Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:11 pm Post subject:
rodin wrote:
Lest we forget
It's been said since the start of this thread that it's important not to confuse the issue happening out in the world with the likely various political agenda that will try to take advantage.
No matter what the scenario, it always remains the haves holding out against the have nots.
And regarding the geraniums, there is also substantial anecdotal evidence for recurringly earlier springs. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:19 pm Post subject:
rodin wrote:
chek wrote:
At present we are in a quiet sun period (the least solar inactivity since 1913)
Bit of a doubleneg there chek. And what happened Christmas 1913? WWI became a done deal. By the same crowd behind big oil and big climate change
Thanks rodin, yes "the least solar activity since 1913" was what I should have said.
And you may be right - maybe our neurons and collective unconscious (should it exist) are affected by ion storms. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's been said since the start of this thread that it's important not to confuse the issue happening out in the world with the likely various political agenda that will try to take advantage.
No matter what the scenario, it always remains the haves holding out against the have nots.
And regarding the geraniums, there is also substantial anecdotal evidence for recurringly earlier springs.
Forensic evidence I hold in high esteem. The NASA goons have made their prediction here. Sunspots ahoy or game over for the warmingerers
Richard Morrison eats babies and the Competitive Enterprise Institute has the "wrong" politics so feel free to ignore the following. And if you are wondering what that clanging sound is, its just your slave masters having your chains hammered out.
Quote:
CARBONGATE – Global Warming Study Censored by EPA
Source inside EPA confirms claims of science being ignored, suppressed, by top EPA management
by Richard Morrison, Competitive Enterprise Institute
Washington, D.C., June 26, 2009—The Competitive Enterprise Institute is today making public an internal study on climate science which was suppressed by the Environmental Protection Agency. Internal EPA email messages, released by CEI earlier in the week, indicate that the report was kept under wraps and its author silenced because of pressure to support the Administration’s agenda of regulating carbon dioxide.
The report finds that EPA, by adopting the United Nations’ 2007 “Fourth Assessment” report, is relying on outdated research and is ignoring major new developments. Those developments include a continued decline in global temperatures, a new consensus that future hurricanes will not be more frequent or intense, and new findings that water vapor will moderate, rather than exacerbate, temperature.
New data also indicate that ocean cycles are probably the most important single factor in explaining temperature fluctuations, though solar cycles may play a role as well, and that reliable satellite data undercut the likelihood of endangerment from greenhouse gases. All of this demonstrates EPA should independently analyze the science, rather than just adopt the conclusions of outside organizations.
The released report is a draft version, prepared under EPA’s unusually short internal review schedule, and thus may contain inaccuracies which were corrected in the final report.
“While we hoped that EPA would release the final report, we’re tired of waiting for this agency to become transparent, even though its Administrator has been talking transparency since she took office. So we are releasing a draft version of the report ourselves, today,” said CEI General Counsel Sam Kazman.
As the years pass and data accumulate, it is becoming evident that global warming is a fraud. Climate change is natural and ongoing, but the Earth has not warmed significantly over the last thirty years. Nor has there been a single negative effect of any type that can be unambiguously attributed to global warming.
As I write, satellite data show that the mean global temperature is the same that it was in 1979. The extent of global sea ice is also unchanged from 1979. Since the end of the last Ice Age, sea level has risen more than a hundred meters. But for the last three years, there has been no rise in sea level. If the polar ice sheets are melting, why isn't sea level rising? Global warming is supposed to increase the severity and frequency of tropical storms. But hurricane and typhoon activity is at a record low.
Every year in the US, more than forty thousand people are killed in traffic accidents. But not one single person has ever been killed by global warming. The number of species that have gone extinct from global warming is exactly zero. Both the Antarctic and Greenland Ice Sheets are stable. The polar bear population is increasing. There has been no increase in infectious disease that can be attributed to climate change. We are not currently experiencing more floods, droughts, or forest fires.
In short, there is no evidence of any type to support the idea that we are entering an era when significant climate change is occurring and will cause the deterioration of either the natural environment or the human standard of living.
Why do people think the planet is warming? One reason is that the temperature data from weather stations appear to be hopelessly contaminated by urban heat effects. A survey of the 1221 temperature stations in the US by meteorologist Anthony Watts and his colleagues is now more than 80 percent complete. The magnitude of putative global warming over the last 150 years is about 0.7 °C. But only 9 percent of meteorological stations in the US are likely to have temperature errors lower than 1 °C. More than two-thirds of temperature sensors used to estimate global warming are located near artificial heating sources such as air conditioning vents, asphalt paving, or buildings. These sources are likely to introduce artifacts greater than 2 °C into the temperature record.
Another cause of global warming hysteria is the infiltration of science by ideological zealots who place politics above truth. Earlier this month, the Obama administration issued a report that concluded global warming would have a number of deleterious effects on the US. In 1995, one of the lead authors of this report told me that we had to alter the historical temperature record by "getting rid" of the Medieval Warm Period.
The Obama report refers to – six times – the work of a climate scientist named Stephen H. Schneider. In 1989, Schneider told Discover magazine that "we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have." Schneider concluded "each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest." Schneider's position is not unusual. In 2007, Mike Hulme, the founding director of the Tyndall Center for Climate Change Research in Britain, told the Guardian newspaper that "scientists and politicians must trade truth for influence."
While releasing a politicized report that prostitutes science to politics, the Obama administration simultaneously suppressed an internal EPA report that concluded there were "glaring inconsistencies" between the scientific data and the hypothesis that carbon dioxide emissions were changing the climate.
If we had an appreciation for history, we would not be fooled so easily. It has all happened before, albeit on a smaller scale in an age where people had more common sense. On May 19, 1912, the Washington Post posed these questions: "Is the climate of the world changing? Is it becoming warmer in the polar regions?" On November 2, 1922, the Associated Press reported that "the Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the waters too hot." On February 25, 1923, the New York Times concluded that "the Arctic appears to be warming up." On December 21, 1930, the Times noted that "Alpine glaciers are in full retreat." A few months later the New York Times concluded that there was "a radical change in climatic conditions and hitherto unheard of warmth" in Greenland. About the only thing that has changed at the Times since 1930 is that no one working there today is literate enough to use the word "hitherto."
After the warm weather of the 1930s gave way to a cooling trend beginning in 1940, the media began speculating on the imminent arrival of a new Ice Age. We have now come full circle, mired in a hopeless cycle of reincarnated ignorance. H. L. Mencken understood this process when he explained "the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary."
June 29, 2009
David Deming [send him mail] is a geophysicist and associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma.
Polar bear expert barred by global warmists Mitchell Taylor, who has studied the animals for 30 years, was told his views 'are extremely unhelpful’ , reveals Christopher Booker.
Christopher Booker, Published: 5:20PM BST 27 Jun 2009
According to the world?s leading expert on polar bears, their numbers are higher than they were 30 years ago Photo: AP
Over the coming days a curiously revealing event will be taking place in Copenhagen. Top of the agenda at a meeting of the Polar Bear Specialist Group (set up under the International Union for the Conservation of Nature/Species Survival Commission) will be the need to produce a suitably scary report on how polar bears are being threatened with extinction by man-made global warming.
This is one of a steady drizzle of events planned to stoke up alarm in the run-up to the UN's major conference on climate change in Copenhagen next December. But one of the world's leading experts on polar bears has been told to stay away from this week's meeting, specifically because his views on global warming do not accord with those of the rest of the group.
Dr Mitchell Taylor has been researching the status and management of polar bears in Canada and around the Arctic Circle for 30 years, as both an academic and a government employee. More than once since 2006 he has made headlines by insisting that polar bear numbers, far from decreasing, are much higher than they were 30 years ago. Of the 19 different bear populations, almost all are increasing or at optimum levels, only two have for local reasons modestly declined.
Dr Taylor agrees that the Arctic has been warming over the last 30 years. But he ascribes this not to rising levels of CO2 – as is dictated by the computer models of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and believed by his PBSG colleagues – but to currents bringing warm water into the Arctic from the Pacific and the effect of winds blowing in from the Bering Sea.
He has also observed, however, how the melting of Arctic ice, supposedly threatening the survival of the bears, has rocketed to the top of the warmists' agenda as their most iconic single cause. The famous photograph of two bears standing forlornly on a melting iceberg was produced thousands of times by Al Gore, the WWF and others as an emblem of how the bears faced extinction – until last year the photographer, Amanda Byrd, revealed that the bears, just off the Alaska coast, were in no danger. Her picture had nothing to do with global warming and was only taken because the wind-sculpted ice they were standing on made such a striking image.
Dr Taylor had obtained funding to attend this week's meeting of the PBSG, but this was voted down by its members because of his views on global warming. The chairman, Dr Andy Derocher, a former university pupil of Dr Taylor's, frankly explained in an email (which I was not sent by Dr Taylor) that his rejection had nothing to do with his undoubted expertise on polar bears: "it was the position you've taken on global warming that brought opposition".
Dr Taylor was told that his views running "counter to human-induced climate change are extremely unhelpful". His signing of the Manhattan Declaration – a statement by 500 scientists that the causes of climate change are not CO2 but natural, such as changes in the radiation of the sun and ocean currents – was "inconsistent with the position taken by the PBSG".
So, as the great Copenhagen bandwagon rolls on, stand by this week for reports along the lines of "scientists say polar bears are threatened with extinction by vanishing Arctic ice". But also check out Anthony Watt's Watts Up With That website for the latest news of what is actually happening in the Arctic. The average temperature at midsummer is still below zero, the latest date that this has happened in 50 years of record-keeping. After last year's recovery from its September 2007 low, this year's ice melt is likely to be substantially less than for some time. The bears are doing fine.
Buchanan: Climate Bill Is Transfer Of Wealth To World Government
Former presidential advisor slams fearmongering that led to passage of nightmare legislation
Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet.com, Monday, June 29, 2009
During an appearance on MSNBC, political commentator Pat Buchanan correctly defined the “Climate Bill” for what it really is, not just a new tax on the American people, but a complete transfer of power and wealth to a global government that is using the manufactured fear of global warming to grease the skids for total domination.
Referring to the passage of the climate bill and global warming in general, Buchanan said that the legislation was passed through the use of fear and that, “More and more scientists are coming forward to say this is a hoax and a scam which is designed to transfer wealth and power from the private sector to the government sector and from the government of the United States to a world government. Which is what we’re going to get in Copenhagen when we get this Kyoto two agreement.”
Buchanan labeled the legislation a “tax bill” that would raise the prices of utilities for every American, hammer the middle class and working class, “for a danger that we don’t even know is really there”.
The former senior advisor to three U.S. presidents accused the Obama administration of hyping the apocalyptic myth that the oceans will rise and that cities will be underwater in order to ram through the legislation.
Establishment left-wing blogs like Crooks and Liars and Media Matters are carrying the video of Buchanan’s remarks with little or no accompanying commentary, as if Buchanan’s comments alone are enough to discredit his position.
Those who act as shills for the climate change hoax may believe that anyone who dares challenge the authodoxy of the church of global warming is automatically a heretic and that no evidence whatsoever needs to even be presented to counter their sacrilege, but here in the real world we prefer to stick to the facts.
Empirical satellite data shows that mean global temperatures are the same that they were 30 years ago and that global sea ice is also at similar levels. Following a spike in global temperatures at the end of the last century that coincided with the sun undergoing its most active period in recent times, the planet has now cooled to 1979 levels. At the end of summer last year, despite hysterical predictions that the North Pole would be free of ice for the first time in history, Arctic sea ice had actually expanded by 30 per cent, an area the size of Germany.
Coinciding with expanding ice sheets, there has been no rise in sea levels for the past three years. Tropical storms and extreme weather events attributed to global warming like hurricanes and typhoons are at a record low.
The United Nations’s IPCC, the heavily politicized organization that is often erroneously cited as an independent scientific body by climate change promoters, was last year caught citing fake data to make the case that global warming is accelerating, a shocking example of mass public deception.
“This was startling,” reported the London Telegraph. “Across the world there were reports of unseasonal snow and plummeting temperatures last month, from the American Great Plains to China, and from the Alps to New Zealand. China’s official news agency reported that Tibet had suffered its “worst snowstorm ever”. In the US, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration registered 63 local snowfall records and 115 lowest-ever temperatures for the month, and ranked it as only the 70th-warmest October in 114 years.”
It soon came to light that the data produced by NASA to make the claim, and in particular temperature records covering large areas of Russia, was merely carried over from the previous month. NASA had used temperature records from the naturally hotter month of September and claimed they represented temperature figures for October.
As David Deming points out in his excellent article today, temperature data collected by weather stations is being artificially impacted by measuring systems placed nearby to sources of heat. This is why claims that global temperatures are still rising are completely contradicted by real world evidence of falling temperatures and what some scientists are warning is the beginning of a new ice age.
“Why do people think the planet is warming?,” writes Deming. “One reason is that the temperature data from weather stations appear to be hopelessly contaminated by urban heat effects. A survey of the 1221 temperature stations in the US by meteorologist Anthony Watts and his colleagues is now more than 80 percent complete. The magnitude of putative global warming over the last 150 years is about 0.7 °C. But only 9 percent of meteorological stations in the US are likely to have temperature errors lower than 1 °C. More than two-thirds of temperature sensors used to estimate global warming are located near artificial heating sources such as air conditioning vents, asphalt paving, or buildings. These sources are likely to introduce artifacts greater than 2 °C into the temperature record.”
“Every year in the US, more than forty thousand people are killed in traffic accidents. But not one single person has ever been killed by global warming. The number of species that have gone extinct from global warming is exactly zero. Both the Antarctic and Greenland Ice Sheets are stable. The polar bear population is increasing. There has been no increase in infectious disease that can be attributed to climate change. We are not currently experiencing more floods, droughts, or forest fires,” he concludes.
As we have attempted to warn, the major beneficiaries of the climate bill will be the elitists who own the carbon trading systems that will be used to handle the ‘cap and trade’ program, namely Al Gore and Maurice Strong, two figures intimately involved with a long standing movement to use the theory of man made global warming as a mechanism for profit and social engineering.
Gore’s investment company, Generation Investment Management, which sells carbon offset opportunities, is the largest shareholder of The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX).
While Maurice Strong, who is regularly credited as founding father of the modern environmental movement, serves on the board of directors of CCX. Strong was a leading initiate of the Earth Summit in the early 90s, where the theory of global warming caused by CO2 generated by human activity was most notably advanced.
Ron Paul: Democrats Who Opposed Climate Bill Voted For It Anyway
Revelation highlights how Congress members are bought and paid for by the elite in Washington
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
In a Campaign for Liberty video commentary, Ron Paul reveals that even though up to 20 Democrats opposed the controversial climate bill, they voted for it anyway, underscoring once again how the vast majority of Congress members are bought and paid for by the elite in Washington.
The Congressman points out that the eight Republicans who voted for the bill did so in order to provide political cover for the Democrats. Even if those Republicans had not defected, some of the 44 Democrats who voted against the bill would have changed their votes anyway to ensure the bill’s passage.
“One Democrat talked to me, a friend of mine,” said Paul, “and I said how are you going to vote on this bill and he said I’m going to vote for the bill but then he sort of whispered and he said, but I sure hope it doesn’t pass.”
Asked why he was voting for a bill that he actually opposed, the Democrat responded, “yeah I have to do that.”
“I said are there any other Democrats that are going to be voting for it and they really don’t like the bill, and he said, oh yeah about 15 or 20 of them,” added Paul.
This underlines how Washington is completely corrupt at its core and how, even if individual members of Congress oppose a bill, they vote for it anyway just to satisfy the agenda of the elite and maintain the status quo.
If the 15 or 20 Democrats who opposed the bill had actually voted against it, the bill would have failed and America would not be facing another great depression, a massive lowering of living standards, and the complete regulation of every aspect of our lives, all of which the climate bill will grease the skids for.
Writing on the Campaign for Liberty website, Congressman Paul states that the climate bill will “put another nail in the economy’s coffin”.
Paul compares the carbon trading scam, a system that is owned and will benefit to the tune of billions or even trillions of dollars long time environmental hysterics like Al Gore and Maurice Strong, to how the Catholic Church sold indulgences to sinners from the 10th century onwards.
The Congressman illustrates how the Obama administration has cited Spain as an example of how a “progressive energy policy” can be successful, when in fact Spain is in economic turmoil partly as a result of this very policy.
“The administration has pointed to Spain as a shining example of this type of progressive energy policy. Spain has been massively diverting capital from the private sector into politically favored environmental projects for the better part of a decade, and many in Washington apparently like what they see. However, under no circumstances should anyone serious about economic recovery emulate an economy that is now approaching 20 percent unemployment, where every green job created, eliminated 2.2 real jobs and cost around $800,000 each!”
“The real inconvenient truth is that the cost of government regulations, taxes, fees, red tape and bureaucracy is a considerable expense that has to be considered when companies decide where to do business and how many people they can afford to hire. Increasing governmental burden directly causes capital flight and job losses, as Spain has learned. In this global economy its easy enough for businesses to relocate to countries that are more politically friendly to economic growth. If our government continues to kick the economy while its down, it will be a long time before it gets back up. In fact, jobs are much more likely to go overseas, compounding our problems.”
Paul concludes by pointing out that the climate bill is based around the manufactured threat of global warming and that even if one accepts the premise that CO2 emissions cause significant temperature increases, the biggest polluters, the U.S. government and specifically the U.S. military, will be exempt from most of the new EPA regulations anyway.
Watch the clip of the Congressman’s comments below.
Joined: 30 Nov 2006 Posts: 575 Location: the eyevolution
Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 8:12 am Post subject:
Anything uttered by Beck is highly suspicious.
The EPA aren't the most trustworthy agency either.
Didn't they have certain classifications changed so that workers could return to work in the businesses around ground zero and called it "safe" even though it wasn't?
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 4:34 pm Post subject:
I'm more interested in his graph, which like Monckton's "maths" seem to be Numberwang based.
Phoney and dishonest?
Of course; no surprise there, like all denier "science".
Or, to be more accurate, "at-first-glance-sciencey-looking-material-for-dummies".
Care to explain or defend it, item7?
I expect not.
"Four key sections of Carlin’s 'masterpiece', and indeed his central guiding premise, were lifted directly from an intellectually vacuous and misleading attack on the EPA on a blog run by a PR disinformation spinmeister with a long history of links to fossil fuel interests. And, of course, none of this was attributed to World Climate Report or the author (presumably Pat Michaels or Chip Knappenburger), compounding the shoddy misleading “scholarship” with outright plagiarism.
I fervently hope that now real and hard questions will start to be asked about the role of the major particpants in the shameful orchestrated attack on the EPA, starting with the Competitive Enterprise Institute and Carlin himself. And it’s also high time to subject to greater scrutiny the fossil fuel companies and their PR surrogates who are behind the dissemination of so much of the gross misinformation that made up the Carlin report.
As for the EPA itself, it might want to check out some of Carlin’s other past work – who knows what other shenanigans might lurk. The only faintly embarrassing question the EPA needs to answer now is this: How did Alan Carlin ever manage to stay on the payroll for so long?
Global warming cover up?
By: Clint Sloan on: 06.07.2009
WASHINGTON — Global warming may not be occurring primarily because of carbon dioxide emissions, according to a report suppressed by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Alan Carlin, who has worked for the EPA for more than 35 years and has a bachelor’s degree in physics and a doctorate degree in economics from Massachusetts Institution of Technology, co-wrote a report for “Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act.” According to the report, there are some inconsistencies with the theory that humans have caused global warming because of increased carbon dioxide emissions.
“The problems become particularly evident when one examines the downtrend period from roughly 1940 through the early 1970s,” Carlin stated in the report. “There does not appear to be any relationship between carbon dioxide levels and global temperatures.”
This report was written before a controversial climate change bill, also known as cap and trade, was discussed in the U.S. House of Representatives. The bill was designed to limit the amount of carbon dioxide industries released into the air, and would be one of the largest tax increases in U.S. history. But Al McGartland, director of the EPA National Center for Environmental Economics, decided not to release the information publicly and censored the report from lawmakers before they cast their vote.
“Alan, I decided not to forward your comments,” McGartland said in an e-mail to Carlin on March 17, 2009. “I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office.”
McGartland was contacted for a response regarding how the information would have a negative impact on the EPA, but declined to comment.
Just eight minutes after that e-mail, McGartland sent Carlin another one outlining the restrictions he was placing on his research:
“You need to move on to other issues and subjects. I don’t want you to spend any additional EPA time on climate change. No papers, no research etc., at least until we see what EPA is going to do with Climate.”
Despite McGartland’s fear the report may give the EPA a negative image, Carlin was not trying to debunk the theory of global warming.
“All this is not to argue that the greenhouse gas explanation of current global warming is wrong – only that the climate system may be more complicated than our current understanding of it and that there exists more uncertainty than is often acknowledged,” Carlin stated in the report.
Carlin said there are other factors besides carbon dioxide that can be attributed to climate change.
“Changes in the sun’s eruptional activity, solar wind, and magnetic field, among other characteristics, have been major determinants of global temperatures here on Earth,” Carlin stated.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, was established to provide lawmakers and others interested in climate change with an objective source of information about climate change. Carlin criticized the panel for not attributing other factors besides carbon dioxide to the effects of climate change.
“Since this had not been taken into account in almost all the IPCC models to date, these models may need to be changed to do so if they are to more accurately reflect reality,” Carlin stated.
According to Carlin, the IPCC models for forecasting need to be changed because they are using computer models to predict future climate and temperatures. “These models are only as good as the relationships they assume,” Carlin stated.
“It is all too easy to develop models that explain historical data by ‘fitting the data.’ It is much harder to accurately predict future events using such models.”
McGartland, who suppressed the report,stated in another e-mail to Carlin that “in light of the tight schedule and the turn of events, please do not have any direct communication with anyone outside of NCEE on the endangerment (report). There should be no meetings, e-mails, written statements, phone calls, etc.”
Carlin broke that rule when he contacted the Ada Evening News. But until all the scientific evidence can be brought to attention, no one may ever know the true causes of global warming.
Earth's 'Fever' Breaks! Global temperatures 'have plunged .74°F since Gore released An Inconvenient Truth'
June 2009 saw another drop in global temps
Sunday, July 05, 2009By Marc Morano – Climate Depot
The latest global averaged satellite temperature data for June 2009 reveals yet another drop in the Earth's temperature. This latest drop in global temperatures means despite his dire warnings, the Earth has cooled .74°F since former Vice President Al Gore released "An Inconvenient Truth" in 2006.
According to the latest global satellite data courtesy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville and made into an easy to read graph by algorelied.com: "For the record, this month's Al Gore / 'An Inconvenient Truth' Index indicates that global temperatures have plunged approximately .74°F (.39°C) since Gore's film was released," noted algorelied.com. (See satellite temperature chart here with key dates noted, courtesy of www.Algorelied.com - Also see: 8 Year Downtrend Continues in Global Temps)
Gore -- who is fond of saying the Earth has a "fever" -- has not yet addressed the simple fact that global temperatures have dropped since the release of his global warming film. (Gore has also not addressed this: Another Moonwalker Defies Gore: NASA Astronaut Dr. Buzz Aldrin rejects global warming fears: 'Climate has been changing for billions of years' - Moonwalkers Defy Gore's Claim That Climate Skeptics Are Akin To Those Who Believe Moon Landing was 'Staged')
A record cool summer has descended upon many parts of the U.S. after predictions of the "year without a summer." There has been no significant global warming since 1995, no warming since 1998 and global cooling for the past few years. (Also see: Scientists Write Open Letter to Congress: 'Earth has been cooling for ten years' - 'Present cooling was NOT predicted by the alarmists' computer models, and has come as an embarrassment to them' - July 1, 2009)
In addition, New peer-reviewed scientific studies now predict a continued lack of global warming for up to three decades as natural climate factors dominate. (See: Climate Fears RIP...for 30 years!? - Global Warming could stop 'for up to 30 years! Warming 'On Hold?...'Could go into hiding for decades' study finds – Discovery.com – March 2, 2009 )
This means that today's high school kids being forced to watch Al Gore's “An Inconvenient Truth” – some of them 4 times in 4 different classes – will be nearly eligible for AARP (age 50) retirement group membership by the time warming resumes if these new studies turn out to be correct. (Editor's Note: Claims that warming will “resume” due to explosive heat in the "pipeline" have also been thoroughly debunked. See: Climatologist Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. 'There is no warming in the pipeline' )
Related Links:
'Gloomy cold weather' in Cape Cod causes farmers to lose thousands of dollars as 'June that felt more like April'
There has been a change in direction by the alarmists, as shown by their new “Synthesis Report.” The independent scientists noticed it during the Wong-Fielding meeting.
The alarmists have abandoned air temperatures as a measure of global temperature, because the air temperature graphs are just too hard to argue with (like the second figure below, from the Skeptics Handbook). Instead they’ve switched to ocean temperatures, which they often disguise as ocean heat content (a huge number like 15×10²² Joules sounds much more scary than the warming it implies of 0.003° C/year).
All three pages of the Synthesis Report that deal with ‘evidence’ are about factors or trends that tell us nothing about whether or not the warming is due to carbon emissions. If God put the galaxy in a toaster, sea levels would rise, ocean heat content would increase, and ice would melt.
Rest of article at above link _________________ Tooth Fairy denier
Santa Clause Denier
Man-made Climate Change Denier
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 10:00 am Post subject:
The usual sickening misrepresentations from Senator of Oklahoma/Big Oil Inhofe and his propaganda monkey Marc "swiftboat" Morano, pretending - for the benefit of their americacentric audience - that US conditions are the same as global conditions.
The map shows that the US is indeed experiencing only modest warming this year- but that's cold comfort to the rest of the world, particularly it will be noticed in Siberia where methane-releasing permafrost melting of the tundra is underway.
And of course - aiming at the dumbed-down tabloid and junk TV end of the population spectrum - plain to see long-term trends are ignored in favour of cherry picked figures. All designed to promote their masters' "business as usual" agenda and probably as good an indicator as any of why the stranglehold of multi-national corporate power over national governments needs to be broken and quickly for the common good.
As for Morano's laughable assertion that Sea Surface temperatures are some new fad, when the overriding global effects of La Nina and El Nino Pacific oscillations on global temperatures are well known, and have of course always been integrated in the predictive models, does make one wonder just what class of prize moron they aim this nonsense at. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's Not Just That Global Warming Is Fake. What Matters Is Why This Fakery Is Being Promoted.
Gary North,
July 3, 2009
Global warming is based 100% on junk science. The most vocal promoters are not interested in the details of physical science. They are interested in two things: political control over the general public and the establishment of international socialism.
Junk Science vs. Real Science
For a detailed, footnoted, 12-page article, written by three scientists, two with Ph.D's from CalTech, click here
This paper was sent to tens of thousands of natural scientists in the United States.
Over 31,000 scientists have put their reputations on the line and signed a politically incorrect petition opposing the 1997 Kyoto agreement or protocol. Here is a photocopy of a signed petition.
Here is a letter from a former president of the National Academy of Sciences. He asks recipients of the petition to sign it.
Back in the 1970's, the bugaboo was the coming ice age, as this Time Magazine article promoted. Not to be outdone, Newsweek got on board. The article warned: "Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects." Want more examples? Click here.
It, too, was based on junk science. It, too, had the same solution: government control over the economy. The goal never changes: government management over the economy. The justification has changed. If the voters won't accept control over their lives on the basis of one brand of junk science, maybe they will accept another. As they used to say in the Nixon Administration: "Let's run this up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes."
Socialism's Last Stand
The global warming movement is not about global warming. It is about the creation of an international political control arrangement by which bureaucrats who favor socialism can gain control over the international economy.
This strategy was stated boldly by economist Robert Heilbroner in 1990. Heilbroner, the multi-millionaire socialist and author of the best-selling history of economic thought, The Worldly Philosophers, wrote the manifesto for these bureaucrats. He did this in an article, "Reflections: After Communism," published by The New Yorker (Sept. 10, 1990).
In this article, he made an astounding admission. He said that Ludwig von Mises had been right in 1920 in his article, "Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth." Mises argued that without private ownership, central planners could not know what any resource is worth to consumers. With no capital market, the planners would be flying blind.
Heilbroner said that for 70 years, academic economists had either ignored this article or dismissed it without answering it. Then Heilbroner wrote these words: "Mises was right."
Heilbroner was one of these people. There is no reference to Mises in The Worldly Philosophers.
This admission was the preliminary section of Heilbroner's manifesto. He was cutting off all hope by socialists that there is a theoretically plausible response to Mises. The free market economy will always outproduce a socialist economy. Get used to it, he said.
Then, in the second section, he called on his socialist peers to get behind the ecology movement. Here, he said, is the best political means for promoting central planning, despite its inefficiency. In the name of ecology, he said, socialists can get a hearing from politicians and voters.
The article is not online. An abstract is. Here is the concluding thought of the abstract.
The direction in which things are headed is some version of capitalism, whatever its title. In Eastern Europe, the new system is referred to as Not Socialism. Socialism may not continue as an important force now that Communism is finished. But another way of looking at socialism is as the society that must emerge if humanity is to cope with the ecological burden that economic growth is placing on the environment. From this perspective, the long vista after Communism leads through capitalism into a still unexplored world that roust [must?] be safely attained and settled before it can be named.
Heilbroner did not care that a worldwide government-run economic planning system would not be called called socialism. He just wanted to see the system set up.
Heilbroner's peers got the message. That was what Kyoto was all about.
Conclusion
If you like poverty, inefficiency, and bureaucratic controls over the economy, and therefore control over your choices, the "climate change" movement is ideal.
If you want to subsidize China and India, neither of which will enforce the rules laid down by unelected international bureaucrats, this movement is for you.
If you want to pay more for less energy, there is no better way than to pass the cap and tax bill which the House has passed. It will be sent to the U.S. Senate next week.
The rest of us should oppose it.
I hereby authorize anyone to reprint this article or post it on any website, just so long as the text is not changed.here.
Solar Physicist Predicts Ice Age. What happened to global warming?
July 6, 10:19 PM
Timo Niroma, a physicist from Finland, publishes a Solar Report each month. He has given his permission to use it and distribute it to all so here it is. It will be a regular feature here and I hope you look forward to it as much as I do. The report is not written in the usual user-friendly way, but is rather intended for scientists that are familiar with the information contained in it. I will attempt to simplify and explain the details of the report and how it could impact you and, of course, Al Gore and company. As the predictions come true, as I assume they will, the green lobby will go on unemployment compensation. Let's start at the beginning and take it piece by piece.
"JUNE BREAKING NEWS: THE CYCLE GOES AT THE MOMENT BELOW DALTON LEVEL" gives away the punch line but let's see how he gets there.
In the following Timo discusses the sunspot activity of the new, as yet not begun, cycle #24:
"So the activity of the cycle 24 has still been greatest in October-November 2008
by length (2 times 8 days). Also by size of the together 4 of size 80, 3
appeared in November 2008, and now one in June 2009.
Altogether there were six sunspot groups in June, but the five after the decent spot in the beginning of June lasted from 1 to 3 days. The sunspot number of May was 2.6.
From July 2008 to June 2009 the sunspot number has varied from 0.5 (July and August 2008) to 4.1 (November 2008). December 2008 and March 2009 were also very quiet (0.8 and 0.7). Besides in November the sunspot number was higher than in June 2009 in October 2008 (2.9) and in May 2009 (2.9). So the 12 month activity can be described as: ---++-----+. No trend so far."
The upshot of this is that there has no indication that the new cycle is about to start. One needs to know that as solar cycles drag on, the likelyhood becomes greater that the next cycle will be weaker. That translates to a cooler climate.
The following is interesting, as Timo says, because the previous cycle although not extraordinary had a much stronger build up that the new cycle #24. Here he describes the differences.
"It is interesting to note that during the previous cycle change 22/23 in 1996 there were only two months with SSN below 3 (September and October 1996). During the on-going minimum there has been already 17 months below 3, 3 in 2007, 8 in 2008 and all 6 thus far in 2009 (i.e. all 2009 numbers up (until) today)."
What is being discussed next is the magnetic flux or intensity which is a strong indicator of climate. The 11 years is significant in that it is the mean of the solar cycle length. A curious point here is that few cycles are ever 11 years long but are either longer or shorter. Not sure why that is but it is curious. What he is saying is that during the previous cycles minimum in 1995 and 1996, the magnetic flux was the same as the value 11 years latter , at a time when the new cycle should be thinking of getting underway. However, at that point the divergence between the two cycles became evident. Cycle #24 is coming in like a lamb.
"The 10.7 cm fluxes of the sunspots were nearly equal at a distance of 11 years
in 1995-1996 versus 2006-2007:
1995 77 / 2006 80
1996 72 / 2007 73 (1996 was minimum between cycles 22/23)
And so began a dramatic separation in the solar magnetic flux. The cycle 23 began with vengeance in 1997, but the cycle 24 did not in 2008. In fact the first and almost only decent spots in October-November 2008 did not affect the flux, which in fact made its all-time (since late 1940's when first measured) low in November-December 2008".
The number list that follows shows that 1997 and 2008 show a significantly lower intensity for the current minimum but around 30% lower.
Here we find that we have to go back to some pretty cold times to find a similar solar pattern. The calculation of length of the current cycle #23 comes from the fact that you can only tell when a cycle is over, when the spots associated with the new cycle overpower the spots with the old cycle. Old cycle sunspots are observed near the solar equator whereas the new cycle sunspots are in the mid to high latitude areas (like Montreal on Earth) and are of opposite polarity magnetically.
"The yearly spot value of 2007 was already only 7.6 which is below the previous minimum in 1996 (with 8.6). The value dropped to 2.6 in 2008 and the smoothed value at the moment is 1.7 (December 2008). (In December 2007 it was 5.0 .) We must go to the year 1913 to find a lower smoothed value (1.5). The November 2008 value means that the cycle 23 has at least a length of 12.6 years.
There has been only 2 cycles since 1749 longer than the cycle 23, the cycle 4 (1784-1798) just before the Dalton minimum and the cycle 6 (1810-1823 or the second of the Dalton cycles). The cycle 9 (1843-1856) had about the same length as we have now achieved (12.5 years). It began the series of 5 Jovian (Jupiter) cycles and a cool climate in 1856-1913 (the Damon minimum)".
I won't go into all the details here, but the IPCC looks at solar irradiance as the only factor that determines the Sun's ability to warm the Earth's climate. If you count them up here, there are many other factors to be considered and they are all at an extreme low compared to our recent past. "Recent" is a relative term not indicating the past 10 or 20 years.
"Now what do we have: 1. Livingston-Penn observations that the magnetic strength of the sunspots irrespective of their amount has linearly declined since at least 1990 leading the spots vanishing in 2014 or 2015 if the trend continues.
2. A 50-year low in solar wind pressure: Measurements by the Ulysses spacecraft reveal a 20% drop in solar wind pressure since the mid-1990's. 3. A 12 year low in solar irradiance: the sun's brightness has dropped a whopping 6% at extreme UV wavelengths since the solar minimum of 1996. 4. A 55-year low in solar radio wavelengths. The lessening of radio emissions seems to be an indication of weakness in the sun's global magnetic field. 5. The all-time low (since Maunder
minimum) of Gleissberg cycle in 2005 (72 years). 6. Ap Index very low. 7. TSI (Total Solar Irradiance) at its lowest since satellite observations began in 1979 (1365 Watts)".
So here we start to get to the meat of the report. If you look at the data there appears to be a cycle of 210 years at work here. This, by the way, is an often repeated cycle length for the Sun which has many cycles of various lengths.
"Autocorrelation of the sunspots since 1760 gives the highest correlation as 210 years. The Dalton minimum began in 1798".
Remember Dalton means, "Coooooold, Brrrr! Then we have this:
"The yearly sunspot numbers of 1795-1798 were 21, 16, 6.4 and 4.1, the
corresponding values for 2005-2008 were 30, 15, 7.6 and 2.8. The first full
Dalton year or 1799, had a SSN value of 6.8. The SSN of the first 6 months of 2009 is 1.7".
The progressions illustrate that there is a similarity between the years prior to the Dalton, and the minimum leading up to the cycle #24 but lower than those leading up to the Dalton.
Next is an interesting list of Climatic periods in our past on Earth, all of which correlate with solar parameters at the time. Folks back then recorded a tremendous amount of information about the Sun and there were also proxy measurements available.
"Well, there was the 300-year Roman Optimum in 100 BC to AD 200, the 200-year oscillation 200-900 (200 cold, 300 warm, 400 cold, 600-900 cold), the 300-year Medieval Optimum 900-1200 (with some colder spells plus warm aftermaths), the 300-year Little Ice Age 1400-1700, the 300-year "Global Warming" 1700-2005 (with some drawbacks especially in the 1800's). A NEW LIA WITH SPÖRER AND MAUNDER IN 2005-2300???"
That's 300 years of cold, in case you missed it! The Maunder minimum was the bottom of the Little Ice Age from which all IPCC temperature charts begin. That is because it was coldest then and makes the warming look worse. Had they started their charts during the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) we would be wondering why it is still so cool. Like when are we going to get to the good stuff.
And then we get the punch line:
"THE CYCLE 24 HAS NOW GONE CLEARLY BELOW DALTON LEVEL."
This is pretty strong evidence. Had you been reading these reports for a few years you would have seen that Timo has been very conservative in his predictions. His earlier predictions were much less severe but trust me, you would be a lot happier with global warming than you will be with a Maunder type solar event. You can take that to the bank. The only thing that makes me grin about this is that it will end the man made global warming scam once and for all. Unless they can convince politicians that we did that too.
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 8:21 pm Post subject:
Behold item7.
The self-appointed, uneducated, workhouse proxy for multi-national Big Business shareholders (aka the New World Order), infecting this site.
Trash "facts" with a would-be glazing of nonsense "science" (the solar irradiance effect, in this case), pushing garbage with a meagre frosting of what for the afflicted, is reality. It really seems that the more they run out of options (and Franken cancels out Inhofe in the Senate) the more of their desperate stupid they expect us to swallow wholesale.
But I'm sure you don't need me to point that out.
At least, I hope you don't.
If you have any doubt about this, check out any reputable source (not a blog). "Total Solar Irradiance - TSI" is what to look for.
I won't even suggest one, on grounds of impartiality.
The interests that this unknown item7 person, whether knowingly or unknowingly (it doesn't really matter - the effect is the same) all-too willingly shills for are really no different to those who told WTC workers to go back to their desks.
If there is anything worse than a hoaxer yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theatre, it would surely be those who send patrons back to their seats while the building merrily razes around them.
Y'know, it occurs to me that the otherwise execrable Krugman in his recent statement, may be on to something in principle, if not in execution.
Maybe the only way to stop this well-funded anti-reality nausea at source is to hold all board members and shareholders back to 1998 (their favourite year, when their loudly proclaimed and well financed cooling hoax disinformation campaign starts from)) severally and personally liable till the pips squeak before a single penny of public money is spent cleaning up the mess.
Here endeth the analogy. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
'Execute' Skeptics! Shock Call To Action: 'At what point do we jail or execute global warming deniers' -- 'Shouldn't we start punishing them now?'
Wednesday, June 03, 2009By Marc Morano – Climate Depot
[ Update: June 3, 2009 - 8:44 AM ET: Talking Points Memo (TPM) has removed the article from their website. "The file you are looking for has not been found" - But the url with a portion of the chilling message lingers as evidence: "at-what-point-do-we-jail-or-ex..." - http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/crazedandconfused/2009 /06/at-what-point-do-we-jail-or-ex.php?ref=reccafe - Climate Depot has also saved a screen shot of the original article. Update: Washington Examiner weighs in: 'Hate sport': Is TPM poster simply lone fanatic? Excerpt: Poster "believes killing those who disagree with him politically is justified." Update: June 5, 2009: Talking Points Memo issues retraction for call to execute skeptics! -- 'A formal retraction and apology' -- Update: June 5, 2009: Joe Romm defends strangle skeptics in bed remark as 'not a threat, but a prediction' -- Strangle Skeptics in Bed! "An entire generation will soon be ready to strangle you and your kind while you sleep in your beds" ]
A public appeal has been issued by an influential U.S. website asking: “At what point do we jail or execute global warming deniers.” The appeal appeared on Talking Points Memo, an often cited website that helps set the agenda for the political Left in the U.S. The anonymous posting, dated June 2, 2009, referred to dissenters of man-made global warming fears as “greedy b******” who use “bogus science or the lowest scientists in the gene pool” to “distort data.”
The Talking Points Memo article continues: “So when the right wing * have caused it to be too late to fix the problem, and we start seeing the devastating consequences and we start seeing end of the World type events - how will we punish those responsible. It will be too late. So shouldn't we start punishing them now?"
The article also claims the “vast majority” of scientists agree that man-made warming “can do an untold amount of damage to life on Earth.”
The full text of the Talking Points Memo is reproduced below:
(Note: The entry is posted under the anonymous byline "The Insolent Braggart")
At what point do we jail or execute global warming deniers
June 2, 2009, 9:42PM
What is so frustrating about these fools is that they are the politicians and greedy b****** who don't want a cut in their profits who use bogus science or the lowest scientists in the gene pool who will distort data for a few bucks. The vast majority of the scientific minds in the World agree and understand it's a very serious problem that can do an untold amount of damage to life on Earth.
So when the right wing * have caused it to be too late to fix the problem, and we start seeing the devastating consequences and we start seeing end of the World type events - how will we punish those responsible. It will be too late. So shouldn't we start punishing them now?
#
Climate Depot Editor's Note:
The Talking Points Memo appeal to execute skeptics is not unique. As the science behind man-made global warming fears utterly collapses, many of the biggest promoters of the theory and environmental activists are growing increasingly desperate. Looming Question: If the promoters of man-made climate fears truly believed the "debate is over" and the science is "settled", why is there such a strong impulse to shut down debate and threaten those who disagree?
Small sampling of threats, intimidation and censorship:
NASA's James Hansen has called for trials of climate skeptics in 2008 for "high crimes against humanity.” Environmentalist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. lashed out at skeptics of 2007 declaring “This is treason. And we need to start treating them as traitors” In 2009, RFK, Jr. also called coal companies "criminal enterprises" and declared CEO's 'should be in jail... for all of eternity."
In June 2009, former Clinton Administration official Joe Romm defended a comment on his Climate Progress website warning skeptics would be strangled in their beds. "An entire generation will soon be ready to strangle you and your kind while you sleep in your beds," stated the remarks, which Romm defended by calling them "not a threat, but a prediction."
In 2006, the eco-magazine Grist called for Nuremberg-Style trials for skeptics. In 2008, Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki called for government leaders skeptical of global warming to be thrown “into jail.” In 2007, The Weather Channel's climate expert called for withholding certification of skeptical meteorologists.
A 2008 report found that 'climate blasphemy' is replacing traditional religious blasphemy. In addition, a July 2007 Senate report detailed how skeptical scientists have faced threats and intimidation.
In 2007, then EPA Chief Vowed to Probe E-mail Threatening to 'Destroy' Career of Climate Skeptic and dissenters of warming fears have been called 'Climate Criminals' who are committing 'Terracide' (killing of Planet Earth) (July 25, 2007) In addition, in May 2009, Climate Depot Was Banned in Louisiana! See: State official sought to 'shut down' climate skeptic's testimony at hearing.
Below are many more examples of the threats, name calling and intimidation skeptics have faced in recent times.
November 12, 2007: UN official warns ignoring warming would be 'criminally irresponsible' Excerpt: The U.N.'s top climate official warned policymakers and scientists trying to hammer out a landmark report on climate change that ignoring the urgency of global warming would be "criminally irresponsible." Yvo de Boer's comments came at the opening of a weeklong conference that will complete a concise guide on the state of global warming and what can be done to stop the Earth from overheating.
September 29. 2007: VA State Climatologist skeptical of global warming loses job after clash with Governor: 'I was told that I could not speak in public' Excerpt: Michaels has argued that the climate is becoming warmer but that the consequences will not be as dire as others have predicted. Gov. Kaine had warned. Michaels not to use his official title in discussing his views. "I resigned as Virginia state climatologist because I was told that I could not speak in public on my area of expertise, global warming, as state climatologist," Michaels said in a statement this week provided by the libertarian Cato Institute, where he has been a fellow since 1992. "It was impossible to maintain academic freedom with this speech restriction." (LINK)
Skeptical State Climatologist in Oregon has title threatened by Governor (February 8, 2007) Excerpt: “[State Climatologist George Taylor] does not believe human activities are the main cause of global climate change...So the [Oregon] governor wants to take that title from Taylor and make it a position that he would appoint. In an exclusive interview with KGW-TV, Governor Ted Kulongoski confirmed he wants to take that title from Taylor.
Skeptical State Climatologist in Delaware silenced by Governor (May 2, 2007) Excerpt: Legates is a state climatologist in Delaware, and he teaches at the university. He`s not part of the mythical climate consensus. In fact, Legates believes that we oversimplify climate by just blaming greenhouse gases. One day he received a letter from the governor, saying his views do not concur with those of the administration, so if he wants to speak out, it must be as an individual, not as a state climatologist. So essentially, you can have the title of state climatologist unless he`s talking about his views on climate?
October 28, 2008: License to dissent: 'Internet should be nationalized as a public utility' to combat global warming skepticism - Australian Herald Sun - Excerpt: British journalism lecturer and warming alarmist Alex Lockwood says my blog is a menace to the planet. Skeptical bloggers like me need bringing into line, and Lockwood tells a journalism seminar of some options: There is clearly a need for research into the ways in which climate skepticism online is free to contest scientific fact. But there is enough here already to put forward some of the ideas in circulation. One of the founders of the Internet Vint Cerf, and lead for Google's Internet for Everyone project, made a recent suggestion that the Internet should be nationalized as a public utility. As tech policy blogger Jim Harper argues, “giving power over the Internet to well-heeled interests and self-interested politicians” is, and I quote, “a bad idea.” Or in the UK every new online publication could be required to register with the recently announced Internet watchdog...
November 5, 2008: UK Scientist: 'BBC SHUNNED ME FOR DENYING CLIMATE CHANGE' – UK Daily Express
Excerpt: FOR YEARS David Bellamy was one of the best known faces on TV. A respected botanist and the author of 35 books, he had presented around 400 programmes over the years and was appreciated by audiences for his boundless enthusiasm. Yet for more than 10 years he has been out of the limelight, shunned by bosses at the BBC where he made his name, as well as fellow scientists and environmentalists. His crime? Bellamy says he doesn't believe in man-made global warming. Here he reveals why – and the price he has paid for not toeing the orthodox line on climate change.
U.N. official says it's 'completely immoral' to doubt global warming fears (May 10, 2007)
Excerpt: UN special climate envoy Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland declared “it's completely immoral, even, to question” the UN's scientific “consensus."
Former US Vice President Al Gore compared global warming skeptics to people who 'believe the moon landing was actually staged in a movie lot in Arizona' (June 20, 2006)
Gore Refuses to Hear Skeptical Global Warming Views (Video)
UK environment secretary David Miliband said 'those who deny [climate change] are the flat-Earthers of the twenty-first century' (October 6, 2006)
Weather Channel Climate Expert Calls for Decertifying Global Warming Skeptics (January 17, 2007) Excerpt: The Weather Channel's most prominent climatologist is advocating that broadcast meteorologists be stripped of their scientific certification if they express skepticism about predictions of manmade catastrophic global warming. This latest call to silence skeptics follows a year (2006) in which skeptics were compared to "Holocaust Deniers" and Nuremberg-style war crimes trials were advocated by several climate alarmists.
Climate science is 'ancient astrology', claims report
By Andrew Orlowski
Posted in Environment, 25th February 2009 12:23 GMT
Exclusive Japanese scientists have made a dramatic break with the UN and Western-backed hypothesis of climate change in a new report from its Energy Commission.
Three of the five researchers disagree with the UN's IPCC view that recent warming is primarily the consequence of man-made industrial emissions of greenhouse gases. Remarkably, the subtle and nuanced language typical in such reports has been set aside.
Click here to find out more!
One of the five contributors compares computer climate modelling to ancient astrology. Others castigate the paucity of the US ground temperature data set used to support the hypothesis, and declare that the unambiguous warming trend from the mid-part of the 20th Century has ceased.
The report by Japan Society of Energy and Resources (JSER) is astonishing rebuke to international pressure, and a vote of confidence in Japan's native marine and astronomical research. Publicly-funded science in the West uniformly backs the hypothesis that industrial influence is primarily responsible for climate change, although fissures have appeared recently. Only one of the five top Japanese scientists commissioned here concurs with the man-made global warming hypothesis.
JSER is the academic society representing scientists from the energy and resource fields, and acts as a government advisory panel. The report appeared last month but has received curiously little attention. So The Register commissioned a translation of the document - the first to appear in the West in any form. Below you'll find some of the key findings - but first, a summary.
Summary
Three of the five leading scientists contend that recent climate change is driven by natural cycles, not human industrial activity, as political activists argue.
Kanya Kusano is Program Director and Group Leader for the Earth Simulator at the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science & Technology (JAMSTEC). He focuses on the immaturity of simulation work cited in support of the theory of anthropogenic climate change. Using undiplomatic language, Kusano compares them to ancient astrology. After listing many faults, and the IPCC's own conclusion that natural causes of climate are poorly understood, Kusano concludes:
"[The IPCC's] conclusion that from now on atmospheric temperatures are likely to show a continuous, monotonic increase, should be perceived as an unprovable hypothesis," he writes.
Shunichi Akasofu, head of the International Arctic Research Center in Alaska, has expressed criticism of the theory before. Akasofu uses historical data to challenge the claim that very recent temperatures represent an anomaly:
"We should be cautious, IPCC's theory that atmospheric temperature has risen since 2000 in correspondence with CO2 is nothing but a hypothesis. "
Akasofu calls the post-2000 warming trend hypothetical. His harshest words are reserved for advocates who give conjecture the authority of fact.
"Before anyone noticed, this hypothesis has been substituted for truth... The opinion that great disaster will really happen must be broken."
'Execute' Skeptics! Shock Call To Action: 'At what point do we jail or execute global warming deniers' -- 'Shouldn't we start punishing them now?'Wednesday, June 03, 2009By Marc Morano – Climate Depots
Once more we get the disgusting sight of those poor oppressed white industrial elite of the richest industries on the planet thrust in our faces unquestioningly by item7.
Nobody except Morano and his fellow wingnuts have ever mentioned 'execution', but they do like to play the 'victim'.
So much so that there are entire websites devoted to what have become known as "hoekstra memes", after poor "victimised" white middle class journalist Pete Hoekstra.
For example "I had to sit at the back of the corporate jet today. Now I know how Rosa parks felt", or "The office water cooler ran out this afternoon. Now I know what it's like in the Sudan".
Look some more up, they're too funny.
Anyway, as I mentioned in my previous post, there's no need to impose any extreme measures on the purveyors of this orchestrated campaign of lies and propaganda expressly designed to gull the less well informed.
Holding the boards and shareholders since let's say 1998 financially liable will be quite sufficient. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
I guess it must make you tired and forgetful being a dupe, no matter how willing, for the international rich class.
I get the distinct - nay, unshakeable impression - that if Marcyboy Morano or indeed any of your oft-quoted PR spinmeisters (because you may have noticed all this "science" being fed to you doesn't actually come from any reputable scientists) were to tell you all-out nuclear war would be good, clean, long overdue macho fun, you'd be spamming that little nugget here faster than you could say 'Dr Strangelove'.
Why wouldn't you?
'Useful idiots', they call'em. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
The debate is “over” and the science is “settled”, but someone forgot to tell Mother Nature
Boston: Sixth Coldest June on Record
Posted On July 8, 2009
By Angela Zalucha, STAFF METEOROLOGIST, July 8, 2009
Sixth Coldest June
on Record
As you are well aware, June was unseasonably cold. The mean temperature for June was 63.3°F, which ties it with June 1982 as the sixth coldest June on record in Boston since records began in 1872. Average temperatures of various sorts are often reported by meteorologists, such as the average high or low for a particular day of the year. A statistical quantity that is often overlooked is the standard deviation. That is, when a record occurs, how statistically unlikely is that event compared with the mean?
Your intuition tells you that the standard deviation for Boston temperatures is probably high, since the weather varies greatly from day to day. In places like Los Angeles, California, or Phoenix, Arizona, however, the temperature is fairly constant on a day-to-day time scale, and so the standard deviation is low. Even from month to month, the standard deviation of temperature may vary. For example, in Boston the standard deviation is higher in January than in July.
So just how unusual were the cold temperatures of the past June? The mean temperature for all Junes from 1872 to 2009 is 67.2 °F with a standard deviation of 2.4 °F. Hence, this year’s mean June temperature was between one and two standard deviations from the mean. If we average only the high temperatures for June, then this June was the second coldest June with an average high temperature of 69.2 °F. The average high temperature for June is 75.9 °F with a standard deviation of 3.0 °F, making the average high temperature for June 2009 two standard deviations below the average high for June.
The remainder of the work week looks to be cool with sunshine returning on Friday. The weekend warms up with another chance for thunderstorms Saturday evening.
Extended Forecast:
Today and tonight: Cloudy with a chance of showers and thunderstorms. High 70 °F (21 °C). Low 58 °F (14 °C).
Friday and Friday night: Sunny. High 72 °F (22 °C). Low 62 °F (17 °C).
Saturday and Saturday night: Partly sunny with a chance of thunderstorms. High 80 °F (27 °C). Low 66°F (19 °C).
Sunday and Sunday night: Partly sunny. High 83 °F (28 °C). Low 63 °F (17 °C).
Tasmania as cold as ice: Temperatures plummet eight below average
Posted On July 8, 2009
Brett Dutschke, Wednesday July 8, 2009 – 17:43 EST
Weatherzone
Bitterly cold weather has been gripping Tasmania as temperatures plummet as much as eight below average.
Widespread frost has affected much of the state in the last few mornings and has been severe in central and eastern parts. Liawenee has had minimum temperatures of minus seven degrees in the last two days, six degrees below average.
Some valley locations, such as Bushy Park and Ouse, which dipped to minus four on Wednesday morning, failed to get within seven degrees of the average maximum. Bushy Park only reached three degrees and Ouse four. Fog and a lack of wind were the main culprits, hampering any warmth from the sun. For Bushy park this is likely to be its coldest day in more than two years and coldest July day in at least eight years.
Sub-freezing temperatures will again be a feature over susceptible parts of the state on Wednesday night and Thursday morning with help from light winds. This will lead to the formation of ice and fog.
A Road Weather Alert has been issued.
The next few nights will be warmer with help from extra cloud and wind.
June Global Temperatures Drop Again, 8 Year Downtrend Continues
Posted On July 7, 2009
June Global Temperatures Drop Again, 8 Year Downtrend Continues
By Joseph D’Aleo
ICECAP
Dr. Roy Spencer announced on his blog that June’s anomaly globally using the Aqua satellite dropped to 0.001C. This continues the downtrend that started after 2001.
Roy notes: June 2009 saw another – albeit small drop in the global average temperature anomaly, from +0.04 deg. C in May to 0.00 deg. C in June, with the coolest anomaly (-0.03 deg. C) in the Southern Hemisphere. The decadal temperature trend for the period December 1978 through June 2009 is now at +0.12 deg. C per decade.
NOTE: A reminder for those who are monitoring the daily progress of global-average temperatures here:
(1) Only use channel 5 (”ch05″), which is what we use for the lower troposphere and middle troposphere temperature products.
(2) Compare the current month to the same calendar month from the previous year (which is already plotted for you).
(3) The progress of daily temperatures (the current month versus the same calendar month from one year ago) should only be used as a rough guide for how the current month is shaping up because they come from the AMSU instrument on the NOAA-15 satellite, which has a substantial diurnal drift in the local time of the orbit. Our ‘official’ results presented above, in contrast, are from AMSU on NASA’s Aqua satellite, which carries extra fuel to keep it in a stable orbit. Therefore, there is no diurnal drift adjustment needed in our official product.
Icecap Notes: It was the 15th coldest June in the 31 years of satellite record keeping since 1979. The first half of the month was extremely cold and even snowy in south Central Canada and the northern United States. In snowed in North Dakota and in California and northern New England in early June. It was also unusually cold in the southwest – well below the normal (often 10-20 degrees) in places like Palm Springs, CA. In general, the desert southwest was unusually mild. Phoenix had 15 straight days with highs below 100F, the first time in June since 1913.
In contrast feeding off the dry soils from two years of La Nina, June, especially the second half was very hot in the southern plains and the heat expanded north and east a bit after mid-month before being suppressed again by months end.
In the northeast, the month was unusually cold, cloudy and wet. In Boston it was 4.7F below normal in a tie for 6th coldest June (with 1982) in 138 years of record keeping, all the other years were before 1916. It was just short of two standard deviations colder then normal. The NWS spot checked the average maximum temp at Boston for the month and it appears this is the second coldest average high temp since 1872. 1903 is the record. A trace or more of rain fell on 22 days of the month. Measurable (0.01 inches or more) occurred on 16 days just short of the record of 18 set in 1942.
At Blue Hill Observatory in Milton, MA, just southwest of Boston, the month of June had between 26 and 27% of the possible bright sunshine. Normal for June is 55% and the gloomiest June in 1903 had just 25% of the possible sunshine. Second place had been June, 1998, with 36%. So, this month has taken over 2nd place, not an enviable distinction for vacationers. So little sunshine and so much cool temperatures that we have heard some reports that swamp maples in parts of Maine showing fall colors!
New York City’s Central Park was also cool, cloudy and wet. The month averaged 3.7F below normal and tied with 1897 as the 8th coldest since 1869 (151 years). It rained in 23 days of the month and ended up as the second wettest June ever falling short of 1927. Recall Joe Romm of Climate Progress had blamed the rains at the US Open on global warming and chuckled the heat waves would make the climate debate in DC all that much more exciting.
In other parts of the world, Southern Brazil had one the coldest June’s in decades and New Zealand has had unusual cold and snow again this year after a banner year there and in the mountains of southern Australia last year. The Mt. Lyford Ski Area is experiencing some of the best early snow it�s ever seen. With a current 135cm average base on the slopes along with 50cm of snow fall earlier this week and an additional 5cm of windblown powder last night, ski area operator Hamish Simpson says there are “plenty of fresh tracks to be had”. “We have got the best early season snow in years,” said Mr Simpson. “Even better than last year – wall to wall white! The Terako rope has 100% cover with plenty of fresh tracks to be had.” Photo Mt. Dobson.
Finally from our Friends at Minnesotans for Global Warming this chart showing how since the release of the Al Gore movie An Inconvenient Truth, global temperatures declined 0.74F.
New Zealand: June temperatures well below average
Posted On July 4, 2009
June temperatures well below average – Niwa
New Zealand Herald
Thursday Jul 02, 2009
Temperatures were well below average during June, the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa) climate summary says.
Extremely low temperatures were recorded in the Waikato, Taumarunui, Taupo, southern Hawke’s Bay, Central Otago, the Kaikoura Coast, and some alpine areas of the South Island.
All other areas experienced below average temperatures and the national average temperature of 7.5degC was 0.7degC below the long-term average for June.
The lowest temperature recorded for the month was -8.9degC in Hanmer Springs, while the highest was 24.5degC in Henderson, Auckland.
Despite the cold, the sun shone brightly with well above average sunshine totals recorded in Northland, Auckland, the Waikato, Bay of Plenty, Taupo, parts of Taranaki and Hawke’s Bay, Fiordland and Westland.
Extremely dry conditions affected much of the South Island as well as in parts of Taranaki and the Manawatu, while Central Otago recorded its lowest rainfall level on record for June.
Of the six main centres, Dunedin was the coldest and driest, Auckland the warmest, Tauranga the wettest, and Hamilton the sunniest.
Source
MILWAUKEE: July Opens with Near-Record Cold
Posted On July 3, 2009
By Dan O’Donnell, Todays TMJ4
MILWAUKEE – July, like March, has come in like a lion. Today’s high temperature was 63 degrees, missing by a single degree the all-time record for coldest high on July 1st.
“The record low high temperature is 62 degrees, set in 1986 and 1876,” said Storm Team 4caster Brian Gotter. “We got about as close as we could, but there will be no white-out taken to the record books today.”
The lowest high temperature on record in July was recorded on July 2nd, 1982, when the high was only 57 degrees.
The weather should improve by the July 4th weekend, however, as Koplien predicts sunny skies and warmer temperatures.
“We’re seeing a warm front moving in by Friday, and that will push the temperature into the 80s for much of the weekend,” Gotter said.
Source
South Africa: Cold a killer for homeless
Posted On June 27, 2009
Cold a killer for homeless
IOL, June 26 2009 at 07:48PM
A recent spate of cold weather is to blame for the deaths on Friday of two people in the Eastern Cape, police said.
Both men are believed to be vagrants who were sleeping outside where they died in the cold, Captain Sandra Janse Van Rensburg.
The first man, in his 60s, was found at 4am by a gardener in Govan Mbeki Municipality. He had gone to sleep on the steps of a building in the town.
The second man, in his 50s, was found at 10am in a construction site where he had sought shelter. – Sapa
Source
Bay of Plenty: Record cold snap
Posted On June 27, 2009
Rain brings end to record cold snap
by Samantha McQueen | 26th June 2009
Bay of Plenty Times
The Bay’s exceptional cold snap which has seen overnight June temperatures in Tauranga fall below 3C for nine consecutive days is unparalleled in Bay of Plenty Times weather records dating back to at least 1982.
Never in 27 years do our figures – recorded at Chapel St – show a colder or more long-lasting frosty spell in June.
MetService weather ambassador Bob McDavitt said average temperatures so far in June – at 9C – were almost two degrees colder than last year.
The cold snap has been felt by locals across the Bay since last Tuesday, with minimum temperatures falling below 2.5C each night.
On June 15 the overnight low was a relatively balmy 10.3C, which plummeted the following night to 2C and then fell further on the 17th and 18th to 1.8C and 1.9C respectively.
For six further days, the low did not climb above 2.5C, until last night when it rebounded to 4.6C.
Tauranga airport recorded the lowest minimum temperature of 0.5C on Friday June 19.
Powerco has recorded a 6 per cent increase in peak electricity demand on the coldest evenings in the Western Bay of Plenty this month, compared with June 2008.
However, some welcome relief is on the way.
Forecasters say nighttime temperatures are expected rise significantly over the weekend during to the northerly wind, jumping back to about 10C.
However, the MetService has said with the wind will come the rain, with showers developing this afternoon and carrying on through the weekend.
Metservice weather forecaster Geoff Sanders said Saturday would bring scattered periods of rain, but the worst of the rain would hit on Sunday.
The Metservice predicts up to 30mm could fall in Tauranga on Sunday as a strong easterly moves across the Bay.
Bay residents should expect warmer night temperatures to last until early next week, when a southerly breeze will bring another cold blast to the Bay.
Source
Cool weather dampens U.S. June retail sales
Posted On June 23, 2009
Rain, cool weather dampen U.S. June retail sales
Reuters
Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:12pm ED
NEW YORK (Reuters) – Rain and cooler-than-usual weather so far in June may have dampened demand for summer items such as sandals, swimwear and beer for retailers already hard put to counter sales declines during the recession.
The effect may be most pronounced in the U.S. Northeast, where June so far has been the coldest in 27 years and is on track to become one of the wettest Junes on record, according to weather research firm Planalytics, which has tracked such data since the 1930s.
June in the Midwest so far is the coldest in six years and has been wetter than normal, but still not close to last year when it was the second wettest in 50 years.
It is the wettest in 4 years in the U.S. Southeast and U.S. Southwest and the coldest in 42 years in the Southwest, the weather tracking firm said.
The summer season typically drives demand for merchandise such as bathing suits, shorts and summer dresses on the apparel side, and pool and garden-related merchandise on the home end.
Items such as bottled water and beer — and conveniences such as air conditioning — also usually see more demand in summer.
But this time, already penny-pinching consumers may not be motivated to brave the less-than-ideal weather to shop, said Wendy Liebmann, chief executive of consulting firm WSL Strategic Retail.
“When the weather is like this, the inclination to (shop) is absolutely not there,” Liebmann said. “It feels like we are going to go straight from spring to autumn or we’ll just wait for the big sales and buy then.”
That attitude is a far cry from a year earlier, when people bought things “like crazy” said Planalytics’ chief operating officer, Scott Bernhardt.
“We knew going into June 2009 that it was not going to be favorable both from the economy and the weather,” he said. “This was going to be a tough one.”
The unseasonal weather stood out in New York City.
The city has failed to top 90 degrees Fahrenheit (32 Celsius) so far in June, which has happened only twice in the past 17 years, according to AccuWeather’s chief long-range forecaster, Joe b******.
With 15 days of rain in the first 21 days of June, New York City is on track for an all-time record in days and amount, Planalytics said. June is also set to be one of the city’s coolest in 50 years, Planalytics added.
COOLER WEATHER = NO AIR CONDITIONING
Given the cool weather, not many consumer found a need to turn on air conditioners.
According to b******, there was lower demand for power to run air conditioners in much of the U.S. Northeast.
Unseasonable weather is an added headache for retailers.
For months, retailers have been trying to attract shoppers who have stuck to tight shopping lists, only buying items they need in the economic slump.
Many stores turned to big sales during the past holiday season to move excess merchandise — a tactic some have adopted again.
UBS retail analyst Roxanne Meyer has noticed more discounts and promotions at teen and apparel retailers such as American Eagle Outfitters Inc (AEO.N), Pacific Sunwear of California Inc (PSUN.O) Chico’s FAS Inc (CHS.N) and Talbots Inc (TLB.N).
“We’re seeing more than half the store, on average, being on sale (and) average mark downs of 50 percent off,” Meyer said. “I would say they’re incrementally more promotional than they were last year.”
Beer and bottled water also face weaker demand in times of unseasonal weather.
“The weather tends to condition people’s attitudes as well,” Pirko said.
People tend to drink according to how hot it is or how much money they can spend.
One saving grace, Meyer said, was that June is typically a clearance month for clothing retailers, who mark down prices to get rid of summer items and prepare for new back-to-school merchandise.
Source
Phoenix: Longest June stretch of below 100 degrees since 1913
Posted On June 22, 2009
June hasn’t been this nice since … 1913
by John Faherty – Jun. 19, 2009 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic
Meteorologists are reluctant to call a month “nice.” They have their data and their science and typically do not describe the weather in such subjective terms.
Except now, because the data prove it.
“It’s probably the best June since I’ve been here, and I’ve been here most of my life,” said the National Weather Service’s Valerie Meyers, who is in her late 40s. “It’s been really nice.”
Possibly the nicest June ever.
It’s that type of thing that is fun to say but hard to quantify.
Thursday, however, was the 14th consecutive day to stay below 100 degrees. That’s the longest stretch of its kind in any June since 1913.
The lower temperatures have allowed people to sleep with windows open and drive with their arms out vehicle windows. Evenings, too, have been spent chatting with neighbors while children or grandchildren play. Those events are not life-changing, but they are, well, nice.
Typically in June, high-pressure systems begin to form above the Valley. High pressure means clear skies and little wind. And, in June, clear skies let in the sunshine, sending the temperatures soaring.
This June, though, has remained cool because of what Meyers called “a persistent area of low pressure off the West Coast.”
The low pressure has prevented the high-pressure systems from getting into place.
Alas, all good things must come to an end. This weekend, the days will heat up. Temperatures are expected to be back in the 104-105 range by the middle of next week.
Source
Iowa: Harsh winter leaves mark on flowers, trees, crops
Posted On June 22, 2009
Harsh winter leaves mark on flowers, trees, crops
By TOM ALEX June 21, 2009
Desmoines Register
The thermometer says another Iowa summer has arrived. But winter continues to hang around in the form of dead trees, flowers, plants and shrubs that were unable to rebound from one the snowiest and coldest seasons on record.
The state’s summer palette might be a bit heavy on brown as a result.
“We’ve had some real damage here,” Bob Atha of Appleberry Farm in Marshalltown said. “I don’t know about other places, but we’re expecting about half the apples we had last year, maybe a little less than half.”
Experts call it “winterkill,” and it’s been reported from the alfalfa fields of Ontario to the wheat stands of Kansas to golf courses in Massachusetts.
In Iowa, the bitter cold and early snow was hard on even the hardiest evergreens. An early spring didn’t help, either.
“We’ve had literally hundreds of people calling and complaining about” winter-ravaged bushes and shrubs, said Jeff Westphal, a salesman at Miller Nursery in Johnston. “Some of them were already weak going into the winter. But that doesn’t explain what happened to the boxwoods and yews. I think it was just too cold for some of them.”
The average temperature statewide for December through February was 18.9 degrees, which represented the 32nd-coldest in 136 winters of record-keeping. The figure for the same period in 2007-08 was 17.7 degrees, 21st-coldest.
A dozen locations recorded their lowest winter temperatures ever.
Snowfall through January was headed toward a top-five ranking in the record books, but a dry February left the winter of 2008-09 at No. 34, with 36 inches. The previous winter ranked 10th, with 45.1 inches.
“We had the largest crop ever last year,” Atha said. “It’s not going to be that way for us this year. Certain varieties had more damage than others.”
Karli Christensen, associate manager at Earl May Nursery & Garden Center in West Des Moines, said timing is everything for plant growth.
“It warmed up in the early, early spring, and some plants started coming out of dormancy,” she said. “When it got cold again, it really zapped some things. Boxwoods and yews got winter burn from that.”
West Des Moines officials noticed the winter was hard on red bud trees.
Jim Fawcett, an Iowa State University agronomist, said the severe cold was hard on alfalfa and forage grasses in parts of northeast Iowa. The winter of 2007-08, he said, was even worse.
“Last winter I think we had some snow cover. In 2007-08 there were sheets of ice, and that was a problem,” he said.
Elaine Peiffer of Swift Greenhouses in Gilman said perennial flowers also took a hit in central Iowa.
“There was a lot more die-back this year than in the past,” she said. “When it freezes and thaws and freezes and thaws, it’s not good. We’ve talked to a lot of people in the area who had a variety of winterkill this year. Even some established perennials didn’t make it.”
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 5:58 pm Post subject:
Seriously item7, after five months you still haven't grasped the difference between climate and weather?
Look at the temperature map a few posts up and you'll see that Asia and Africa are currently experiencing excess heat. I notice your spinmeisters don't include them in their supposedly 'global' survey.
But then they aren't about enlightening so much as spin for their faithful.
They know full well (as do I) that you'll never check anything out for yourself, but rather blindly believe them before moving on to some other poisonous blog. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
OPEN LETTER TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES: YOU ARE BEING DECEIVED ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING
Wednesday, July 1st 2009, 9:45 AM EDT
Co2sceptic (Site Admin)
You have recently received an Open Letter from the Woods Hole Research Center, exhorting you to act quickly to avoid global disaster. The letter purports to be from independent scientists, but that Center is the former den of the President’s science advisor, John Holdren, and is far from independent. This is the same science advisor who has given us predictions of “almost certain” thermonuclear war or eco-catastrophe by the year 2000, and many other forecasts of doom that somehow never seem to arrive on time.
The facts are:
The sky is not falling; the Earth has been cooling for ten years, without help. The present cooling was NOT predicted by the alarmists’ computer models, and has come as an embarrassment to them.
The finest meteorologists in the world cannot predict the weather two weeks in advance, let alone the climate for the rest of the century. Can Al Gore? Can John Holdren? We are flooded with claims that the evidence is clear, that the debate is closed, that we must act immediately, etc, but in fact
THERE IS NO SUCH EVIDENCE; IT DOESN’T EXIST.
The proposed legislation would cripple the US economy, putting us at a disadvantage compared to our competitors. For such drastic action, it is only prudent to demand genuine proof that it is needed, not guesswork, and not false claims about the state of the science.
DEMAND PROOF, NOT CONSENSUS
Finally, climate alarmism pays well. Many alarmists are profiting from their activism. There are billions of dollars floating around for the taking, and being taken.
Robert H. Austin
Professor of Physics
Princeton University
Fellow APS, AAAS
American Association of Arts and Science Member National Academy of Sciences
William Happer
Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics
Princeton University
Fellow APS, AAAS
Member National Academy of Sciences
S. Fred Singer
Professor of Environmental Sciences Emeritus, University of Virginia
First Director of the National Weather Satellite Service
Fellow APS, AAAS, AGU
Roger W. Cohen
Manager, Strategic Planning and Programs, ExxonMobil Corporation (retired)
Fellow APS
Harold W. Lewis
Professor of Physics Emeritus
University of California at Santa Barbara
Fellow APS, AAAS; Chairman, APS Reactor Safety Study
Laurence I. Gould
Professor of Physics
University of Hartford
Chairman (2004), New England Section of APS
Richard Lindzen
Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Fellow American Academy of Arts and Sciences, AGU, AAAS, and AMS
Member Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters
Member National Academy of Sciences
Source Link: icecap.us
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:09 pm Post subject:
Still promoting the views of your proven industry financed fantasists and spinners then item7, despite previous warnings about their probity.
Could you explain how anyone with brainpower superior to a tadpole can interpret the global temperature graph below, with its very obvious sub-pattern of dips and rises, rather than a monotonically even increase, as demonstrating a future of 'global cooling'?
"Oh look - it's not quite as hot as the previous record-breaking years of 1998 and 2005 - therefore it must be getting cooler", seems to be the (rather obviously flawed) line of reasoning being piped to you by your masters. Because let's be frank - these 'ideas' that you continually spam are written for you and published on a well-financed blog network designed to promote an appearance of ubiquity.
You and I know well that you've never actually, like, y'know..., read a book or two or otherwise educated yourself on the subject or anything, beyond the level of right-clicking.
It'll be extremely interesting to see how they (via item7) spin this year's global temperatures (and quite possibly also next year's) what with increasing sunspot activity and a developing El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO in case I have to mention it again. And item7 ain't by any means quick on the uptake, so I may well have to). I mean, JesusHChristthecyclist, five months later and he still hasn't grasped the different meanings of the words "weather" or "climate" (which are both common words defined in any home dictionary) so when did anybody, anywhere ever so much as imply that man-made global warming (AGW) led to the abolishing of weather?
...but I digress, and dumbing down of the population has long been accepted as a reality so why wouldn't we be experiencing the effects?
...now, where was I?
Oh yes... the sunspot indicated pick-up in solar activity and ENSO (the Pacific ocean surface heating cycle) influenced expected world-record-beating highest temperatures ever recorded during the period we fondly regard as that occupied by settled human civilisation, will likely occur this year, or next. And the effect will all amplified by atmospheric CO2, 25% of which we are responsible for releasing over the past 120 years.
Which will be quite the laugh as item7 assures us all that really, he's been told that it's actually cooling.
It's enough to make you wonder why they ever did away with tarring and feathering.
I think item7 can't explain it and will just spam another blogpost in response, but then that's because I - perhaps foolishly - think it's because he's a rather dim, right-wing fetishist with a tax fixation (paradoxically with with no grasp of basic maths, which would tend to indicate he's ... er... not on an especially high tax rate anyway) rather than say, disastrously and mind-blowingly stupid.
Or worse.
Perhaps I'm a maverick, or perhaps the responses (or more accurately, lack of same) to his few other posts on this site mean others also distrust his blatant, agenda-driven approach to 'truth' as well.
Or maybe I'm just being silly, and you're generally perceived as not being beyond thick (or just driven) with no capacity to explain or engage...
I expect Paul will be along shortly to defend your theoretically unimpeachable right to spam industry propaganda and frack (BSG®) the intent.
Some users of this place seem to disregard that this is a "truth" site by the day, and prefer the promoting of ideologically-driven, proven lies.
Just look at old astro Nick.
_________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
