Global Warming Hoax Update

Just more of that good, old global warming climate change climate disruption heading towards the midwest:

Following several weeks of economic data that has been, despite erroneous expectations of a Fed rate hike, one major disappointment after another including regional Fed reports, housing data, manufacturing surveys, construction spending, and durable goods data, the US economy is about to get the slowdown scapegoat it so desperately needs: according to Weather.com, following a brief overnight respite from cold temperatures, entering the first full week of January, both the Midwest and the East will see a plunge to the coldest temperatures of the season. This blast of cold temperatures will be different than the Arctic chill that ended 2014, which was mainly confined to the northern tier. This time the frigid air will push farther south and east.

Only thing I can figure is that Al Gore must be making a speaking tour through the area – but, as Zero Hedge notes, this is going to cause sighs of relief through our Economist and Banker classes…that it is cold in January will be used to explain away the poor 1st quarter GDP data we’re going to get in April (and, as usual, this exceptionally cold spell will be used to “prove” global warming…because if we weren’t warming, you see, we wouldn’t get weather that is unusually cold). The thing about our modern system is that it is so hopelessly corrupt that both global warming and fake-money economies can be kept going for quite a while…

Global Warming Hoax Update

Interesting:

Critics of those who claim that man-made global warming is a serious threat to the planet and settled science frequently point to the fickleness of scientists on the issue, noting that in the 60s and 70s scientists were warning of just the opposite. It now appears the critic’s claims may have merit as a new consensus is beginning to once again return to the global cooling model…

Of course, this won’t stop our liberals – they’ll just say  its “climate change” and that it’s still all the fault of humans, especially Americans.

The bottom line of all this, however, is what I’ve been saying for years:  we don’t know what is exactly happening with the climate because our data are insufficient; if the world is warming (or, as it turns out, cooling) we simply do not know the primary culprit; finally, if it is changing and even if it is our fault, there’s not much we can do to stop it at this point so we’re just going to have to adapt to changing conditions…as life on this Earth has done again and again over the ages.

The reason I’ve called it a hoax is not because it is impossible for our climate to be changing, but because a hoax is a con…and people are trying to con us out of or wealth and our liberty.  This is, bottom line, a mere attempt by self-selected “leaders” to take charge of all aspects of our lives…and for these leaders to live very well while dictating to the rest of us.  It is just one in a very, very long line of scams.

$1 Billion per day?

There is big money to be made in “Global Warming” errr… “Global Climate Change”.  If Al Gore getting rich off this scam wasn’t a big enough clue…  no wonder “consensus” is acceptable scientific “proof” when big bucks can be made.

http://www.euractiv.com/development-policy/global-climate-investment-flatli-news-531212

The lie that 90% of scientists agree that man made climate change is real has been thoroughly debunked due to their severely flawed “peer review” process…..

IPCC Admits Its Past Reports Were Junk

The InterAcademy Council (IAC) conducted an independent review of the processes and procedures of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Based on this review, the IAC issued a report with recommended measures and actions to strengthen IPCC’s processes and procedures so as to be better able to respond to future challenges and ensure the ongoing quality of its reports.IAC findings:

The IAC reported that IPCC lead authors fail to give “due consideration … to properly documented alternative views” (p. 20), fail to “provide detailed written responses to the most significant review issues identified by the Review Editors” (p. 21), and are not “consider[ing] review comments carefully and document[ing] their responses” (p. 22).

In plain English: the IPCC reports are NOT PEER-REVIEWED.

The IAC found that “the IPCC has no formal process or criteria for selecting authors” and “the selection criteria seemed arbitrary to many respondents” (p. 18). Government officials appoint scientists from their countries and “do not always nominate the best scientists from among those who volunteer, either because they do not know who these scientists are or because political considerations are given more weight than scientific qualifications” (p. 18).

Again in plain English: authors are selected from a “club” of scientists and nonscientists who agree with the alarmist perspective favored by politicians.

The rewriting of the Summary for Policy Makers by politicians and environmental activists — a problem called out by global warming realists for many years, but with little apparent notice by the media or policymakers — was plainly admitted, perhaps for the first time by an organization in the “mainstream” of alarmist climate change thinking. “[M]any were concerned that reinterpretations of the assessment’s findings, suggested in the final Plenary, might BE POLITICALLY MOTIVATED,” the IAC auditors wrote. The scientists they interviewed commonly found the Synthesis Report “TOO POLITICAL” (p. 25).

Really? Too political? We were told by everyone — environmentalists, reporters, politicians, even celebrities — that the IPCC reports were science, not politics. Now we are told that even the scientists involved in writing the reports — remember, they are all true believers in man-made global warming themselves — felt the summaries were “too political.”

Here is how the IAC described how the IPCC arrives at the “consensus of scientists”:

Plenary sessions to approve a Summary for Policy Makers last for several days and commonly end with an all-night meeting. Thus, the individuals with the most endurance or the countries that have large delegations can end up having the most influence on the report (p. 25).

How can such a process possibly be said to capture or represent the “true consensus of scientists”?

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/ipcc_admits_its_past_reports_were_junk.html#ixzz20mLGz6ss

As the GOD_FATHER OF GLOBAL WARMING LOVELOCK HAS ACCURATELY STATED the DOOM AND GLOOM PREDICTIONS WERE “INNACURATE” and the SCIENCE was far from “SETTLED”. It is factual that a true PEER-REVIEW of IPCC’s process found that their process was flawed, politically motivated. Forced consensus and its conclusions are complete crap.

Uh Oh! Contrary to Climate Models Arctic Ice Grows 60% in a Year

Again, the prevailing climate models are proven faulty, inaccurate and fraudulent by NASA and NOAA.

http://personalliberty.com/2011/07/29/nasa-data-proves-global-warming-computer-models-wrong-29347/
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/noaa-proves-that-climate-models-are-wrong/

To the chagrin of climate change alarmists (formerly know as global warming alarmists and global cooling alarmists) NASA data shows that far less heat is trapped by earth’s increased CO2 laden atmosphere. (Even AlGore’s own chart showed that temperature increases PRECEEDED CO2 concentration increases by 800 years).

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/NASA-Global-Warming-Alarmists/2011/07/28/id/405200

Now after seeing dozens of pictures and videos (by very discriminating camera persons) of Polar Bears stranded on smaller and smaller ice flows (again pictures were misleading), it seams, that during one of the highest concentrations of atmospheric CO2 and contrary to the climate models, arctic ice has increased by 60% in one year!  The pictures speak for themselves.

The current models, which are supposedly based on “settled” and “peer reviewed” science, that the alarmists take as gospel have yet to predict any of the contrary physical evidence that we have seen.  This goes to show anyone with an open mind, who avoids the zealotry of the left that treats Global Climate Change as their religion, can see that the science is far from settled and that consensus does not a solid conclusion make.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/Global-cooling-Arctic-ice-caps-grows-60-global-warming-predictions.html

Uh oh, what is an global warming…errrr… climate change alarmist to do?

Global Warming Update

A while back, Rusty, one of our resident progressives and I, debated the global warming issue specifically as it related to human involvement. I cited several sources wherein it was noted that temperatures had leveled off over the last decade despite continual measurable  increases in carbon emissions. Well this fact has even now caught the attention of the “quite liberal” Gray Lady:

The rise in the surface temperature of earth has been markedly slower over the last 15 years than in the 20 years before that. And that lull in warming has occurred even as greenhouse gases have accumulated in the atmosphere at a record pace.

Amazingly, despite the fact that previous claims of rising temperatures as a result of carbon emissions by global warming alarmists have now been proven false, the movement to control personal activity continues. And dovetailing into Mark’s previous thread, the global warming issue, or climate change issue, or whatever it is called today, IS just another mechanism for control over the population sought by governments. And even more harming to America is the fact that this cause has become global, and many world governments are hoping to legislate our activity and redistribute our wealth in the name of climate change. Restricting our freedoms? You’re damn right, and those freedoms are being assaulted on many different fronts. The worst enemy to an ever expanding and controlling government is an educated and armed populace, unfortunately the “educated” part of that equation has waned considerably over the last few decades, and the “armed” part of that equation is currently under attack. Thomas Jefferson once said that a “democracy requires eternal vigilance”, and for those of us who hope to keep liberty in tact, we had better start stepping up to the plate.

Global Warming Hoax Update

From The Hindu:

Plummeting mercury, coupled with thick fog cover, threw normal life out of gear in the entire North India on Monday, with 24 more people succumbing to the cold wave in various parts of the region.

While 20 more persons died in Uttar Pradesh, four persons lost their lives in Uttarakhand, officials said.

Delhi continued to shiver as mercury was below normal in the city by five notches to settle at 2.4 degrees, even as it rose from yesterday’s 1.9 degrees Celsius.

The maximum temperature too dipped to seven degrees below normal to settle at 13.4 degrees Celsius…

To translate from the bizarre celsius scale those weirdo foreigners use, 1.9 degrees celsius is approximately 35 degrees fahrenheit.  That is pretty darn cold for a subtropical area of the world.  Oh, I know – our liberals will jump in and say, “that’s just weather!”.  Don’t you know the difference?  Sure do:  “weather” is anything which undercuts global warming.  Anything which supports global warming is “settled science”.  I do know the drill.

But if it is just “weather” then it seems to be happening all over the world all at the time time.  This report is from India…but waaaaay the heck away from India up in Alaska, latest reports indicate that Alaska is heading in to an ice age.  Meanwhile, there seems to be no evidence of a warming globe for the past 15 years...

UPDATE:  It gets worse for you liberals.  The only nation which has cut its carbon emissions 12% from its 2007 peak?  The United States.  How did we do it?  By fracking our way in to massively increased natural gas supplies.  Yes, liberals:  Big Oil has cut US greenhouse emissions…

Global Warming Catastrophe

It’s been quite a while since we’ve had a Global Warming update, and it appears that we failed to act soon enough, and now we’re all going to drown.

There are no comparisons to be made. This is not like war or plague or a stockmarket crash. We are ill-equipped, historically and psychologically, to understand it, which is one of the reasons why so many refuse to accept that it is happening.

What we are seeing, here and now, is the transformation of the atmospheric physics of this planet. Three weeks before the likely minimum, the melting of Arctic sea ice has already broken the record set in 2007. The daily rate of loss is now 50% higher than it was that year. The daily sense of loss – of the world we loved and knew – cannot be quantified so easily.

The Arctic has been warming roughly twice as quickly as the rest of the northern hemisphere. This is partly because climate breakdown there is self-perpetuating. As the ice melts, for example, exposing the darker sea beneath, heat that would previously have been reflected back into space is absorbed.

This great dissolution, of ice and certainties, is happening so much faster than most climate scientists predicted that one of them reports: “It feels as if everything I’ve learned has become obsolete.” In its last assessment, published in 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change noted that “in some projections, Arctic late-summer sea ice disappears almost entirely by the latter part of the 21st century”. These were the most extreme forecasts in the panel’s range. Some scientists now forecast that the disappearance of Arctic sea-ice in late summer could occur in this decade or the next.

As I’ve warned repeatedly, but to little effect, the IPCC’s assessments tend to be conservative. This is unsurprising when you see how many people have to approve them before they are published. There have been a few occasions – such as its estimate of the speed at which glaciers would be lost in the Himalayas – on which the panel has overstated the case. But it looks as if these will be greatly outnumbered by the occasions on which the panel has understated it.

The melting disperses another belief: that the temperate parts of the world – where most of the rich nations are located – will be hit last and least, while the poorer nations will be hit first and worst. New knowledge of the way in which the destruction of the Arctic sea ice affects northern Europe and North America suggests that this is no longer true. A paper published earlier this year in Geophysical Research Letters shows that Arctic warming is likely to be responsible for the extremes now hammering the once-temperate nations.

I’m really sorry we didn’t listen to our obviously wiser Liberals while we still had time to do something.  And even though it’s probably too late, I’d be interested in hearing from our resident Progressives, after the well-deserved I-told ya-so’s, just exactly what we should or could have done to avoid the impending climate Armageddon.  A big mea culpa is all I have to offer at this point.  I don’t even think we need to bother with the election in November.  I mean, what does it matter in the overall scheme of things?