05 March 2013
Climate Reconstruction Shows Long Term Cooling Trend
24 December 2010
Stop Global Warming Sign Buried in the Snow
Found this over at "JammieWearingFool". This is just HILARIOUS!!
Sign of the Times: 'Stop Global Warming' Sign Buried in the Snow
This amusing photo goes hand in glove with this idiocy:
That snow outside is what global warming looks like
There is now strong evidence to suggest that the unusually cold winters of the last two years in the UK are the result of heating elsewhere.Who says something so stupid? Why, a renowned "expert" who was exposed as a total fraud during ClimateGate, of course. But wait, ten years ago we were told snow was a thing of the past. Oops.
Daniel Hannan is amused.
For all I know, Monbiot may be right. It just seems remarkably convenient that any climatic trend is the fault of greenhouse gases . Getting hotter? Global warming! Getting cooler? Global warming! Average overcast October day? Gaea is on her last legs!But ... but ... NASA is telling us the truth!
Ye-e-s. There’s just one problem with this. Can anyone spot what it is? That’s right: the clue is in that phrase “published by NASA”. See, going to NASA GISS for reliable, unbiased temperature data is a bit like asking Charles Manson for tips on how best to set up a commune where everyone’s happy and no one gets ritually murdered or anything. James Hansen, the guy in charge of NASA’s dataset, is so committed to the religion of AGW he makes Al Gore sound like Viscount Monckton.Can't wait to see them explain Australia's white summer.
It just turned to winter today here in the United States. We in the northeast have been freezing since at least Thanksgiving. I can't wait for spring. Just hope it warms up a bit by then.
Update: Submitted for further amusement.
Climategate: A Veteran Meteorologist Exposes the Global Warming Scam
02 April 2009
Rise of sea levels is 'the greatest lie ever told'
Rise of sea levels is 'the greatest lie ever told'
The uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story, writes Christopher Booker.
Christopher Booker, 28 Mar 2009
If one thing more than any other is used to justify proposals that the world must spend tens of trillions of dollars on combating global warming, it is the belief that we face a disastrous rise in sea levels. The Antarctic and Greenland ice caps will melt, we are told, warming oceans will expand, and the result will be catastrophe.
Although the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) only predicts a sea level rise of 59cm (17 inches) by 2100, Al Gore in his Oscar-winning film An Inconvenient Truth went much further, talking of 20 feet, and showing computer graphics of cities such as Shanghai and San Francisco half under water. We all know the graphic showing central London in similar plight. As for tiny island nations such as the Maldives and Tuvalu, as Prince Charles likes to tell us and the Archbishop of Canterbury was again parroting last week, they are due to vanish.
But if there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change. And the uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story.
Despite fluctuations down as well as up, "the sea is not rising," he says. "It hasn't risen in 50 years." If there is any rise this century it will "not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm". And quite apart from examining the hard evidence, he says, the elementary laws of physics (latent heat needed to melt ice) tell us that the apocalypse conjured up by Al Gore and Co could not possibly come about.
The reason why Dr Mörner, formerly a Stockholm professor, is so certain that these claims about sea level rise are 100 per cent wrong is that they are all based on computer model predictions, whereas his findings are based on "going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world".
When running the International Commission on Sea Level Change, he launched a special project on the Maldives, whose leaders have for 20 years been calling for vast sums of international aid to stave off disaster. Six times he and his expert team visited the islands, to confirm that the sea has not risen for half a century. Before announcing his findings, he offered to show the inhabitants a film explaining why they had nothing to worry about. The government refused to let it be shown.
Similarly in Tuvalu, where local leaders have been calling for the inhabitants to be evacuated for 20 years, the sea has if anything dropped in recent decades. The only evidence the scaremongers can cite is based on the fact that extracting groundwater for pineapple growing has allowed seawater to seep in to replace it. Meanwhile, Venice has been sinking rather than the Adriatic rising, says Dr Mörner.
One of his most shocking discoveries was why the IPCC has been able to show sea levels rising by 2.3mm a year. Until 2003, even its own satellite-based evidence showed no upward trend. But suddenly the graph tilted upwards because the IPCC's favoured experts had drawn on the finding of a single tide-gauge in Hong Kong harbour showing a 2.3mm rise. The entire global sea-level projection was then adjusted upwards by a "corrective factor" of 2.3mm, because, as the IPCC scientists admitted, they "needed to show a trend".
When I spoke to Dr Mörner last week, he expressed his continuing dismay at how the IPCC has fed the scare on this crucial issue. When asked to act as an "expert reviewer" on the IPCC's last two reports, he was "astonished to find that not one of their 22 contributing authors on sea levels was a sea level specialist: not one". Yet the results of all this "deliberate ignorance" and reliance on rigged computer models have become the most powerful single driver of the entire warmist hysteria.
•For more information, see Dr Mörner on YouTube (Google Mörner, Maldives and YouTube); or read on the net his 2007 EIR interview "Claim that sea level is rising is a total fraud"; or email him – morner@pog.nu – to buy a copy of his booklet 'The Greatest Lie Ever Told'
Fined, frozen and now jailed
The Marine Fisheries Agency was certainly onto a winner when it enlisted the aid of the Assets Recovery Agency in its ruthless war against our fishermen. In December 2007 Charles McBride and his son Charles, from Kilkeel in Northern Ireland, were fined £385,000 for under-declaring catches of whitefish and prawns in the Irish Sea, threatening the loss of their homes and boat. But the Assets Recovery Agency, using powers designed to recover money from drug dealers, also froze all their assets. To pay the fines, the McBrides tried to borrow against their assets. Now, for this effort to pay the fines, Liverpool Crown Court has sentenced the two men to two and three months in gaol for “contempt of court”.
Blown away
The Climate Change Secretary, Ed Miliband, timed his jibe impeccably last week when he said that opposing wind farms is as “socially unacceptable” as “not wearing a seatbelt”. Britain’s largest windfarm companies are pulling out of wind as fast as they can. Despite 100 per cent subsidies, the credit crunch and technical problems spell an end to Gordon Brown’s £100 billion dream of meeting our EU target to derive 35 per cent of our electricity from “renewables” by 2020.
Meanwhile the Government gives the go-ahead for three new 1,000 megawatt gas-fired power stations in Wales. Each of them will generate more than the combined average output (700 megawatts) of all the 2,400 wind turbines so far built. The days of the “great wind fantasy” will soon be over.
14 July 2008
Bush Finally Lifting Executive Ban on Offshore Oil Drilling
Unfortunately for us stuck paying $4.00+ per gallon for Gas, Congress still needs to repeal the Moratorium on Offshore Oil drilling as well. Unlikely to happen with the Democrats in Control of Congress. They are still beholden to the Sierra Club and other environmental groups vehemently opposed to offshore oil drilling, even though they can't point to a single instance of an Oil rig destroying a beach or the other nonsense that they spout about environmental damage.
"There is no excuse for delay," the president said in a last month in a Rose Garden statement.
"In the short run, the American economy will continue to rely largely on oil, and that means we need to increase supply here at home," Bush said, adding that there is no more pressing issue for many Americans than gas prices.
Experts have gone from saying it would take 10 years to 3 years before we see any oil, once all the Moratoriums are lifted, but only time will tell who will be proven correct. One thing is for sure, if we do nothing, prices will continue to spiral upwards. Doubts on Global Warming, shouldn't stop us from sourcing our Oil from the Middle East to sourcing it from ourselves.
One thing is for sure, unless someone puts pressure on Congressman David Obey to re-open the Appropriations Process, we definitely won't see any progress on this issue.
Maybe now is the time to start a fresh round of Operation Drill Bit, to remind Congress that we're still overpaying for Gas.
Bush Administration Puts Off Greenhouse Gas Regulation
Here's the text:
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Environmentalists are seething after the administration of US President George W. Bush delayed any decision on regulating greenhouse gases, likely leaving any substantive action to his successor.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a 588-page report Friday that cites "the complexity and magnitude" of the issue and calls for 120 days of public comment.
The decision follows a Supreme Court ruling ordering the EPA last year to devise ways to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act.
"The Bush administration's refusal to respond to the Supreme Court and do something about global warming is not just illegal, it is grossly immoral," said Danielle Fugere of Friends of the Earth, an environmental group.
"President Bush's inaction in the face of this crisis is one of the greatest failures of leadership in presidential history," she said in a statement.
The EPA said there were doubts whether "greenhouse gases could be effectively controlled under the Clean Air Act."
EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson wrote that regulating greenhouse gases under any portion of the act "could result in an unprecedented expansion of EPA authority that would have a profound effect on virtually every sector of the economy and touch every household in the land."
David Bookbinder, the climate counsel for the Sierra Club environmental group, said the EPA's decision underscores Johnson's "utter lack of credibility."
"The American public, Congress, world leaders, and even career government officials are counting down the days until this administration leaves town and a new president undoes the damage done by President Bush and makes up for nearly a decade of lost time -- time we didn't have to waste in the first place," Bookbinder said in a statement.
The EPA decision came after Bush agreed during the Group of Eight industrialized nations meeting in Japan this week to cut carbon emissions blamed for global warming by at least half by 2050. It was the strongest language yet signed by the US leader.
The Bush administration has fiercely opposed any imposition of binding emissions limits on the nation's industry and has refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol on reducing greenhouse gas blamed for global warming. (Though in all honesty Clinton signed it, but never presented it to congress).
But the Supreme Court ruled in April 2007 that the EPA must consider greenhouse gases as pollutants and deal with them.
The ruling came in response to legal action undertaken by Massachusetts and a dozen other states and environmental groups that went to court to determine whether the agency had the authority to regulate greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide emissions.
Environmentalists have alleged that since Bush came to office in 2001 his administration has ignored and tried to hide looming evidence of global warming and the key role of human activity in climate change.
At a hearing in November 2006, Massachusetts argued that it risked losing more than 4.5 meters (15 feet) of land all along its coastline if the sea level should rise by 30 centimeters (one foot).
But the Bush administration, backed by nine states and several auto manufacturers, urged the court not to intervene, arguing that if the situation was so dire it could not be solved by a simple legal decision.
It further argued that reducing emissions from new US motor vehicles would have only a minor effect on global climate change.
While the court's decision is unlikely to change US policy, it has ramifications on several other ongoing issues, such as the agency's refusal to regulate emissions from electricity plants which produce some 40 percent of US carbon dioxide emissions. Motor vehicles are responsible for just 20 percent.
12 July 2008
Global Warming Has Officially Ended
The Space and Science Research Center Issues A Formal Declaration:
Global Warming Has Ended – The Next Climate Change to A Pronounced Cold Era Has Begun.
In a news conference held in Orlando, Florida, Mr. John L. Casey, Director of the Space and Science Research Center, issued a landmark declaration on climate change.
“After an exhaustive review of a substantial body of climate research, and in conjunction with the obvious and compelling new evidence that exists, it is time that the world community acknowledges that the Earth has begun its next climate change. In an opinion echoed by many scientists around the world, the Space and Science Research Center (SSRC), today declares that the world’s climate warming of the past decades has now come to an end. A new climate era has already started that is bringing predominantly colder global temperatures for many years into the future. In some years this new climate will create dangerously cold weather with significant ill-effects world wide. Global warming is over – a new cold climate has begun.”
According to Mr. Casey, who spoke to print and TV media representatives today, this next cold era is coming about as a result of the reversal of the 206 year cycle of the sun which he independently discovered and announced in May of 2007.
Casey amplified the declaration by adding, “Though the SSRC first announced a prediction of the coming new climate era to the US government and media in early 2007, the formal declaration has been held off pending actual events that validate the previously forecast new cold period. We now have unmistakable signs of accelerating decline in global temperatures and growing glacial ice, coupled with the dramatic if not startling changes in the sun’s surface including unusually low and slow sunspot activity. These signs, in conjunction with the research center’s ‘relational cycle theory ” or “RC Theory” of climate change which predicted these changes, now leaves no doubt that the process has already been initiated. It is also unstoppable. Our world is rapidly cooling. Even though we still may have isolated warm temperature records, the global trend to a colder era is now irreversible.”
As to whether others agree with his declaration, Casey congratulated the many other scientists around the world who had done “many years of outstanding research” which he used to corroborate his own research after he first found these climate-driving solar cycles and formulated the RC Theory. In the news conference he listed and praised more than a dozen other scientists, most in foreign countries, who had come to the same prediction on the Earth’s climate shift to a cold era.
In the one hour presentation, Casey detailed the solar activity cycles that have been driving the Earth’s climate for the past 1,200 years. He condemned the climate change confusion and alarmism which has accompanied seven separate periods over the past 100 years, where scientists and the media flip-flopped on reporting that the Earth was either entering a new ‘ice age’ or headed for a global meltdown where melting glacial ice would swamp the planet’s coastal cities.
Much of the presentation focused on the positive and negative effects the next climate change will have on the State of Florida, the nation and the world.
Some effects of the coming cold climate on NASA’s space program were highlighted including an extended “quiet period’ produced by reduced solar activity. Casey believes this cold climate era will be the best time since the space program began to conduct human spaceflight. Advises Casey, “With the sun going into what I call “solar hibernation,” the harmful effects of solar radiation on astronauts in space will be minimized.”
Regarding the impacts of the next cold climate period on hurricanes, Casey summarized by saying “I would not be surprised to see the lowest number and least intense storms ever recorded in the US during this cold epoch, for obvious reasons. We should not forget however, the buildup along coastlines and an ever increasing population may continue to make Florida’s hurricanes potentially more destructive in the future, regardless of the number we have.”
On the subject of cold climate effects on agriculture, Casey was not optimistic. “I can see,” he added, “just like the last time this 206 year cycle brought cold, that there will be substantial damage to the world’s agricultural systems. This time however we will have eight billion mouths to feed during the worst years around 2031 compared to previously when we had only one billion. Yet even then, many died from the combined effects of bitter cold and lack of food.”
In his concluding remarks, Casey called on all leaders to immediately move from the past global warming planning to prepare for the already started change to a cold climate.
He ended with, “Now that the new cold climate has begun to arrive, we must immediately start the preparation, the adaptation process. At least because of the RC Theory we now have some advance warning. No longer do we need to wonder what the Earth’s next climate changes will be two or three generations out. But we must nonetheless be ready to adjust with our now more predictable solar cycles that are the primary determinants of climate on Earth.”
07 July 2008
Nasa Backtracks on 1998 Warmest Year Claim
Today, there are even articles like this one, claiming that it's not true, they were never Ostracized, but I know what I remember, and I remember seeing a conference on TV with Dr. Marshall speaking and the Audience erupting in Laughter. I remember my Doctor Laughing about it, when I pointed out the research on this, and him saying, that's just foolishness.
Warren and Marshall first wrote about this in 1981, and it wasn't until 17 years later that their conclusions finally became main stream. In 2005, they won a Nobel in Medicine for their discovery. Today we have Prilosec to help us combat this problem, thanks to their pioneering work.
I tell you about this to show you the lengths that the Scientific Community takes on defending the "Status Quo". Just like any other human organization, no one wants to admit that they are mistaken and no one wants to admit that someone else might be right.
Now we have the great consensus of Global Warming and NASA backtracking on claims that 1998 was the warmest year on record.
First let me tell you what I find disturbing on this. This story has been out since August of 2007,Continued after our sponsor almost a year, and you don't hear a peep from CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, the Weather Channel or the granddaddy of News Monopolies, the Associated Press. The second thing that I find disturbing is how the Global Warming Alarmists are always talking about the fact that the studies on Anthropogenic Global Warming have all been peer reviewed for errors and if there was a problem, one of the thousands upon thousands of scientists would find and catch any errors. .. Continued after our Sponsor...
It took a School Boy to catch the Errors. After he found the errors in NASA's data, they were forced to restate their claims. And what did they have to restate?
The hottest year on record is 1934, not 1998
The third hottest year on record was 1921, not 2006
Three of the five hottest years on record occurred before 1940
6 of the top 10 hottest years occurred in the first half of the last century.
going to be revised? These charts have been rendered meaningless without the new data, yet every single Global Warming Alarmist site, still has these, as if they're still relevant!The biggest problem with the media in general is that they think we're stupid. They think we don't know about the Medieval Warming Period and how it was actually warmer back then then it is today, or so says Harvard, but hey, who the heck are those right wing wackos right?
The big networks think that we don't know about the Little Ice age, and how the earth started warming, naturally, without any interference from us, so that by the end of the 1700's it was pretty much over. But it didn't stop warming there.
The Thames River used to freeze over every few years. It froze in 1408, 1435, 1506, 1514, 1537, 1565, 1595, 1608, 1621, 1635, 1649, 1655, 1663, 1666, 1677, 1684, 1695, 1709, 1716, 1740, 1768, 1776, 1785, 1788, 1795, and finally, the very last time was in 1814. Obviously, the earth started warming too much for it to freeze over after 1814. We also know that the earth still didn't stop warming then either, because the Hudson in N.Y. continued to Freeze up every year from 1855 all the way through to 1875 obviously, it's too warm today for that to happen, so the Hudson no longer freezes, yet our industrial revolution didn't start in earnest until the 1930's.
The whole point of this story that we have a story of Global Warming that is based on supposed facts that no longer exist. Will the scientific community wait 17 years to act on this new data, just as the Medical community waited because they didn't want to believe in the data at hand? Has Man Made Global Warming become such a "Religion" that no amount of facts can dislodge it from our media outlets? When will we start seeing the new "Revised" charts on all the Networks Blogs and so on?
With our policies on Food, Oil, Energy and a myriad of other decisions being based upon Global Warming, we should be looking at every aspect of this issue very carefully and very closely before we act.
This video seems even more relevant now that NASA has revised it's data.
13 June 2008
Global Warming .... Make that Cooling
The Global Warming Alarmist, are all saying that Carbon output is causing Global Warming, and yet in the past 10 years, worldwide Carbon emissions keep rising, as a matter of fact, China alone has added 2 Coal Fired Power plants every single week over the past decade, and that doesn't even include their Oil burning and Gas burning ones that they've added. As a matter of fact, they don't even apply the same stringent environmental controls to their plants that the U.S.A. uses, so their pollution output is significantly higher than the same plants built in the U.S. And yet, we still have had a global cooling trend in the past couple of years. What gives? Maybe this is the reason why the World Bank is trying to siphon off dollars meant to reduce Carbon output, because they know that it really doesn't make and difference and this is all about money.
In the mean time, food prices are still going through the roof, all around the world the poor are the hardest hit. We're doing this supposedly to reduce Carbon output because, we're told it causes Global warming? Clearly, this is not the case. Congress has done nothing but block efforts to increase Oil and Gas production and we're paying through the nose, all for what? To reduce Carbon Output to save the world? Carbon has gone up by MASSIVE amounts, and yet the planet is still cooling!
I've said it before Congress needs to show us they care, but it seems that they're too beholden to the special interest groups, like the Sierra Club and others, to look at straight up FACTS. This information comes from a the government agency that monitors the climate, not some right wing conspiracy group, so what is the problem?
We need to make it clear to congress that we mean business. They need to start Drilling, NOW. We need those Shale to Oil converters running NOW. We need the Coal to Oil Gasification NOW. And if we don't get it, they will be out of a job (right along with the rest of us, since we won't be able to afford to gas it takes to go to work).
One of the best ways to let congress know is by participating in Operation Drill Bit.