The United Nations released data
two years ago that showed that only four scientists actually agreed
with the consensus on Chapter 9 of the IPCC's report, which was the chapter
on the science of man-caused warming. |
|
|
|
New Oil Commission Has NO Oil Experience.
NewsMax.com. June 18, 2010. It seems clear that this current administration does not have as
its first priority actually solving the devastating catastrophe in the Gulf
and the ever expanding corrupted ecosystems that have ensued.
Political posturing is the order of the day. The new commission that
the president has assembled to supposedly address the crisis, to a member,
has no experience in the Oil Industry. If they actually wanted to
Solve this problem, one would think they would have at least one member who
knows something about drilling… Watch for ever more stringent regs and
political maneuvering to push Cap and Trade.
|
|
|
|
Off-Shore Moratorium Killing
Gulf Sates. Newsmax.com
June 16, 2010. Rep. Senator David Vitter of
Louisiana says that President Obama’s response to the
catastrophe in the Gulf does not match the actual response. Leaders and
everyday citizens alike all over the region are concerned and deeply
offended that the president used this devastating crisis to push his
political agenda while actual, practical solutions from the feds are nowhere
in site. Furthermore, the only federal response that has packed any punch
is a Moratorium on drilling which has only furthered the hardships in the
area for the foreseeable future.
|
|
|
|
Manipulating a Crisis:
WorldNetDaily. The mess in the Gulf of Mexico is a real problem, in real
time. But, make no mistake. The hype of Obama visiting the region has
little to do with pollution and everything to do with politicizing a crisis
to meet a predetermined end. In the wake of the Climategate scandal and the
hopelessly discredited man-caused global warming scam, author Brian Sussman
warns that president Obama will use the crisis in the gulf to push through
cap and trade. Cap and trade will very simply use energy policies to
redistribute wealth and further socialize our national economy. |
|
|
|
Italian Green Jobs: Where’s the Spaghetti?
Master Resource, June 11, 2010. Recent studies on
Spain (,
Germany, and
Denmark suggest that,
in fact, RES (Renewable Energy Sources) subsidies destroy (2 to 5 jobs
destroyed for every green job create), not create, jobs – a remarkable
result, since these three countries are widely regarded as the most
successful models in Europe. The U.S. Congressional Budget Office
found similar
results. We performed a
similar study on
Italy. Our estimates on the opportunity cost of green jobs show that, on
average, every single green job comes at the expenses of 4.8 “grey” jobs.
Note: No surprise here. We have been saying this for years. It is nice
that there are hard facts to back it up. |
|
|
|
Sen. Lindsey
Graham Reverses Position on Climate Legislation.
Mother Jones, June 9, 2010.
On Tuesday, Neo con Senator
Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told reporters that he would vote against the climate
bill he helped author. Graham now doesn't think pricing carbon is that
important. "The science about global warming has changed," he noted. "I
think they've oversold this stuff, quite frankly. I think they've been
alarmist and the science is in question," Graham told reporters. "The whole
movement has taken a giant step backward." Note: Graham may have had
an epiphany, but this may be one more of his waffling on an issue in
response to the political winds. Nonetheless, he is supporting a much better
bill by Dick Lugar which calls for more nuclear energy and raises fuel
economy standards. Unlike green energy, nuclear is at least cost-competitive
with coal energy. |
|
|
|
Global Warming Science: A Cross
Examination.
GWPF, June 7, 2010.
A cross
examination of global warming science conducted by the University of
Pennsylvania’s Institute for Law and Economics has concluded that virtually
every claim advanced by global warming proponents fails to stand up to
scrutiny. The
cross-examination,
found that “on virtually every major issue in climate change science, the
[reports of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] and other
summarizing work by leading climate establishment scientists have adopted
various rhetorical strategies that seem to systematically conceal or
minimize what appear to be fundamental scientific uncertainties or even
disagreements.” |
|
|
|
Why Scientists Get It Wrong.
Quadrant Online,
June 1, 2010. The
fact that the IPCC scientists believed in the global warming they were
promoting means that their morality at that level was better than expected,
but it also means that they are a lot more stupid than expected.
Nevertheless, their behaviour in promoting the notion of global warming
using fraudulent statistics is reprehensible and hopefully they will be duly
punished in this world or the next. Note: Perhaps the IPCC/CRU
scientists believe they are right and are therefore moral. However, that
will never justify manipulating the data to back up their beliefs. That is
criminal when destructive legislation is passed based on their wrong data.
|
|
|
|
Shape-Shifting
Islands Defy Sea-Level Rise.
New Scientist, June 2, 2010. For years,
people have warned that the smallest nations on the planet - island states
that barely rise out of the ocean - face being wiped off the map by rising
sea levels. Now the first analysis of the data broadly suggests the
opposite: most have remained stable over the last 60 years, while some have
even grown. The trend is explained by the islands' composition. Unlike the
sandbars of the eastern US coast, low-lying Pacific islands are made of
coral debris. This is eroded from the reefs that typically circle the
islands and pushed up onto the islands by winds, waves and currents. Because
the corals are alive, they provide a continuous supply of material. "Atolls
are composed of once-living material," says Webb, "so you have a continual
growth." Note:
So much for another theory down the drain of reality. |
|
|
|
New Plans Try to Revive Carbon Trading.
New York Times, May 24, 2010. Carbon
trading was meant to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the European Union
by making polluting more expensive for heavy industries, encouraging them to
invest in cleaner technology. The system, also known as cap and trade, is
falling far short of that goal. Critics decry it as just another form of
financial profiteering with little environmental benefit. New ways to revive
carbon trading are falling short. Western banks are reluctant to increase
their stakes because of uncertainty. |
|
|
|
Sunspots May Predict Hurricanes As Well As Global
Warming and Cooling.
Financial Post, June 1, 2010. Sunspots may have a more profound effect on
Earth’s climate than previously understood. During periods of low sunspot
activity, the researchers discovered, the probability of three or more
hurricanes hitting the United States increases dramatically. “With fewer
sunspots, there’s less energy at the top of the atmosphere,” Jim Elsner of
Florida State Univ. explained, making for a cooler atmosphere above the
hurricane. This differential fuels atmospheric instability, propelling
tropical storms into hurricanes. Note: This is a new wrinkle,
but not surprising. |
|
|
|
Uncertain Science.
Newsweek, May 28, 2010. Is Newsweek joining the skeptics? "The backlash
against climate science is also about the way in which leading scientists
allied themselves with politicians and activists to promote their cause.
Some of the IPCC’s most-quoted data and recommendations were taken straight
out of unchecked activist brochures, newspaper articles, and corporate
reports.... Just as damaging, many climate scientists have responded to
critiques by questioning the integrity of their critics, rather than by
supplying data and reasoned arguments." Note: For Newsweek to publish
this is almost unbelievable; No less than a magnitude 9.0 earthquake in its
implications. Newsweek is not the only staunch man-caused news media that is
starting to hedge their articles. Cracks are also forming in the New York
Times and London Times. |
|
|
|
Rebel Scientists Force Royal Society to Accept Climate
Change Scepticism.
London Times, May 29. 2010. Britain’s premier scientific institution is
being forced to review its statements on climate change after a rebellion by
members who question mankind’s contribution to rising temperatures. The
Society has taken an "unnecessarily alarmist position" and now admits "Any
public perception that science is somehow fully settled is wholly incorrect
— there is always room for new observations, theories, measurements.” The
admission comes after Society members signed a petition forcing the
leadership to recant. Note: This will go a long ways in killing the
"science is not debatable mantra. |
|
|
|
Time to Fight Back Against the EPA's Power Grab.
Fox News, May 27, 2010.
President Obama has been very
made clear that his top domestic priorities are health care and global
warming. We all know what happened on health care. Now the
date
is set for the key Senate showdown on global warming: June 10. That’s when
the Senate will vote on a resolution introduced by Alaska Senator Lisa
Murkowski (S.J. Res. 26) that would overturn the
EPA’s
18,000 page global warming regulations. The regulations will ultimately
control just about everything that uses carbon-based energy. It’s not
subject to filibuster. There is no place for weak-kneed senators to hide. In
just two weeks we’ll know where every member of the Senate stands. Note:
Any business that emits more than 200 tons of carbon a year is subject to
these regulations. About half the small businesses in the U.S. would come
under the regulations. |
|
|
|
NASA Accused of ‘Climategate’ Stalling.
Washington Times, May 26, 2010. NASA has stonewalled Freedom of Information
requests it has promised it would deliver 3 years ago. Chris Horner and the
Competitive Free Enterprise has filed a lawsuit to force NASA to deliver on
its promises. "What we've got is the third leg of the stool here, which is
the U.S.-led, NASA-run effort to defend what proved to be indefensible, and
that was a manufactured record of aberrant warming," Mr. Horner said. Horner
suggests NASA is stalling until after the Senate passes its cap and trade
legislation. |
|
|
|
Tax Dollars Perpetuate Global-Warming Fiction.
Washington Times Editorial, May 25, 2010. The National
Academy of Sciences (NAS) just spent $6 billion accumulating evidence
to support the man-caused warming theory in a massive new report. After
cooking the books, the NAS recommended almost exactly the same conclusions
and remedies as is found in the UN IPCC report and the new Senate cap and
trade legislation. Of course, it is just a coincidence. Note: Not
surprisingly, the NAS report completely ignores the overwhelming scientific
evidence that the warming was natural, and the earth is now cooling. |
|
|
|
Renewable Energy Costs to Americans.
Heritage Foundation, May 5, 2010.
The levelized costs
per megawatt hour are $78.10 for conventional coal power,[11]
$149.30 for onshore wind power, $191.10 for offshore wind power, $396.10 for
photo-voltaic solar power, $256.60 for thermal solar power, and $139.50 for
power generated by natural-gas conventional turbines. An Renewable Energy
Standard would:
· Raise
electricity prices by 36 percent for households and 60 percent for industry;
· Cut
national income (GDP) by $5.2 trillion between 2012 and 2035;
· Cut
national income by $2,400 per year for a family of four;
· Reduce
employment by more than 1,000,000 jobs; and
· Add more
than $10,000 to a family of four’s share of the national debt by 2035.
Note: These numbers are
very, very conservative. |
|
|
|
Wounded Warmists Attack As Their Prophecies Fail.
PajamasMedia, May 16,
2010. The global warming “science” community is feeling threatened by
evidence and revealing emails — their funding, and therefore their careers,
may be in peril. In reaction to this, they will mount an even more alarmist
campaign to convince the world — and themselves — that humans cause global
warming and that it must be stopped. As global temperature fails to rise in
the future, we will be bombarded by increasingly shrill cries of global
warming catastrophe. All forms of weather — cold, hot, record snow, record
heat, floods, droughts, or anything else — will be considered proof of
global warming. A more than willing media desperate for spectacular
headlines will give them the front page. |
|
|
|
CO2 Is Not a Pollutant.
Climate Depot, May 24, 2010.
Princeton Scientist, Dr. William Happer gave testimony to Congress May 20,
2010. He said, “Additional
CO2 in our atmosphere will cause relatively less direct warming because we
already have so much CO2 in the atmosphere that it has blocked most of the
infrared radiation that it can… To get the frightening global warming
scenarios that are bandied about, the added CO2 must substantially increase
water’s contribution warming. The jargon is “positive feedback” from water
vapor and clouds. [Recent] experimental observations further undermine the
claim of a large positive feedback from water…. The feedback…may even be
negative” |
|
|
|
The Green Jobs Myth.
Investors Business Daily, May 20, 2010. Last years
finding by a Spanish professor, Gabriel Alvarez that 2.2 jobs were lost for
every green job created in Spain. Environmentalists attacked Alvarez of
being a stooge of big industry. A leaked Spanish government report now backs
up Alvarez's claim. Worse, two Italian researchers
found that in Italy, the losses
were worse than they were in Spain: Each green job cost 6.9 jobs in the
industrial sector and 4.8 jobs across the entire economy. Note: The
numbers speak for themselves; the panacea of creating green jobs is truly
insane.
|
|
|
Oxford
Union Debate on Climate Catastrophe.
Science
and Public Policy Institute, May 24, 2010. For what is believed to be the
first time ever in England, an audience of university undergraduates has
decisively rejected the notion that “global warming” is or could become a
global crisis by 135 votes to 110. This is a sign that students are now
impatiently rejecting the relentless extremist propaganda taught under the
guise of compulsory environmental-studies classes in British schools,
confirming opinion-poll findings that British voters are no longer
frightened by “global warming” scare stories, if they ever were.
Note: This is highly significant. Schools
in both the U.S. and Great Britain are bastions of global warming
indoctrination.
|
|
|
|
Sea Levels Not Rising.
New American, May 20, 1020. In addition to global cooling for awhile, Dr.
Nils-Axel Morner of Sweden, the world's foremost experts on sea levels, said
at the 4th Annual International Conference on Climate Change that there is
no increase in the rate of rising ocean levels.
The real-world data do not
support the frightening scenarios of global doom and submerged coastal
cities presented by the computer modelers. Even in Italy's famed city of
Venice, often cited by alarmists, the water level is actually "slowly
subsiding." "Any increase would be easily picked up, Dr. Morner said. "The
sea level there has not risen for 40 years. There is no record sea level
[rise]." Note: Another false theory bites the dust. |
|
|
|
Global Warming Not Causing Malaria, Say Experts.
The Med Guru, May 22,
2010. Researchers from University of Oxford, UK, contradicted the known fact
that increasing global temperatures multiplies vector-borne population,
saying that the incidences of malaria have reduced in the twentieth century
owing to better medications and awareness among people. “We know that
warming can boost malaria transmission but the major declines we’ve measured
have happened during a century of rising temperatures, so clearly a changing
climate doesn’t tell the whole story.”
Note: Leading experts on Malaria have always said the
historically that Malaria has always been found well into the northern
latitudes (into Canada/Siberia).The reason it is not found today in
developed nations is because of improvements in health and mosquito control,
the same reason this study found for the decline in third world countries. |
|
|
|
Freezing the Economy with Global Warming Taxes &
Regulation.
New American, May 21, 2010.
As the politicians and
special interests push for climate change legislation, they increasingly
will be confronted with evidence from recent scientific and economic studies
showing that their proposals not only will impose devastatingly destructive
costs, but also will produce no significantly measurable environmental
benefits. The massive expenditures contemplated under Waxman-Markey would
reduce temperatures only five hundredths
of a degree Centigrade ... over the next
fifty years. Note:
This is a easy to understand discussion why all of the cap and trade bills
are not only economically devastating, but totally worthless to achieve any
environmental gain. |
|
|
|
Senate Should Reject EPA’s Regulatory Overreach on
Global Warming.
Heritage Foundation, May
21, 2010. The Clean Air Act was never intended to address global warming,
and regulations attempting to do so would be very troublesome for the
economy. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant but a natural constituent of the
air and necessary for life on earth. Unfortunately, it is also the
ubiquitous and unavoidable byproduct of fossil fuel use. Fortunately, the
Congressional Review Act was enacted to stop just such bad regulations. S.J.
Res. 26, sponsored by Senator Lisa Murkowski (R–AK) would use the act to
stop the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from imposing global warming
regulations that would do tremendous economic damage in the years ahead.
Note: The president and Democrats
in Congress are using these EPA regulations, first as a club to justify the
cap and trade bill because it is less onerous than the EPA regs. Second,
should the legislation fail they can use the EPA regs to assume federal
control of the U.S. economy. |
|
|
|
New Ice Age ‘To Begin in 2014’
WorldNetDaily, May 17, 2010. A new "Little Ice Age" could begin in just four
years, predicted Habibullo Abdussamatov, the head of space
research at St.
Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia. The Little Ice Age
is typically defined as a period of about 200 years, beginning around 1650
and extending through 1850. Abdussamatov predicted a reduction of sunspot
activity that would reach a new minimum in 2042, resulting in a deep global
temperature minimum in the years 2055-2060. The coming Little Ice Age will
be better defined after his research is completed aboard the Space Station.
In his speech's conclusion Abdussamatov said that to combat the very
negative effects of global cooling we must "maintain economic growth in
order to adapt to the upcoming new Little Ice Age in the middle of the 21st
century." Note: Russians have been saying for years that a fairly
severe and long lasting cooling period is about to begin. Most scientists
who do not believe in man-caused warming believe that a slight cooling will
only last 30-40 years, not the hundred or more years predicted by
Abdussamatov. |
|
|
|
Geologist Warns of Looming Threat of Global Cooling.
ClimteDepot, May 16, 2010. While speaking at the 4th
International Conference on Climate Change in Chicago, Dr. Don Easterbrook
noted, “That global warming is over, at least for a few decades, might seem
to be a relief. However, the bad news is that global cooling is even more
harmful to humans than global warming and a cause for even greater concern.”
This was a common theme from a variety of scientists speaking at the meeting
coming from all over the world. Easterbrook goes on to say that twice as
many people are killed with extreme cooling than with extreme warming.
Shorter, cooler growing seasons are already lowering global food production.
Colder winters also means more heating fuel is needed when many people
cannot afford it. |
|
|
|
IPCC Chairman Says Use of “Gray” Literature OK.
London
Telegraph, May 14, 2010. IPCC Chairman Dr Rajendra Pachauri said there was a
need to use information which was not from peer-reviewed scientific
journals, because in some places that was the only research that had been
done. He claimed un-refereed reports from the International Energy Agency,
the World Bank, national governments and charities "cannot be ignored." His
statements were the result of heavy criticism resulting from the IPCC’s use
of a World Wildlife article stating the Himalayan Glaciers would all be
melted by 2035. Note: Pachauri’s appeal does not pass the smell test.
It has been shown that the IPCC deliberately ignored refereed research whose
results strongly contradicted the IPCC’s position. Instead it used junk
science refereed by the good-ol-boy system discovered in the Climategate
email scandal. |
|
|
|
EPA Unveils Emissions Rule Aimed at Large Polluters.
Dallas
News, Associated Press, May 14, 2010.
The EPA said
it is completing a rule requiring large polluters to reduce the amounts of
carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that they release into the air.
The rule, which will take effect in January, would require companies to
install better technology and improve energy efficiency whenever they build
or significantly modify a plant. The rule applies only to large polluters
such as power plants, refineries and cement production plants that
collectively are responsible for 70 percent of greenhouse gas emissions from
stationary sources in the U.S. Industry groups and some GOP lawmakers called
it a job-killer. Note: The press release hinted that with these
rules, the proposed rules for smaller, more economically vulnerable
manufacturers and farmers will be spared the destructive regs the EPA
planned for them. Stay tuned for updates on what this will mean for
electrical rates. |
|
|
|
Kerry and Lieberman Introduce Energy and Climate Bill.
Fox News, May 12, 2010. Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Joseph Lieberman,
I-Conn. introduced the
American Power Act
Wednesday, their bill to overhaul America's energy pricing system. They say
all of these groups are at the table because they would rather negotiate
with the legislature than be regulated by the Environmental Protection
Agency. The bill establishes a "hard price collar" on carbon emissions
credits that polluters would have to purchase in order to operate. It
also invests heavily in clean coal, nuclear, and renewable energy
technologies. Note: While adding clean coal and nuclear is an
improvement, the bill heavily favors wind and solar power, which is
extremely expensive and unreliable. |
|
|
|
Eco-censors and the global warming hoax.
Canadafreepress.com. For years
scientists who don’t accept the rhetoric, that man is causing global
warming, have been trying to get their voices past a very politically
correct, agenda driven media. These scientists want the world to know that
the so-called “Scientific consensus” that anthropogenic warming is a fact,
simply does not exist. In fact, 31,486 Americans with university degrees in
science - including 9,029 PhD, 7,157 MS, 2,586 MD and DVM, and 12,714 BS or
equivalent have signed on with the Global Warming Petition project to let
the world know there is no such consensus. In June, Nature Magazine, the
academic journal that introduced the world to DNA double helix, x-rays,
pulsars, and the human genome, will publish a paper that shows atmospheric
carbon dioxide (CO2) is responsible for only 5-10% of observed warming on
Earth.
|
|
|
Climate Change Email Scandal “Heats” Up.
Washington Post,
May 4, 2010. In the wake of the
leaked e-mails from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit,
the heat is turning up for the one of the authors of those emails and his
former employer, the University of Virginia. Virginia Attorney General
Ken Cuccinelli II is
demanding the University release of a variety of documents from their former
professor, Michael Mann. Mr. Cuccinelli’s goal is to determine whether Mann
defrauded taxpayers when he applied for five research grants while he was at
the university.
|
|
|
Strongest Emissions Bill In The Nation
LA
TIMES:
In 2006,
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed the Global Warming Solutions Act into
law in the state of
California.
The Bill established a timetable by which California will come into near
compliance with the Kyoto Protocol. The bill requires a reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions to pre-1990 levels, roughly a 25% reduction. As
defined in the bill, “greenhouse gases” include all of the following gases:
carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons
(HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). These are
the same gases listed as Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) in the Kyoto Protocol.
Opposition to the Bill has been heating up in recent months with groups
organizing a November ballot initiative which would delay the implementation
of the bill. The California Teamsters Union has voted to oppose the
initiative.
|
|
|
|
The Proof Is In The Pudding.
Foxnews.com April 29, 1010: … A leading Global Warming
skeptic is planning an indepth examination of the IPCC’s report on Climate
Change. Donna Laframboise of NoConsensus.org is working with an Australian
software developer to set up a researchable database of the IPCC report.
Many skeptics have long doubted the validity of the IPCC’s methods. This new
exhaustive examination of the report will show the science and the methods
for what they are. |
|
|
|
Too Much Caution Will Kill Off the Economy.
London Times, April 21, 2010.
We are becoming a
risk-averse society and that is dangerous. Last week's grounding of airlines
in Europe because of volcanic ash is a prime example. While we in the U.S.
were shown black billowing clouds of ash while being told all flights were
cancelled, the actual ash over most of Europe was miniscule, well within the
engine tolerances of the airlines. Yet, the decision was made to ground the
planes based on the precautionary principle (zero tolerance), the same
theory driving the global warming theory.
You cannot run a national economy on the
precautionary principle; indeed, the sound position is to embrace as much
risk as possible. Note: The airlines lost $1.7 billion and came
dangerously close to bankruptcy. Yet, we are willing to incur trillions of
dollars in cost for a largely phantom and very low risk of the planet
warming 2 degrees. |
|
|
|
Senators Postpone Climate Bill Unveiling.
Washington Post, April 25, 2010. Senator Lindsey Graham, one of the
promoters of the new global warming/energy legislation, has refused to go
public with the new bill because the Democrats are taking up immigration
reform as a result of the national debate over Arizona's controversial new
illegal alien legislation. Without Graham's endorsement, many analysts
believe the new energy bill is likely to be dead on arrival. Note:
This is good news on one hand because any energy bill based on alternative
energy (other than nuclear) significantly replacing fossil fuel would
be a gigantic failure. However, don't go to sleep. The energy bill may yet
rise from the ashes like the Phoenix. |
|
|
|
EPA Rules Bad News for Blacks.
The Dickinson Press, April
24, 2010. Five civil rights organizations recently condemned EPA’s plans to
regulate carbon dioxide and other emissions. Pending anti-CO2 regulations
will slam Americans hard and blacks and other minorities hardest. A recent
Affordable Power Alliance study estimates that implementation of the EPA
regs "would...significantly reduce U.S. GDP every year over the next two
decades, and by 2030 GDP would be about $500 billion less” than otherwise.
The report also predicts EPA’s destruction of 2.5 million jobs by 2030 and
an increase of 50 percent for gasoline, 75 percent for residential natural
gas, and 100 percent for industrial natural gas by 2030. Note: We
have been warning the EPA regs and/or cap and trade will hurt minorities and
the poor the worst. They are finally seeing it. |
|
|
|
Twenty Years of Advocacy, Not Journalism, on Global
Warming.
Media Research Center, April 22, 2010.
For more than two decades, the so-called
mainstream media have preached the dangers of manmade global warming.
Not even last November’s exposure of e-mails
from leading scientists on the alarmist side of the debate — showing them
conniving to fudge or suppress data, discredit critics and distort the peer
review process — has caused journalists to finally take a skeptical approach
to radical environmentalists’ doomsaying.
A
new study documents how ABC, CBS
and NBC have been just as strident in their advocacy in the months following
“ClimateGate” as they were in the 20 years that preceded the scandal.
Note: We have discussed media advocacy before. What is new is that it
has now been officially documented. |
|
|
|
Global Warming Bill Likely Dead.
Journal Sentinel, April 21, 2010. A bill to cut Wisconsin's greenhouse gas
emission and boost the state's green economy appears dead as lawmakers move
toward wrapping up their session Thursday. Note: Wisconsin follows
New Jersey in killing global warming legislation. Perhaps this portends a
trend back to sanity. |
|
|
|
Top Climate Scientist Under Fire for ‘Exaggerating’
Global Warming.
Fox News, April 15, 2010.
Although an inquiry by a panel of scientists into the behavior and
methodologies of researchers at Britain's East Anglia University found
Britain's climatologists scatterbrained and sloppy, but ultimately innocent
of intentionally skewing climate data, one of the top scientists selected
for the panel slammed the methodologies used by Penn State climatologist
Michael Mann to devise his infamous "Hockey Stick." Although discredited,
Mann’s study still forms the backbone of global warming theories. Mann's
colleagues at Penn State launched a probe into his work -- an investigation
that came under severe attack by critics who argued that the university
failed to interview any hostile witnesses, failed to examine the methodology
that was at the heart of the controversy and was more concerned that the
millions of dollars in grant money it gets by having Mann on the faculty
could be jeopardized by adverse findings. Skeptics universally believe all
these investigations are nothing more than whitewashes. |
|
|
|
NJ's Gov Cutting $65 Million for Global Warming
Prevention. New Jersey
Gov. Chris Christie is taking $65 million, the entire allocation, from the
state's global warming fund, and $5.9 million, from the toxic waste site
cleanup program, to help close the over $10 billion deficit in his $29.3
billion 2010-11 state budget. Note: Unlike California's Arnold
Schwarzenegger NJ's newly elected Christie is aggressively cutting the
state's bloated budget to bring it into balance. Knowing Christie, it is
doubtful it will ever be reinstated because he seems to realize man-caused
global warming is a scam. Even though California's budget is far worse than
New Jersey's, Schwarzenegger and the legislature just cannot let go of even
one dime of their socialist budget--especially their global warming plan
which admittedly will
cost 1 million jobs and billions dollars of lost revenue. |
|
|
|
Climategate Team Were "Guilty of Sloppiness - NOT
Cheating"
Mail Online, April 14, 2010. In the second of three investigations into the
CRU Climategate scandal, it was determined the scientists were disorganized
and statistically naive, but not dishonest. The first, commissioned by
Britain's House of Commons came to similar conclusions. However, Lord
Oxburgh, who led the investigation, is a director of one of the most
powerful, but little known, environmental networks in the world, GLOBE. For
instance, GLOBE issued guidelines for legislators on how to articulate
positive language used at the UN's Copenhagen climate change conference last
December. Note: It is no surprise the actions of the CRU are
whitewashed. The investigations were rigged from the start. It is also no
surprise that neither investigative committee interviewed any climate
skeptics to determine what the email revelations really meant. |
|
|
|
Is 'Green Goon Squad' at Your Front Door?
WorldNetDaily, April 12, 2010.
The progressive liberals are ramping up to pass cap and trade in the Senate.
Veteran meteorologist Brian Sussman warns
"Buried in the 2009 America
Clean Energy and Security Act are federally mandated
energy-efficient
building regulations, which supersede all local and state codes and which
will be enforced by a national, green goon squad... Each time a home is
built, remodeled, or ... preparing to be sold, a G-man wearing a federal
badge and armed with a clipboard will show up at your house to make sure ...
all of your appliances have been updated with the most recent Energy
Star-approved internal communication devices, and that the Home Area Network
has been properly installed and connected to your new SmartMeter, whether
you like it or not," he says. Note: We have been warning of this
provision since last summer. Compliance will cost the average homeowner in
excess of $10,000 or more. Perhaps much more. |
|
|
|
Who Needs A Committee Report to Spot Rank Deception.
ABC Australia, April 12, 2010. The UK's House of Commons whitewash of the
CRU's Climategate scandal does not pass the smell test. The claim that the
other two temperature data repositories (NOAA and NASA) still proves that
man is causing global warming also doesn't pass the smell test. Not only
does their data link directly with that of CRU, but NASA has admitted their
data stinks, and NOAA is being accused of gargantuan data manipulation.
According to the whitewash, scientists don't need the raw data; they should
be happy with the adjusted data.
Note:
In spite of real and growing concerns of deliberate data tampering
and glaring evidence of fraud, the whitewash implies we should proceed full
steam ahead with its multi-trillion dollar, economy-busting cap and trade
scheme. That really stinks! |
|
|
|
A Superstorm For Global Warming Research
In the 1970's and early 1980's climate scientists were
projecting horrifying scenes of major cities being wiped off the face of the
earth by flooding due to melting ice caps. Current models do not predict
the complete melting of the Ice Caps. The reality is that sea levels are
rising. Storm surges are often blamed on the rising sea levels which is
blamed on global warming. The reasons for rising sea levels as well as for
storm surges are varied and complicated. The IPCC claims that violent
weather will absolutely occur in tandem with increased temperatures. It is
just another example of the grossly exaggerated predictions proclaimed by
the IPCC. Can we really expect to see stormier weather in a greenhouse
climate?
|
|
|
|
The Smoking Gun of Climatology.
(Part 4). There are enormous inconsistencies in the global
temperature data. That is not surprising given the data comes from all parts
of the world using different protocols for data collection and so forth. But
even after the data is “adjusted” for those inconsistencies, there remains
serious problems. Environmental economist Ross McKitrick, one of Steven
McIntyre's associates in exposing the hockey stick fraud, examined all
rapidly growing countries, in which this urban heat effect was to be
expected, and found a correlation between economic growth and temperature
rise. He submitted his study in time for the last IPCC report. Jones
(Director of the Climate Research Center of email infamy) did everything he
could to suppress the publication, which was critical of him. It proved
advantageous to him that he had been one of the two main authors of the
temperature chapter. In one of the hacked emails, he openly admitted that he
wanted to keep this interfering publication out of the IPCC report at all
costs, "even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"
Jones failed in the end, but he did manage to smuggle a devastating sentence
into the IPCC report, which states that McKitrick's findings were
"statistically insignificant" -- in other words, meaningless. Note: Many
subsequent studies confirmed McKtrick’s analysis, which means the 2007 IPCC
report grossly overestimated warming in the last half of the twentieth
century.
|
|
|
|
A Climate Rebel Takes on the
Establishment.
(Part 3) Der Spiegel,
April 1, 2010. Canadian engineer turned financial analyst Steven McIntyre
first exposed the fraudulent hockey stick curve eight years ago through
dogged determination. Michael Mann, author of the hockey stick, used tree
rings to come up with his infamous graph. The graph eliminated the Medieval
Optimum and Little Ice Age shown by hundreds of other research evidence
showing it was much warmer than today around 1100 to 1200 AD and much colder
in 1650 to 1850 AD. In doing so, Mann allegedly proved that the temperature
increase the last half of the 20th century was unique (read man-caused). The
IPCC heralded the graph as the smoking gun proving man-caused warming.
McIntyre destroyed the graph by proving the statistics used by Mann would
turn even randomized data into a hockey stick. Then after years of
stonewalling by the CRU, McIntyre finally got the raw data and proved that
Mann eliminated data from trees that no longer showed warming after 1960.
Worse, Mann substituted thermometer data after 1980 because the tree ring
data no longer showed warming. The CRU's efforts to stop McIntyre are all in
the hacked emails. |
|
|
|
A Politically Charged Science.
(Part 2) Der Spiegel, April 1, 2010. No other branch of science is as
politically charged as global warming. A religious war is raging between
alarmists and skeptics. It is a critical conflict, because it revolves
around something as massive as the total restructuring of industrial
society, a venture that will cost trillions of euros. Powerful economic
interests and unshakeable fundamental beliefs come into play. Only 42% of
Germans now believe global warming is serious, down from 58% just three
years ago. Anyone who speaks with leading climatologists today will discover
how many questions remain open. The media, politicians and even scientists
often talk about changes to the weather with a certainty that does not in
fact exist. |
|
|
|
A Superstorm for Global Warming Research.
Der Spiegel, April 1,
2010. Once a stanch defender of man-caused warming Der Spiegel has launched
a series of eight articles severely criticizing the theory. The first
summarizes Climategate and how the once "100% confidence" of the IPCC is now
in tatters. Sloppy work by the IPCC and apparent data manipulations by
England's CRU and the U.S.'s NOAA and NASA temperature databases has put the
entire science of climatology into a crisis -- despite a herculean effort by
the mainstream media to downplay and cover up the stunning exposures of
fraud. Der Spiegel is but one of Europe's leading papers that are now
challenging the once unchallengeable warming theory. Note: None of
this seems to have dissuaded the Obama administration from its
"full-steam-ahead" mission of cap and trade legislation. |
|
|
|
EPA's Global Warming Regulations: A Threat to American
Agriculture.
Heritage Foundation, April 2, 2010.
An analysis conducted by The Heritage
Foundation found that the Waxman-Markey bill would reduce farm profits by an
estimated 28 percent starting in 2012, the first year the bill's provisions
take effect, and average 57 percent lower through 2035.[1]
A study of a several Missouri farms ranging from 800 to 1,900 acres of corn,
soybeans, and wheat estimated annual cost increases of $4,903 to $11,649 by
2020, mostly from higher costs of natural-gas-derived fertilizer as well as
overall increased energy costs. The EPA is also beginning to implement its
draconian regulations. Any source emitting 250 tons of carbon dioxide (CO2),
an easily met threshold, would be subject to the statute's tough
requirements. Overall, a number of onerous permitting and other provisions
would apply to a million or more entities that use fossil fuels--small
businesses, commercial properties, and agricultural operations.[4] |
|
|
|
Climategate Investigation Clears UK Climate Scientists
of Fraud.
Examiner, March 31, 2010. A British investigation conducted by a panel of 14
members has exonerated the climate scientists involved, including Dr. Phil
Jones. There will be no criminal indictments. The House of Commons Science
and Technology Committee concluded there was no evidence to support
accusations of tampering with data or the peer review process to exaggerate
the global warming. The panel said as far as it could ascertain the
reputation of Professor Jones, other scientists involved, and the
CRU--remain intact. Note: This whitewash was a given. As reported
earlier, the committee was loaded with environmentalists and
led by a very powerful environmentalist. |
|
|
|
Blame the Weatherman.
BNet, April 1, 2010.
A majority of meteorologists, 63
percent, told George Mason University that global warming mostly stems from
natural causes, while 27 percent called the entire theory of global warming
a “scam”. However, George Mason's spokesman warn American's not to believe
meteorologists because they only have a four year degree and no grounding at
all in climate studies. After all, the article states, weather forecasting
models can barely predict the weather a few days ahead and have no knowledge
of the sophisticated super computer models used by climatologists. Note:
meteorologists have the background to understand general climate
dynamics and that the sophisticated climate models use wrong assumptions. |
|
|
|
Global Warming Alarmists Were Wrong About Gulf Stream
Too.
Washington
Examiner, March 30, 2010. An article published in the journal Geophysical
Research Letters refutes the computer-concocted figures typically used to
predict warming by the now discredited Climate Research Unit at East Anglia
University and the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Between
2002 and 2009, scientists from NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory have seen
no, repeat NO, discernible long-term trend in the major oceanic circulation
that affects major weather systems worldwide.
Note:
While
seeming to be "so what," this is big. For over 2 decades the prevailing
theory was that the Gulf Stream was being diluted by fresh water from
glacial melt which would stop its circulation. The theory was it would
result in cataclysmic climate change not unlike that depicted in the "sky is
falling" movie Day After Tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
Freeing Energy Policy From The Climate Change Debate.
Yale Environment 360, March 29, 2010. "The 20-year effort by
environmentalists to establish climate science as the primary basis for
far-reaching action to decarbonize the global energy economy today lies in
ruins....Now is the time to free energy policy from climate science. In
recent years, bipartisan agreement has grown on the need to decarbonize our
energy supply through the expansion of renewables, nuclear power, and
natural gas, as well as increased funding of research and development of new
energy technologies. ...The primary role for carbon pricing, whether through
auctioning pollution permits or a carbon tax, should be to fund low-carbon
energy research, development, and deployment." Note: No energy policy
should be implemented that increases the cost of energy. So far renewable
energy increase the cost by orders of magnitude. |
|
|
|
Oops: Chief Climategate Investigator Exposed as a
Director of Powerful Environmental Lobby.
The Register, March 24, 2010. Lord Oxburgh, appointed to lead the inquiry
into the scientific aspects of the CRU's Climategate scandal, failed to
disclose he is a director of one of the most powerful, but little known,
environmental networks in the world, GLOBE. For instance, GLOBE issued
guidelines for legislators on how to articulate positive language used at
the UN's Copenhagen climate change conference last December. Note:
There can be little doubt now that there has always been an effort to
officially whitewash the importance of the CRU fraud. |
|
|
|
EU Summit Cools Ambition on Global Warming.
Earth Times, March 26, 2010. European Union leaders are cooling on their
ambition to fight global warming, leaving a key greenhouse-gas emission
reduction target out of a draft statement prepared for a summit on Friday.
The draft leaves out any reference to the previously accepted target of 30%
reduction goal after 2020. The goal of a 20% reduction by 2020 still remains
in the draft document. |
|
|
|
Senate Climate Bill Details Still Unfinished.
Reuters, March 23,
2010. Emboldened by their historical win on health care, Democrats are once
again turning to cap and trade legislation, which has been languishing in
the Senate since last fall. The current bill sets a 17 percent reduction in
emissions by 2020, but environmentalists decry that is not enough. Utilities
would be hit first in 2012 while manufactures would start in 2016. Note:
We have long predicted that if health care passed, the Senate would try to
ram the full cap and trade bill through Congress. It now looks like that is
exactly they are doing. |
|
|
|
NASA's Bogus Data.
Big Journalism, March 23, 2010. Chris Horner is evaluating thousands of NASA
emails obtained via the Freedom of Information Act. According to NASA, it’s
"data is worse than the “CRU” temperature data that was the central issue in
ClimateGate. That is the temperature record which we now know was for all
intents and purposes fabricated.... NASA’s data is not independent at all,
but thoroughly dependent upon the non-existent/phonied-up CRU numbers." NASA
also depends upon NOAA's Nat. Climate Data Center' data, which has also been
shown manipulated by dropping out northern and high elevation data after
1990, but keeping the data from those stations before 1990. This gives a
huge artificial bump in temperature that has nothing to do with global
warming, but has been used to "prove" the 1990s and 2000s were the warmest
in recorded history. |
|
|
|
IPCC's Whitewash 'Review' is the AGW Camp's Biggest
Mistake.
London Telegraph, March 12, 2010. The IPCC's blatant attempt at whitewashing
its cascade of errors in January and February may backfire. The UN's
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and IPCC head Ranendra Pachauri, both warming
zealots, appointed the review body to look into to the IPCC's blatant
propaganda attempt in its 2007 report. That's like putting the fox in charge
of the hen house. The committee is to only review the IPCC's procedures, not
the falsification of the report itself. In other words, the conclusions
drawn from the falsified report will stand and little will be done to stop
the falsification in the next report, which is scheduled to begin next fall
and reported out in 2014. The attempted whitewash is so obvious that it in
itself may destroy the IPCC's credibility. |
|
|
|
ClimateGate Goes Back to 1980.
Wall Street Pit, March 19, 2010. James Hansen of NASA's GISS appears to have
systematically adjusted the historical temperature record to remove a cold
patch in the ’70s in order to exaggerate the rise since. The amount of
change of 0.6 degrees is for one decade is close to the measured change for
the whole century. This is vividly seen in these three snapshots of his data
being modified.... Watch how the cooling trend of the 1960’s to 1970’s is
steadily adjusted up so that 0.3 degrees cooler gradually becomes 0.03
warmer (notice the red and blue horizontal lines in the graphs above).
Note: Hansen, of "coal trains are death trains" fame, has long been
suspected of cooking the books. It can't be proven, however, because he
refuses to release the data or the algorithms he uses to re-adjust the
curves. Yet, the IPCC and the media take everything he says at face value. |
|
|
|
Global Warming Concerns in a Freefall.
Gallup, March 16, 2010. A Gallup poll found that global warming ranked dead
last when compared to concern specifically about environmental problems.
Only 28% worry about global warming a "great deal," down from 33% a year ago
and 41% in 2007. Note: The American people are starting to really
understand this issue is a fraud. |
|
|
|
Granddaddy of green, James Lovelock, Warms to
Eco-skeptics. London
Times, March 14, 2010. Note: James Lovelock is the most radical of
the radical environmentalists. He was the one who developed the Gaia
theory that the earth is a living, sentient being. Two years ago he said
that billions of people will die if we don't stop global warming. This is
what he said Saturday:
“I think you have to accept that the sceptics have kept
us sane — some of them, anyway,” he said. “They have been a breath of fresh
air. They have kept us from regarding the science of climate change as a
religion. It had gone too far that way. There is a role for sceptics in
science. They shouldn’t be brushed aside. It is clear that the angel side
wasn’t without sin.” Note: He also said more. This is nothing short
of astounding. It made the headlines in all the British papers Sunday and
Monday. It will have an impact on British environmentalists and may have a
ripple effect in the U.S. |
|
|
|
Wind Power the Worst Kind of Mirage.
Financial Post, March 3, 2010. Wind energy is an engineer's nightmare. To
begin with, the energy density of flowing air is miserably low. Therefore,
you need a massive contraption to catch one megawatt at best, and a thousand
of these to equal a single gas-or coal-fired power plant. If you design them
for a wind speed of 34 mph, they are useless at wind speeds less than 22 mph
and extremely dangerous at 44 mph. Since the power generated by modern wind
turbines is so unpredictable, conventional power plants have to serve as
back-ups. These run at less than half power most of the time. That is
terribly uneconomical -- only at full power do they have good thermal
efficiency and minimum CO2 emissions per kWh delivered. Note: Written
by an aeronautical engineer, this article completely destroys the myth that
wind can substitute for conventional power plants. |
|
|
|
Graph of Temperature vs. Number of Stations.
RossMcKitrick, March 15, 2010.
Dr. Ross McKitrick, one of the two Canadians who exposed the famous Hockey
Stick Curve, presents shocking pre-manipulated NOAA temperature data as
affected by surface station dropout in the 1990s. The graphic is stunning.
When NOAA’s global
temperature database suddenly dropped from around 11,500 surface stations to
under 10,000 in the early 1990s (mostly from colder latitudes and
elevations) the unmodified global temperature suddenly shot up from about 10oC
to11.5oC. However, after NOAA applied their “correction”
algorithms the data showed a smooth, but rapid increase in temperature
starting in the early 1980s through the mid 1990s. Joe D’Aleo, the first
Director meteorology for the Weather channel discovered this and is
currently challenging NOAA of cooking the books by leaving the data from the
discontinued colder stations in the database prior to their discontinuance. |
|
|
|
Memorandum Submitted by Stephen McIntyre to
Parliament.
United Kingdom Parliament, March
15, 2010. Steven McIntyre, one of the two Canadians who exposed the famous
Hockey Stick Curve, submitted testimony about the CRU to Britain's
Parliament. "Reconstructions of temperature over the past 1000 years have
been an highly visible part of IPCC presentations to the public. CRU has
been extremely influential in IPCC reconstructions through: coauthorship,
the use of CRU chronologies, peer review and IPCC participation. To my
knowledge, there are no 1000-year reconstructions which are truly
"independent" of CRU influence. In my opinion, CRU has manipulated and/or
withheld data with an effect on the research record. The manipulation
includes (but is not limited to) arbitrary adjustment ("bodging"), cherry
picking and deletion of adverse data..." |
|
|
|
Increased Number Think Global Warming Is
"Exaggerated." Gallup,
March 11, 2010. A
record-high 41% [for Gallup] now say it is exaggerated. This represents the
highest level of public skepticism about mainstream reporting on global
warming seen in more than a decade of Gallup polling on the subject. As
recently as 2006, significantly more Americans thought the news
underestimated the seriousness of global warming than said it exaggerated
it, 38% vs. 30%. Now, according to Gallup's 2009 Environment survey, more
Americans say the problem is exaggerated rather than underestimated, 41% vs.
28%. Note: Most polls show that over half of the American people
believe global warming is exaggerated. It still ranks last in the top 30
problems that should be addressed. |
|
|
|
California Global Warming Law May Lead to Job Losses.
Los Angeles Times, March 10, 2010.
California's nonpartisan legislative analyst's office has analyzed the
state's stiff 2006 global warming legislation and has concluded it will
cause job losses. Note: Job losses have followed every effort to
implement a green energy system in the world. California has finally
recognized it. The best analysis is from
Spain last
year which found after 10 years, 2.2 jobs were lost in the regular economy
for every green job created (at a cost of over $750,000 by the way). |
|
|
|
Global Warming
Doubts Hamper Climate Legislation?
Christian Science Monitor, March 8, 2010. The
new polls released yesterday suggest that the cap and trade legislation
passed by the House last June, and currently in the Senate may have suffered
a fatal setback. The severe drop in support for global warming legislation
is the result of the series of scandals since last November that reveal
fraud at every level of the man-caused theory. Along with the horrible
economy the scandals have created the "perfect storm" against any
legislation that allegedly stops man-caused global warming (it can't be
stopped because it is not happening in the first place). Note: Don't
count on this happening. If the Dems get any form of healthcare passed, it
is likely they will push ahead on cap and trade. President Obama essentially
told us that in his State of the Union address. If they fail to pass
healthcare, they will still push for converting to green energy (which will
further bankrupt us) and imposing smart grid technology on us. More on this
later. |
|
|
|
After Errors, Global Warming Gets a Cold Shoulder.
Boston Globe, March
8, 2009. Public confidence has been eroded by the string of email exposures
of fraud, deliberate use of un-refereed articles from environmental
advocates as scientific evidence of apocalyptic catastrophes, and systematic
tampering of temperature data to show more warming than really exists.
Recent polls found only 57 percent now believe global warming is even
occurring at all, down from 71 percent in 2008. Fifty percent were
"somewhat" or "very worried" about global warming, a 13 percent decrease
from the fall of 2008, and 26 percent decrease from 2007. The percent of
people who completely dismissed global warming as being man-caused jumped
from 7 percent in 2008 to 16 percent today. Meanwhile 56 percent don't trust
what the things scientists say about the environment; up from 49 percent in
2007. Note: The drop in warming alarmists continues a 3 year trend.
What is discouraging is that the lies and politicization of this issue is
also increasing mistrust in scientists in genera, which can spell trouble in
the future. Look for a big push to get legislation passed this year as a
last ditch effort. |
|
|
|
Coal-State Dems Unveil Bills Stalling EPA Emission
Curbs.
New York Times, March 4, 2010. "Four influential coal-state Democrats
introduced companion bills in the House and Senate today that would block
U.S. EPA from implementing any climate-related stationary source rules for
two years, a timeout of sorts that they think gives Congress time to pass
legislation dealing with the issue." The " bill would give Congress the time
it needs to address an issue as complicated and expansive as our energy
future. Congress, not the EPA, must be the ideal decision-maker on such a
challenging issue." This is in addition to the resolution by Senator
Murkowski (R-AK) that would overturn EPA's "endangerment" finding that opens
the doors for the multi-thousand page series of regulations that the EPA was
scheduled to implement this month, but has postponed until 2011. Note:
This may be an attempt by the Democrats to short-circuit Murkowski's
resolution, but more likely is the political realization that Obama has said
numerous times he plans to put the coal industry out of business, even
though the U.S. has a 500 year supply of coal. |
|
|
|
Climategate Statements from Physics, Chemistry and
Statistical Societies.
Climate Research News, March 5,
2010. Three British profession societies have sent scathing reviews of the
East Anglia Climate Research Unit's email Climategate fiasco to Britain's
Parliament. They are the Institute of Physics, The Royal Society of
Chemistry, and the Royal Statistical Society. Contrary to the media's effort
to downplay and whitewash the email's revelations, the three professional
organizations are highly critical of what the email's revealed. The
organizations criticized the effort to distort data, obstruct opposing
ideas, the flagrant denial to release data to be evaluated by others, and
more. The general conclusion was that the corruption was so bad that any
conclusions drawn from the CRU data were highly suspect. |
|
|
|
$90 Million
Bill for the CO2 of Britain's Political
Class.
London Telegraph, February 20, 2010. Must Read: The British
Government allocated £60 million ($90 mil) of taxpayers money to be spent on
buying carbon credits from Third World nations to keep government offices
warm and comfy. JP Morgan and Barclays (a branch of JP Morgan) gets a cool
£9 million (13.5 mil) for brokering the deal. (Note: JP Morgan is one of the
biggies pushing for global governance). Most of the carbon credits were
bought from China and India. How does China have any credits to sell when
they are the single biggest carbon polluter on the planet, with India
close behind? The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has set
up a sweet racket for them. Chinese and Indian firms are permitted to carry
on the production of the refrigerant gas HCFC-23, which has a byproduct
known as HCFC-23. HCFC-23 happens to be 11,700 times more potent than CO2 as
a greenhouse gas. The UNFCCC allows China and India to destroy the HCFC-23,
claiming allocations of carbon credits worth billions for doing so
while much of the useful HCFC-22 is then sold on to the international black
market. China's profits can be used to build their military so they can
destroy us. After millions of taxpayer money was spent, not one pound of
carbon emissions was removed. |
|
|
|
Global Warming Scientists 'Need to Go Back to Square One.'
CNS News, March 3, 2010. Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) chided the EPA's regulations
saying that global warming has not met scientific criteria; the theory does
not match the facts. None of the alleged science cannot be verified, but is
being used in computer models that provides the only evidence for man-caused
warming. Scientists, he said need to start over again using verifiable
empirical data. The comments were made during an announcement a resolution
condemning the EPA's recent endangerment finding that greenhouse gases (CO2
specifically) are pollutants. They don't expect the resolution to pass in
the Democrat-controlled House. |
|
|
|
A Gas Tax to Cure Global Warming?
Washington Examiner, March 2, 2010. Senators John
Kerry (D-MA), Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) are proposing a
carbon tax to replace the unpopular cap and trade schemes that are stalled
in Congress. NOTE: Ironically, a carbon tax is far more straight forward,
less intrusive, less susceptible to corruption, and more transparent than
the convoluted cap and trade ideas. Its biggest problem? The dreaded word
"tax" is in the bill. Even though cap and trade is in reality the biggest
tax ever passed by Congress, the word "tax" does not appear in the title.
All the costs to the taxpayer are hidden by whopping increases in the cost
of living to poor and rich alike. Cap and trade is OK, carbon tax is
forbidden -- even though either one is not necessary because man is not
causing global warming, and either one will pretty much sink our economy.
|
|
|
|
The Global Warming Blizzard Myth.
Philadelphia Bulletin, February 18, 2010. In spite of
record cold temperatures and snowfall, global warming alarmists are
repeatedly trying to convince the American people that it is all part of
global warming. The global warming computer models, they tell us, predict
record heat will resume, along with higher frequency of extreme weather such
as heat waves, drought, floods violent storms, and yes, blizzards. However,
historical records don't support this. Record warmth across the globe
occurred more frequently in the late 1800s and early 1900s than now. US
precipitation has increased 10 % in the last 115 years, but it has been in
low to moderate events, not extreme events. Drought in the US still happens,
but has experienced a sharp decline the past century. Severe tornadoes were
more common in the 1960s and 70s during global cooling in the 1990s and
early 2000s when warming was occurring. Not surprisingly the number of
tornadoes has increase the past 5 years as the earth once again was cooling.
The winter of 2009-2010 is the coldest and snowiest since 1899.
|
|
|
|
Al Gore Won't Return Your Call.
Fox News, February 26, 2010. "In the last three months, as global warming
has gone from a scientific near-certitude to the subject of satire, Gore --
the public face of global warming -- has been silent on the topic. The
former vice president apparently finds it inconvenient even to answer calls
to testify before the U.S. Senate. You can call him Al . . . but he won't
call back." Gore did attend the Apple's annual stockholders meeting last
Thursday. "Gore was seated in the first row while several stockholders
bashed his high-profile views on climate change. One reportedly said Gore
'has become a laughingstock. The glaciers have not melted.'" Ridicule is the
least that could happen to Gore. Senator Inhofe (R-OK) derided Gore, "When
his movie came out, parents of small children told me their kids had to go
to the psychiatrist over bad dreams about global warming. We owe it to the
public to find out where the science came from. This is the greatest
scientific scandal of our generation." |
|
|
|
EPA's Global Warming Power Grab.
Washington Times, February 25, 2010. Next month the EPA is set to began to
implement its multi-thousand page set of regulations to control carbon
emissions. President George W. Bush's EPA administrator, Stephen L. Johnson,
warned that such a finding would result in a major government power grab. "[T]he
potential regulation of greenhouse gases under any portion of the Clean Air
Act could result in an unprecedented expansion of EPA authority that would
have a profound effect on virtually every sector of the economy and touch
every household in the land," he explained. The EPA placed what it called a
"primary reliance" on reports like those of the IPCC instead of conducting
independent research to make its finding. Given the retractions and
revelations of faulty science surrounding the global-warming religion,
especially at the IPCC, it's time to take the issue out of the EPA's hands
so Congress can address it in the open. Note: It is highly unlikely the
Democratically controlled Congress will vote to do this. |
|
|
|
Climategate II--NASA's Science as Corrupted as CRU's.
Pajamas Media,
February 17, 2010. NASA's GISS was finally forced to release emails under
the Freedom of Information Act after being threatened with a lawsuit. Like
the CRU email scandal, they are very revealing. Dr. James Hansen leads the
GISS and a radical, even rabid global warming alarmist. This is what has
been found so far. "The emails show the hypocrisy, dishonesty, and suspect
data management and integrity of NASA, wildly spinning in defense of their
enterprise. The emails show NASA making off with enormous sums of taxpayer
funding doing precisely what they claim only a “skeptic” would do. The
emails show NASA attempting to scrub their website of their own documents,
and indeed they quietly pulled down numerous press releases grounded in the
proven-wrong data. The emails show NASA claiming that their own temperature
errors (which they have been caught making and in uncorrected form
aggressively promoting) are merely trivial [the errors added 0.1oC--that's
not trivial], after years of hysterically trumpeting much smaller warming
anomalies. NOTE: we will bring you more specific information in the future. |
|
|
|
Even More Defections from Global Warming.
Orange County Gazette, February 21, 2010. The global warming fear campaign
is rapidly losing steam, and may even be reversing. ConocoPhilips, BP
America, Caterpillar have announced they will not renew their membership in
the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, formed to seek federal reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions and investment in lower-emitting technologies. This
is convincing evidence that many major corporations now recognize the
energy-rationing cap and trade legislation is not needed. |
|
|
|
EPA Faces New Legal Challenges on GHG Ruling.
Recharge, February 19, 2010.
Alabama and Virginia have joined
Texas and 13 other plaintiffs in filing court challenges to the US
Environmental Protection Agency’s finding in December that heat-trapping
greenhouse gases endanger human health and welfare. The 13 include
the American Farm Bureau
Federation; American Iron and Steel Institute; National Mining Association;
Portland Cement Association; Ohio Coal Association; US Chamber of Commerce
and Utility Air Regulatory Group, Gerdau Ameristeel; Peabody Energy;
Southeastern Legal Foundation and the Competitive Enterprise Institute, an
advocacy group, American Petroleum Institute; Corn Refiners Association;
National Association of Home Builders; National Association of
Manufacturers; National Oilseed Processors; National Petrochemical and
Refiners Association and Western States Petroleum Association. The EPA is
confident it will win. NOTE: If the US Circuit Court of Appeals bases its
decision on the science, the EPA will lose. We'll see. |
|
|
|
Virginia Seeks to Block EPA's Finding of Endangerment
from Global Warming.
Richmond Times Dispatch, February 18, 2010. The EPA's finding of
endangerment by greenhouse gases and their massive new regulations to
control them is running into some snags. Several organizations have already
filed lawsuits to stop the EPA and the State of Virginia just through its
hat into the stew. Virginia's Attorney General said
"An incredibly far-reaching decision has been
made [by the EPA] using a clearly flawed process." He was referring to the
avalanche of evidence showing fraud by climate research centers and the IPCC
uncovered since late November. The EPA's decision rests entirely on the
conclusions of the IPCC, which are now in serious doubt. NOTE: This is big.
Unless Congress passes a simple law saying that the Clean Air Act does not
pertain to greenhouse gases, which it should, but probably won't, individual
states will likely issue direct challenges under the Tenth Amendment, which
they are doing on other issues with increasing regularity. |
|
|
|
What to Say to a Global Warming Advocate.
Orange County Register, February 12, 2010. There apparently are 19, that's
right, 19 reports of fraud by global warming alarmists, especially in the
IPCC. We have reported on most of them, but there are a few that we seemed
to have missed. 1) China's temperature database is missing 42 important
sites; 2) Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC's Chairman, knew of the Himalayan
glacier melting fraud before December's Copenhagen Conference, but still
used it to scare attendees; 3) Britain's 2006 Stern report that painted an
economic doomsday picture was mostly based on made up scenarios; 4) So far
the 2007 IPCC report has been found to have at least 16 nonpeer-reviewed
reports from the radical green World Wildlife Fund to back up the IPCC's
catastrophic predictions; 5) Russia has accused the CRU/IPCC of leaving the
coldest temperature stations out of the IPCC's analyses; 6) The IPCC's
assertion that coral reef disintegration was based entirely on
non-peer-reviewed assertions by Greenpeace; 7) The IPCC claim that African
agricultural yields could be cut in half was from a green advocacy
think-tank, not a peer reviewed journal; 8) claims that the 50% of the
Netherlands was under sea level were false, it is only 20%; and the Alaska
glacier loss was overestimated by 40% for the past 40 years. |
|
|
|
Skeptical on Global Warming.
The Star Ledger, February 14, 2010. Every state of the union had snow on the
ground or was snowing late last week. There is some question about Hawaii,
but there are reports that it was snowing at higher elevations. Even if
Hawaii is left out, it is still the first time this has happened in recorded
history. Even though there has been a desperate attempt by warming alarmists
that the cold and snow is caused by global warming, there is growing
evidence that we are truly in a cooling cycle. Even Dr. Phil Jones, who is
facing possible indictment for his role in Climategate, now admits the earth
has not warmed statistically since 1995. Yet, man-caused warming continues
to take on the aspects of a pantheistic religion. Believers believe without
any evidence at all. NOTE: Ironically, January turned out to be one of the
warmest months since satellites began measuring earth's temperature. It is
due to an moderate El Nino embedded within a cold 30 yr PDO (Pacific Decadal
Oscillation). The El Nino should dissipate by spring when colder
temperatures will return. We'll see. |
|
|
|
Another Climategate Panel Member Proved Biased.
The Scotsman, February 13, 2010. Only 24 hours after another ClimateGate
panel member was forced to quit, questions emerged over Professor Geoffrey
Boulton because of his previous views that climate change is caused by human
activity. The public was assured that the panel members were "selected on
the basis they have no prejudicial interest in climate science." Yet Boulton
"was among a number of scientists who, in the wake of the climategate
scandal, signed a petition to show their confidence that global warming was
caused by humans. And for at least five years, he has made clear his strong
views on global warming. He has given interviews and written articles –
including in The Scotsman – that have spelled out his firmly held beliefs."
He even argued "The argument regarding climate change is over." This led the
editorial board of the Scotsman to question if the panel selection is an
attempt at a cover-up. |
|
|
|
Climate Emails Review Panelist Quits After His
Impartiality Questioned.
The Guardian, February 12, 2010.
Philip Campbell, editor in chief of Nature, the most prestigious
scientific magazine in the world, was forced to resign from a panel
investigating whether the CRU's hacked email showed wrongdoing on the part
of CRU known as Climategate. It turned out Campbell had already told the
Chinese state radio, "The scientists have not hidden the data.... In fact
the only problem there has been is on some official restrictions on their
ability to disseminate data, otherwise they have behaved as researchers
should." Nature was the scientific publication in which Michael
Mann's infamous Hockey Stick Curve was published. The Hockey Stick Curve has
been thoroughly debunked as a fraud and was one of the main topics of
discussion in the hacked emails. NOTE: To have invited Campbell in the first
place strongly suggests a cover-up in progress. Anyone who understands the
facts behind the emails can see that the CRU and its associated scientists
blatantly corrupted the scientific method. Worse, it was also announced the
investigation will be behind closed doors with no transcript of the
proceedings. It is quite shocking how the global warming alarmists will do
anything to prevent the truth from being told to the world. |
|
|
|
Record Snowfall Buries Climate Bill But Sparks Debate.
NBC News, February 11, 2010. The
historic snowfall in D.C. has shut down the federal government and
hope seems to be withering
that a significant climate change bill can be passed this year.
In addition to paralyzing the nation's capitol, the blizzard has breathed
new wind into the argument that the globe is not getting any warmer.
Environmentalists are now pushing the counterintuitive notion that the heavy
snow is further proof that global warming exists. Conservatives, meanwhile,
are chilling -- confident that a northeast coated in white is the right
indication that climate change is junk science. NOTE: GW alarmists proclaim
the record cold and snow proves global warming. They're nuts, of course. On
the other hand a batch of cold, snowy weather does not prove we are having
global cooling either. We are in an warm El Nino that is happening in the
Cold cycle of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO). We entered the cold PDO
ten years ago and it should be gradually cooling. It has been, which is
right in line with cooling temperatures. At the same time we are in a
moderate El Nino, which usually means a dry Pacific Northwest (Vancouver has
no snow for the Olympics), a wet southern California and Southeast (which it
is), and generally a wet central and northern Atlantic Coast (which it is).
Conclusion? Man is not causing global warming. The sun and oceans control
climate. Period. |
|
|
|
Sara Palin calls global warming science snake oil.
Seattle Post Intelligence, February 10, 2010. While speaking at the
Sierra-Cascade Logging Conference in Redding CA, Sara Palin lambasted the
federal government's decision in 2008 to list polar bears as threatened
under the Endangered Species Act. Those promoting polar bear listing really
want to shut down oil and gas leasing in Arctic coastal waters off Alaska,
Palin argued. "We knew the bottom line
. . . was ultimately to shut down a lot of our development," Palin told the
loggers. "And it didn't make any sense because it was based on these global
warming studies that now we're seeing (is) a bunch of snake oil science."
NOTE: Although Palin is correct, the mainstream media is faithfully
regurgitating all of the alleged "scientific" evidence on the melting polar
icecap proving her wrong. The don't mention that the icecap has been rapidly
growing in size since 2007. |
|
|
|
New Federal Office for Global Warming.
Washington Times, February 9, 2010.
President Obama is calling for a new federal office within National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to study, report and advise other
agencies on global warming. NOAA's Climate Service office would help federal
agencies and businesses prepare for and cope with global changes. "This
service will be a vital part of our growing body of knowledge on climate
change, and will be held to the highest standards of scientific integrity
and transparency," said Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-MA). Markey is the
co-author of last year's economy wrecking cap and trade bill that passed the
House in June. NOTE: "the highest standards of scientific integrity and
transparency?" Just like the IPCC at the international level, who has been
exposed the past four months of data manipulation and outright science
fraud. There is credible evidence that
NOAA has
already been cooking the books as well. This is nothing more that
putting the wolf in charge of the henhouse. |
|
|
|
Follow the Global Warming Money.
Casper Tribune, February 8, 2010.
"Liberal politicians are adherents [of global warming] because they thirst
for unlimited tax revenue through cap and trade laws. For pseudo-scientists,
the global warming scheme is a smooth path to lucrative government research
grants and the resulting prestige. To green energy producers, it is a
financial bonanza for startup companies since the federal government is the
largest venture capitalist in this field. Global warming is the basis for
green energy continually seeking special tax favors, carbon portfolios and
other benefits from all levels of government. For undeveloped countries
global warming is a justification for restitution payments from the U. S.
taxpayers. To the hard left it provides an environmental basis for one-world
government and complete control over the production and lives of the planet.
To people like Al Gore, who refers to global warming as "settled science,"
it provided an effective vehicle for becoming a multimillionaire." |
|
|
|
The Great Global Warming Collapse.
The Globe and Mail, February, 6,
2010. First there was the e-mails leaked from the University of East Anglia,
home of a crucial research unit responsible for collecting temperature data.
Then the IPCC's claim that the Himalayan glaciers were melting was proved
false. Next the IPCC's claim that large tracts of the Amazon forest
world disappear was based on a radical green article in an environmental
magazine not even related to global warming. Then came the revelation
that the IPCC claim that the Alps glaciers were based on antidotal claims by
hikers published in a hiking magazine. Now, well-known warming alarmists are
saying the IPCC has crossed into advocacy and they don't want anything to do
with it. "By exaggerating the certainties, papering over the gaps,
demonizing the skeptics and peddling tales of imminent catastrophe, they've
discredited the entire climate-change movement." NOTE: for the record,
skeptical scientists have long known the IPCC's "evidence" was a fraud, and
were suspicious that the CRU, NOAA, and NASA scientists were cooking the
books. They just couldn't prove it until now. |
|
|
|
Media Cools On Global Warming.
The Australian, February 6, 2010. Two major staunch defenders of man-caused
global warming are now questioning the integrity of global warming data.
After stonewalling Climategate and numerous revelations of fraud in the 2007
IPCC report, the British Independent is now questioning just what CRU's head
Phil Jones meant when he said that Michael Mann (University of Pennsylvania)
meant when he tried to "hide" the decline the data really showed. Mann used
tree-ring analysis until 1960 and then switched to "real" data thereafter
because the tree ring data showed cooling, not warming. The media outlet
also questioned Jones' suppression of the heat island effect, which skeptics
believe caused most of the warming in the late 20th century. England's The
Guardian is also starting to question the suppression of evidence supporting
the heat island effect. NOTE: This is evidence that even the media has to
acknowledge the man-caused theory is coming unraveled even though they still
support the theory. |
|
|
|
Climate Scientist Calls For 'Big Changes' at UN IPCC.
The Heartland Institute, February 4, 2010.
In his address to the Thirteenth Annual
Energy and Environment Expo, Dr. William Sprigg took on the ClimateGate
scandal and called for "serious reforms" of the global scientific community.
He warned of a growing perception that "the IPCC is biased, conflicted,
[and] pushing political agendas." Sprigg called for a new climate research
agency supported not entirely by the government, but in conjunction with the
private sector. "We need to stick to our scientific principles," Sprigg
said, referring at least in part to the critical importance of sharing data
with other scientists so that hypotheses and methodologies can be checked
and double-checked. "We need to improve our peer preview process, and expand
the stakeholders' role to keep us all honest." |
|
|
|
The Hottest Hoax in the World.
Open Magazine, India, January 30, 2010. Increasingly messages like this are
being reported in media around the world: "The climate change fraud that is
now unraveling is unprecedented in its deceit, unmatched in scope—and for
the liberal elite, akin to 9 on the Richter scale. Never have so few fooled
so many for so long, ever. The entire world was being asked to change the
way it lives on the basis of pure hyperbole. Propriety, probity and
transparency were routinely sacrificed. The truth is: the world is not
heating up in any significant way. Neither are the Himalayan glaciers going
to melt as claimed by 2035. Nor is there any link at all between natural
disasters such as Hurricane Katrina and global warming. All that was pure
nonsense, or if you like, ‘no-science’!" |
|
|
|
IPCC Based Claims on Student's Report and Magazine
Article. London
Telegraph, January 30, 2010. In the growing debacle of false reporting in
its 2007 report, yet another false conclusion in the report. The IPCC's 2007
report
stated that observed reductions in mountain ice in the Andes, Alps and
Africa was being caused by global warming, citing two papers as the source
of the information. the conclusion was based on two reports; one was from a
feature article in a popular mountain climber magazine based on anecdotal
evidence and the other was written by a geography student that quoted
interviews with mountain guides in the Alps. NOTE: This is not science and
shows how sloppy the IPCC's report really is. Mountain snows have probably
retreated, but it is not caused by man-caused global warming, but by the
recovery from the Little Ice Age in the 1700s and 1800s plus changes in
land-use patterns (which is the major reason for the disappearance of the
snows of Mt. Kilimanjaro). Claiming the IPCC is a "scientific" organization
is ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Can Climate Forecasts Still Be Trusted?
ABC News, January 28, 2010. As the
realization sinks in that the IPCC deliberately lied and then demonized
anyone who questioned them about the lies, the mainstream media is becoming
disillusioned about the integrity of the IPCC and it's increasingly shrill
statements of doom and gloom. The word Glaciergate is now entering the
language about all the exposures of fraud. Yet, even as the call for the
resignation of IPCC Chairman and Nobel laureate Rajendra Pachuari increases
daily,
President Obama has just called for a 28 percent reduction in greenhouse
gas emissions by 2020; 13 percent higher than what Congress called for in
the House and Senate cap and trade bills. NOTE: It seems like the far left
is insanely calling for more and more fascist laws in spite of overwhelming
opposition by American citizens. Review the information on
www.nocapandtrade.us.
|
|
|
|
UN’s Global Warming Report Attacked for Rainforest Claims.
Foxnews,
January 28, 2010. The UN’s IPCC is again under fire for the third time in
two weeks for its claim in its 2007 report that 40 percent of the Amazon
Rain Forest was threatened by global warming. The claim was totally
discredited when it was discovered that the World Wildlife Federation’s
study upon which the IPCC’s claim was based had nothing to do with global
warming, but instead was about man-caused forest fires. Worse, the article
was written by a freelance journalist/green activist. This new fraud by the
IPCC follows the exposure of fraud by the IPCC earlier this week of its
claim that global warming will cause increased extreme storm events, and the
exposed fraud last week that the Himalayan glaciers would be gone by 2035.
Note: This kind of fraud has been going on since the inception of the IPCC.
(See our 4 minute
YouTube video) If this were any other “science” organization it would be
totally discredited and ignored in the future, or more likely, shut down
entirely. That won’t happen to the IPCC because it is the key cog in a huge
global agenda. They will go through the motions of a major housecleaning,
but it will be a whitewash. |
|
|
|
2 Climate Studies Offer Hope on Global Warming.
Houston Chronicle, January 28, 2010. Two studies just published showed that
global warming was not nearly as serious as previously thought. One study
showed that atmospheric water vapor had declined over the past 10 years
rather than increasing as all the climate models had showed. Increasing
water vapor amplifies the warming. It is called a positive feedback.
However, the decline in water vapor the past 10 years shows it to be a
negative feedback, which has caused earth’s temperature to actually decline.
This suggested future projected warming would be about 80 percent less than
forecast. (We have known this for at least two years. See our
3 ½ minute video).
Another positive feedback is as oceans warm they cannot hold as much CO2 and
therefore emit more CO2, which amplifies its effect in the atmosphere. This
is not happening because the ocean’s are not warming as expected. Why? See
our 4 minute
YouTube video. Note:
the author’s of these two research papers still claim man-caused CO2 is the
primary driver of warming even though their results disprove it. Of course,
they must make this claim if they are to get future grant money from the
federal government. |
|
|
|
Carbon Currency: A New Beginning for Technocracy?
The August Review, Carbon Currency: A New Beginning
for Technocracy, January 26, 2010. Must Read
There is growing evidence that national
currencies, including the US dollar will be replaced with a single carbon
currency. It is designed to support a revolutionary new economic system
based on energy consumption and production rather than price.
Our current price-based economic
system and its related currencies that have supported capitalism, socialism,
fascism and communism, is being herded to the slaughterhouse in order to
make way for a new carbon-based world. Unfortunately for individual people
living in this new system, it will also require authoritarian and
centralized control over all aspects of life, from cradle to grave. Note:
Economists have long thought the cap and trade system is an irrational means
of controlling carbon emissions. However, if the long-term goal is to
develop a carbon currency, it makes perfect sense. It's a well-worth reading
report that may help explain the insanity of cap and trade legislation. |
|
|
|
Obama to Continue Pushing for Cap and Trade.
State of Union Address, January 27, 2010. Obama: "And, yes, it means passing
a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally
make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America. I'm grateful to
the House for passing such a bill last year. And this year -- this year, I'm
eager to help advance the bipartisan effort in the Senate. I know there have
been questions about whether we can afford such changes in a tough economy.
I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific
evidence on climate change. But -- but here's the thing. Even if you doubt
the evidence, providing incentives for energy efficiency and clean energy
are the right thing to do for our future, because the nation that leads the
clean-energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy, and
America must be that nation." Note: While admitting there are
scientists who disagree with the global warming mantra, it would still be
the right thing to do to pass the legislation because it would create clean
energy. He is wrong.
It would not be profitable, it will not create new jobs, nor can it provide
a lot of clean energy with today's technology. |
|
|
|
Public's Priorities for 2010: Global Warming Dead
Last.
Pew Research Center,
January 26, 2010. A Pew Poll of top priorities by the American public ranked
global warming dead last, 21 out of 21. Only 28 percent thought it the
highest priority, down from 38 percent in 2007. This follows an overall
trend in which only 48 percent of all Americans now believe man is causing
global warming compared to almost 80 percent in 2006. Such a low ranking in
the new Pew poll is driven in part by indifference among Republicans: just
11% consider global warming a top priority, compared with 43% of Democrats
and 25% of independents. Not surprisingly, nearly 70 percent of all
Democrats still believe man is causing global warming. Note: Watch to see if
Obama will still pursue cap and trade in his State of the Union Address.
There is no scientific or political justification for him to do so. |
|
|
|
China Officially Has Doubt About Man-caused Theory.
Financial Times,
January 25, 2010. China has made it official; cause of global warming is
uncertain. Although global warming is a "fact," its cause very much remains
in doubt. It is very possible it is nothing more than a natural cycle. China
also strongly implied the
IPCC must include "contrarian" evidence refuting the man-caused
theory in the fifth assessment in 2013. Note: The man-caused theory of
global warming is rapidly becoming unraveled. However, since it is part of
an agenda, don't expect the media or politicians to give up trying to pass
cap and trade and some sort of international agreement. |
|
|
|
UN IPCC Falsely Linked Global Warming to Natural
Disasters.
London Times, January 24, 2010.
Must Read.
Still reeling from the inclusion
of false warnings that the Himalayan glaciers would be gone by 2035, the
IPCC has now been found to have used an unpublished, un-reviewed paper that
shows that global warming creates the number and severity of natural
disasters such as hurricanes and floods. One of the main emotional
motivators for cap and trade legislation and international treaties has been
the alleged "certainty" that global warming would cause catastrophic weather
events. Indeed, almost every destructive storm the past 15 years has been
blamed on global warming. It turns out that all these predictions of
catastrophic weather were based on an unpublished report. Numerous
scientists told the IPCC that it was wrong, but they included it in their
2007 report anyway. To add insult to injury, when the unpublished report was
finally published it claimed, "We find insufficient evidence to claim a
statistical relationship between global temperature increase and catastrophe
losses." -- just the opposite of what the IPCC said. Note: Scientists have
long known that the entire IPCC process is political and has nothing to do
with true science. The proof is finally coming out. Even so, it is unlikely
the IPCC will be shut down or will change its position. After all, it is
advancing a political agenda, not the truth. (See why global warming
can't cause the number and violence of storms. Get our highly acclaimed
DVD) |
|
|
|
Glacier Scientist: I knew Data Hadn't Been Verified.
Daily Mail UK, January 24, 2010. The scientist behind the bogus claim in the
2007 IPCC report that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 said he knew
the claim did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research. "We thought
that if we can highlight it [the unsubstantiated claim
that exposed as false], it will impact policy-makers and politicians and
encourage them to take some concrete action." When the report proving the
melting claim was wrong IPCC Chairman, Raj Pachauri, rather than saying the
IPCC would look into the report's accusation, said that the report
questioning the IPCC was based on "voodoo science." It turns out the IPCC's
report itself was based on voodoo science. Note: Skeptics have long known
the IPCC was not a science institution, but rather a political institution
instituting a political agenda to show man was causing global warming. It
systematically eliminating all science that refuting its man-caused theory,
and as evidenced by this controversy, made up "evidence" to support its
agenda. It then demonizes anything or anybody that opposes it. |
|
|
|
Ohio Professional Geologists Reject Warming Alarmism.
Heartland Institute, 1-21-2010. The
Ohio Section of the American Institute of Professional Geologists has
adopted a position statement rejecting global warming alarmism and calling
on Congress to defeat legislation aimed at restricting carbon dioxide
emissions. They further requested Congress to reject all cap and trade
legislation stating, "The Ohio Section of AIPG professes that there is no
scientific evidence supporting this [man-caused warming] premise." The
statement condemns the IPPC science as being dependent "on unreliable
climate computer-model simulations" that have not predicted the current
cooling trend because the models incorporate a fatal error whereby increases
in CO2 have positive feedbacks resulting in amplified warming when new
science shows it is a negative feedback that reduces warming and explains
the current cooling. Note: for an explanation of positive/negative feedback
issue, view one of our
short YouTube videos. This destroys the entire man-caused global warming
theory. |
|
|
|
Global Warming Lower Than Expected.
Lab News Daily, January 21, 2010. “Earth
has warmed much less than expected during the industrial era based on
current best estimates of Earth's "climate sensitivity"--the amount of
global temperature increase expected in response to a given rise in
atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide.” The article gives two
possible explanations: 1) The earth is less sensitive to CO2 than previously
thought; 2) and/or the sun energy is reflected back into space by haze
particles. Note: While the second probably plays a role, the first is the
primary reason, although, not in the way they explain it. The article simply
states that it will take a few decades longer to reach doomsday than
originally thought. However, the problem is the climate models are simply
wrong because every one assumes a positive feedback to increased CO2, which
has been shown to be wrong. It is a negative feedback which diminishes the
warming effect of CO2.
Note: for an explanation of positive/negative
feedback issue,
view one of our short YouTube videos. This destroys the entire
man-caused global warming theory. |
|
|
|
Will Senate Pass Cap and Trade in 2010?
New York Times,
January 19, 2010. The Senate is
unlikely to consider climate
change legislation this year after going through the contentious health care
debate, says Sen. Brian Dorgan (D-ND). Instead Dorgan wants an Energy bill
passed that is not a contentious as cap and trade. Meanwhile Sen. Harry Reid
(D-NV, Majority Leader) will take the cap and trade bill up this spring.
Note:
Who's right? If the progressive Dems are following Saul Alinsky's strategy
of attack and destroy (which seems to be what they have done all of 2009),
Reid is right and Dorgan will be attacked. We could witness the destruction
of the Democrat Party this year -- an election year to boot. The next few
weeks should tell if the progressive Dems back off after their stunning
defeat in Massachusetts Senate race on Tuesday. If they don't back off,
expect a bloodbath because these progressives don't care who they hurt as
long as they win. |
|
|
|
Heat Turned On IPCC Over Himalayan Glacier Claim.
Times of India, January 19, 2010. The assault by science on the UN IPCC and
man-caused warming continues with the revelation that another key marker in
the 2007 IPCC's "science" report was totally wrong. The IPCC report claimed
that peer-reviewed science showed conclusively that the Himalayan glaciers
would be gone by 2035, proof of man-caused warming. When India's
Environmental Minister,
Jairam Ramesh told the IPCC's
chief R K Pachauri that his scientists totally disagreed with the IPCC's
assessment, Pachauri told him India's conclusions were "based on voodoo
science." It turns out the IPCC's science was based on voodoo science. The
entire IPCC report on the Himalayan's was not based on peer-reviewed
science, but on a careless comment decades ago. NOTE: Pachauri's voodoo
science putdown is typical for warming alarmists. They can't argue the
science so they resort to rhetoric and demonization (no pun intended). After
years of knowing man-caused warming was based on fraud, skeptical scientists
are finally being vindicated. Stay tuned; there is more to come. |
|
|
|
World Mislead Over Himalayan Glacier Meltdown.
London Times, January 17, 2010. The claim by the UN in
its 2007 IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report that the
Himalayan glaciers would all melt by 2035 has now been proven to be nothing
but speculation by an obscure Indian scientist who had mentioned it as a
concern in a conversation but had no intention for his statement to be
official. He said there was no research to support his concern. Yet, it was
made a major supporting fact in the 2007 UN IPCC report that claimed there
was a 90% certainty that man was causing global warming. Note: This is
merely another in a long list of fraudulent statements the UN IPCC made in
its 2007 report. It clearly shows how this alleged "scientific" organization
will use any conclusion that man is responsible for global warming without
checking it, but eliminate all solid, peer-reviewed science results
that shows the warming is not caused by man. |
|
|
|
Climategate II.
WorldNetDaily,
January 16, 2010. Amid breaking news that scientist and climate alarmist
Michael Mann, who gave the world the Hockey Stick fraud and played a central
role in the Climategate scandal,
received $541,184 from stimulus funds last June and another $1.9 million
from the National Science Foundation this week, comes accusations
against NOAA for cooking the books in the US. By now the Mann should be
fully discredited as an unbiased scientist, instead is heavily rewarded by
the Obama administration. Worse Joseph D'Aleo, first Director of Meteorology
at the cable TV Weather Channel, has evidence that
NOAA
cooked the books by systematically eliminating most of the temperature
data from northern and high elevation weather stations from the global
temperature data base. This slight of hand would automatically show a large
increase in global temperature. Note: There will likely be more revelations
to come. The science from the CRU, NOAA and NASA stinks. |
|
|
|
UN Should Be Sidelined in Future Climate Talks.
London Guardian, January 14, 2010.
America sees a diminished role for the United Nations
in trying to stop global warming after the "chaotic" Copenhagen
climate change
summit, an Obama administration official said today. Instead,
the official said a future path
for negotiations should be dominated by the world's largest polluters such
as China, the US, India, Brazil and South Africa, who signed up to a deal in
the final hours of the summit. That would represent a realignment of the way
the international community has dealt with climate change over the last two
decades. Note: Watch this in the future. We could be witnessing a shift to
the G-7 or G-20 as the vehicle to usher in global governance. The G-20
meeting in Pittsburg last year suggests the same thing because it would be
much easier to control. |
|
|
|
Insurance Group Warns Not to Accept Climate Science.
New York Times, January 13, 2010. A major trade group for the insurance
industry is warning that it is "exceedingly risky" for companies to blindly
accept scientific conclusions around climate change, given the "serious
questions" around the extent to which humans cause atmospheric warming. The
reason? Climategate casts doubt over the reality of man causing global
warming. |
|
|
|
Climate Change Experts Clash Over Sea-rise
'Apocalypse.'
London Times, January 10, 2010. Climate science faces a new controversy
after the Britain's Met Office denounced research from the Copenhagen summit
which suggested that global warming could raise sea levels by 6ft by 2100.
Note: It is amazing that the Met disputes this outrageous research. It's own
research is very biased and outrageous in its own right. |
|
|
|
Global Warming is a Religion.
Townhall.com, January 13, 2010.
Manmade global warming, for many, is an
Earth-worshipping religion. The essential feature of any religion is that
its pronouncements are to be accepted on the basis of faith as opposed to
hard evidence. Questioning those pronouncements makes one a sinner. That is
exactly what is happening today on the global warming issue. In fact, as
explained in the book
Saviors of the Earth, most of the environmental catastrophes of the
past 30 years are based in the earth-based religion of pantheism. |
|
|
|
Clean Energy Sources: Sun, Wind and Subsidies.
Wall Street Journal, January 8, 2010.
In Germany, renewable energy
from projects that qualified for feed-in tariffs between 2004 and 2008 will
cost consumers [euro ]122.3 billion (about $175 billion) between 2008 and
2030 -- 46% more than the same amount conventional energy would cost, New
Energy Finance predicts. In Spain, renewable energy from projects started
under the country's feed-in tariff between 2006 and late 2008 will cost
[euro ]53 billion over the Spanish tariff's 25-year life, the firm projects,
a 75% premium over the likely cost of the same amount of conventional power.
As part of the Obama administration's stimulus plan, renewable-energy
producers are eligible for cash grants totaling 30% of the cost of projects
they start this year -- however high those costs go. |
|
|
|
Snow, Bitter Cold Grip Northern
Hemisphere.
Nocapandtrade.us, January 10, 2010.
View a satellite image of the snow extent. Regional weather forecasts have
all called for a warmer than average winter because a moderately strong El
Nino has gripped the Eastern tropical Pacific. However, so far all have been
totally wrong. |
|
|
|
The Met Office Gives Us the Warmest Weather.
London Telegraph, January 2, 2010. England's MET office, the official
weather forecasting agency for Great Britain, forecast of warmer than normal
2010 winter is being frozen over by the lowest temps in decades. This
agency, sister to Climategate's
Climate Research Institute, has a state of the art super computer, yet has
disastrously missed seasonal predictions the past 3 years. "The reason the
Met Office so persistently gets its seasonal forecasts wrong is that it has
been hi-jacked from the role for which we pay it nearly £200 million a year,
to become one of the world's major propaganda engines for the belief in
man-made global warming. Over the past three years, it has become a laughing
stock for forecasts which are invariably wrong in the same direction." Note:
So much for unbiased science. Tragically, this is the norm for U.S. federal
agencies as well. |
|
|
|
Scientist claims Cold Doesn't Negate Global Warming,
But Privately Says He Has No Explanation.
New American, January 8, 2010. Attempting to explain away the bitter cold
and snow currently gripping the northern hemisphere, Dr. Kevin Trentworth
told ABC News on January 6 that "weather is
chaotic. It has an infinite amount of variability," including cold snaps.
Putting aside the fact the current hemispheric cold is very rare, and a
cooling trend has been in effect for 10 years, Trentworth is the same
scientist who wrote in the climategate email scandal "the fact is that we
can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty
that we can't." Note: You decide which Trentworth quote you believe. |
|
|
|
Climategate: You Should be Steamed.
Seattlepi.com (Hearst), January 7, 2010. Neil Frank, retired Director of the
National Hurricane Center, reminds us that the evidence that man is NOT
causing global warming is huge, and growing. He discusses the climategate
issue as rock-hard evidence of a fraud. He also notes that scientists are
also coming out more and more against the man-caused theory. He cites 1)
32,000 scientists (including
9,000 Ph.D.s) who signed a petition saying there is no evidence man is
causing the warming, 2)
700 scientists (many who are or were an IPCC member or author) who
endorsed a 231 page Senate minority report that discredits man-made global
warming, 3) and the endorsement of 800
scientists of an 881 page refutation of the 2007 IPCC report, and
showing man is not causing global warming. Frank also provides a summary of
the key points skeptics generally believe. |
|
|
|
Cold Snap Doesn't Disprove Global Warming.
ABC News, January 6, 2010. As
more evidence that very unusual (in some cases record) cold and
snowy weather is tightening its grip on the northern hemisphere, some
scientists still reassure the public that it does not disprove man-caused
global warming. They say that man-made climate change will cause more
frequent and more severe weather extremes. Note: History does not support
this claim. Records show that
global cooling has always caused more frequent and violent weather (for
instance during the Little Ice Age in the 1700-1800s) compared to warm
periods like the Medieval Optimum in the 1100-1200s. |
|
|
|
Arctic Freeze and Snow Weak Havoc Across the Planet.
London Times, January 5, 2010. "There are few precedents for the global
sweep of extreme cold and ice that killed dozens in India, paralyzed life in
Beijing and threatened Florida orange crops. Chicagoans sheltered from a
potentially killer freeze. Paris endured sunny Siberian cold, Italy dug
itself out of snow drifts and Poland counted at least 13 deaths in record
low temperatures of about minus 25C (13F)." Note: For the entire Northern
Hemisphere to be hit with below normal cold and record or near record
snowfall is extremely unusual. At the same time
Solar Cycle 24
is delayed for three years, which historically has meant colder earth
temperatures. |
|
|
|
The Real Cost of Green Energy Hits Britain.
Mail Online, January
2, 2010. British Parliament is rethinking its green energy policy enacted 3
years ago as the costs keep skyrocketing. Costs for an average family are
certain to go up to £2000 a year ($3200 US), and perhaps as high as £5000
annually ($8000). Included in this new reality is also the almost certain
realization that millions of jobs could be lost when energy intensive
industry has to move off shore. To add to this troubling reality, reports
that
British pensioners are already buying cheap books instead of coal to
heat their homes in the below normal cold gripping England this year. |
|
|
|
China Gets Huge Snowfall, Cold Temperatures.
Sidney Morning Herald, January 5, 2010. Beijing received its biggest
snowfall since 1951, along with the harshest Siberian winds and temps down
to -16o, the coldest in 40 years. The cause? Global warming, say
the Chinese. In
Peru increasing cold temperatures are also blamed on global warming. The Midwest and East Coast get hammered with record
snowfalls and bitter cold the last week in December and early January. You
guessed it. Global warming. Note: Are we so dumbed down that we cannot see
past this hoax? |
|
|
|
Scientist Predicts Cooling.
Times Argus, January 3, 2010. A
Canadian Physicist asserts that there is no correlation of earth's
temperature with CO2. Instead, he has found a striking correlation of
temperature to cosmic radiation and CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons).
The total amount of CFCs decreased
around 2000, and "correspondingly, the global surface temperature has also
dropped. In striking contrast, the CO2 level has kept rising since 1850 and
now is at its largest growth rate."
Note: Cosmic radiation has long been thought to play a role in earth's
climate. The role of CFCs, however, is a new hypothesis. Is the decline of
CFCs and temperature since 2000 a coincidence or did the CFCs play a role.
Only further study will answer this question. |
|
|
|
Scientist Need to Speak Up.
Washington Post, January 3, 2010. Since the CRU's hacked emails were
released in late November last year, America's
distrust of scientists jumped to 40 percent. Nearly 60 percent of
Republicans now distrust scientists. Note: As we have feared, one of the
great casualties of the global warming debacle has been America's trust in
science. The solution for this alarming distrust? Amazingly, the article
calls upon scientists to speak up. Da? Isn't that what the hacked emails
said they were doing? The emails clearly showed an incredible effort to
control what was released to the public. Yet, the Post article asks that
"mainstream" scientists speak out like the skeptics are doing. When will it
occur to them that the skeptics are the mainstream of science, and
the only reason the apocalyptic view of global warming has legs at all is
because the mainstream media only parrot the propaganda from those
scientists that got caught red-handed in climategate? |
|
|
|
Archived 2009 News
Articles |
|
|
|
