WUWT Ice Survey Shows Thickening Arctic Ice

By Steven Goddard via Watts Up With That?

The WUWT Arctic Ice Thickness Survey has been conducted from the comfort of a warm living room over the last half hour, without sponsors, excessive CO2 emissions or hypothermia. The data is collected from the US military web site http://imb.crrel.usace.army.mil. All of the active military buoys show significant thickening ice over the past six months to a year, as seen below.
Location of military buoys
Location of Catlin team relative to buoy 2008D and the North Pole Buoy 2008B has thickened by more than half a metre since last autumn, and is more than 3 metres thick.

2008C also shows thickening by more than half a metre since last autumn, and is nearly 4 metres thick.
2008D has not been updated since early February, but showed thickening and is 3.5 metres thick. It is close to the Catlin team position. 2007J has thickened more than half a metre, and is nearly 4 metres thick.
2006C has thickened by nearly a full metre over the past year, and is more than 3 metres thick UPDATE: The military site also has graphs which are supposed to show depth. It appears that many of these are broken, which is why I used the more reliable temperature graphs. The depth at which the ice drops below the freezing point of seawater (-2C) is of course the bottom of the ice. You can’t have water in a liquid state below it’s freezing point. Some of the buoys have reliable depth data, and they correspond closely to the temperature data – for example 2007J which shows 400cm for both.
http://imb.crrel.usace.army.mil/buoy_plots/ice2007J.gif
http://imbcrrel.usace.army.mil/buoy_plots/2007J.gif

COMMON SENSE ENERGY

An email from geophysicist Norm Kalmanovitch [kalhnd@shaw.ca]

With no new coal fired power plants constructed in the USA since the hysteria over global warming started, the only competition for oil was wind power and the price of a barrel of oil skyrocketed to $147/bbl until the economic collapse sent the price down to $34/bbl.

In China, which was politically excluded from the Kyoto Protocol, coal fired power plants were being constructed at a rate of two a week, and unlike the power plants in the USA which capture virtually all of the pollutants, (CO2 is not a pollutant) these plants in China have no such pollution controls making the power even cheaper. (But create a serious pollution problem)

The net effect of this is that China was powering its economy at less than 2cents/kWh while the USA was attempting to compete with power costs at least five times greater because of global warming advocacy.

Add to this the high cost of oil that caused a doubling of transportation costs in two years, and with the financial institutions and investment houses operating without any fiscal constraints on either mortgages or market speculations; you have all the makings for economic collapse.

Perhaps the most insidious aspect of “global warming advocacy energy initiatives” is biofuels, and the effect that this had on food prices that were already high because of the increased transportation costs. With high oil prices, crops that produced the feedstock for biofuels became highly lucrative especially when government incentives were given. Biofuel crops were now unfairly competing with basic food staple crops, doubling the cost of food and quite literally starving the poor who can no longer afford these basic food staples.

Simply put, the economy is primarily controlled by the financial institutions and the markets, but it is powered by energy, and unless energy is bailed out, the trillion dollar bailouts of the economy will not succeed in reversing the economic decline.

Unlike the financial bailouts, there is no cost to the taxpayer to bail out energy; but there is a great political cost that none of the leaders seem to be willing to pay. All that has to be done is to demand that the IPCC make public the facts that there has been no global warming for over a decade, that the world has been cooling since 2002, and all this has occurred while CO2 emissions continue to rise demonstrating that there is no possible causal relationship between CO2 emissions and global temperature. For good measure the leaders can also demand that the IPCC “come clean” and admit there never actually was any evidence that supported the AGW hypothesis, and that all their publications were designed to convince the world of a non existent impending danger for the sole purpose of supporting their misguided political agenda.

This is all that remains to be done to fix the economy of the USA, which will fix the rest of the world’s economies that are ultimately affected by the state of the US economy. Unfortunately politicians have, by political necessity, committed their political futures to pursuing the initiatives of the IPCC, and in order not to jeopardize their positions, they are willing to spend taxpayers money on financial bailouts, but are afraid and unwilling to confront the IPCC even though it won’t cost the taxpayer anything and will help the lower income citizens who have been most seriously affected by this crumbling economy.

The false statements of the IPCC are the only rational for the entire vilification of CO2, so if the IPCC is forced to admit that there is no physical basis for reducing CO2, all of the ridiculous and costly CO2 initiatives can stop being subsidized, and this money put into clean coal (in the true sense of the word and not the environmentalist’s bastardized version) and nuclear power developments that will reduce the cost of power and give industry a fighting chance.

The economy cannot support the wildly fluctuating oil price of the last two years and there is also a simple way around this problem if the IPCC is relegated to oblivion. In the past year, the USA consumed 19.485million barrels of oil per day (mmbbls/d) but produced only 8.508mmbbls/d; importing the deficit of 10.977mmbbls/d at rates that jumped between $147/bbl down to $34/bbl. Even as the economy deteriorates, the oil price is rising from the low of $34/bbl to over $52/bbl today, because the OPEC oil cartel is cutting back production to raise the price. This $18/bbl increase in the price of oil equates to an additional $4.6billion leaving the economy each month, because an outside cartel is controlling the price.

The economies of Canada and Mexico are so intertwined with that of the USA that the portion of this money that comes from Canadian and Mexican oil imports, stays within the North American economy. Collectively North America consumed 23.975million barrels of oil per day, but produced 15.058million barrels of oil per day. This leaves a deficit of 8.917mmbbls/d.

There is enough potential production in the Canadian Oil Sands, the Bakkan formation, and “oil from coal” production, coupled with intelligent use of oil (i.e. conservation) to completely remove this deficit; but none of these oil producing initiatives can be undertaken unless there is a long term stable oil price of around $60/bbl. All that the USA has to do is to set a fixed North American Oil price of $60/bbl that is guaranteed for the long term future. This is the only way that the heavy capital investment for these projects can be undertaken. There is enough oil in these three reserves to keep North America oil independent for at least the next century by which time someone will have figured out how to harness energy from nuclear fusion making oil irrelevant as an energy source.

As well, this initiative does not cost the taxpayer anything; but it goes against the dictates of the environmentalists because these resources produce CO2, and even though there is no actual increase in fossil fuel usage, facilities such as the Canadian Oil Sands have already been made environmental targets and the politicians are unwilling to risk political futures upsetting environmentalists if they undertake these common sense energy initiatives.

It is not a coincidence that when the Chinese overtook the USA in CO2 emissions in 2006, that the economy of China also increased dramatically while the US economy was starting to stagnate because of the limited and costly energy supply.

Renewables are listed as “wood, black liquor, other wood waste, municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agricultural by products, other biomass, geothermal, solar thermal, photovoltaic, and wind” and collectively these produced 2.21% of the US electrical power in 1997. (The year Kyoto was signed) Coal produced 52.83% of the electricity in 1997.

After all the rhetoric and cost and ten years of no global warming, by 2008 these renewables were increased to supplying 2.74% of the power; coal was reduced to supplying 48.61% of the power, and the difference was made up with natural gas which also is a fossil fuel and produces CO2.

In the last decade the cost of power went up and the emissions increased by 24%, and now instead of getting rid of this environmentalist blight on the economy, the government now wants to tax the poor even further with carbon taxes and cripple the economy by replacing cheap energy with energy that costs five times as much; all because they are more afraid of the environmentalists than the economic collapse that this will cause.

How many more years of global cooling with increased CO2 emissions will it take before common sense kicks in and the false doctrine of the IPCC is exposed? Tomorrow would not be soon enough!!

Source

The Vote that (may have) Changed the World

By Raymond Richman and Howard Richman, American Thinker

In a procedural vote on April 1, 2009, 26 Democratic Senators joined all of the Republicans in defeating, for now, a climate change bill that would have allowed fast-tracking of President Obama’s cap-and-tax proposal so that it could be passed as part of the current Federal budget. (Click here to see how your Senator voted.) Senator Lamar Alexander called this “the biggest vote of the year.” The bill that would have passed would probably have resembled the Waxman-Markey discussion draft of The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, a bill proposal designed to combat global warming by encouraging the use of “renewable” energy sources (nuclear energy providers need not apply). So it is possible to look closely at the Waxman-Markey draft to see what the Senate rejected. The draft is full of subsidies, while at the same time providing that electric utilities impose energy and efficiency standards on their customers to achieve one percent reduction of carbon emissions in 2012 increasing to 15 percent in 2020. (If renewable energy is going to be so plentiful and cheap, why does it require tremendous subsidies and command and control methods to achieve its goals?) But the worst part of the bill by far is its plan to auction rights to emit carbon dioxide in order to fight global warming, as noted in the bill’s summary:

Global Warming Pollution Reduction Program. The draft establishes a market-based program for reducing global warming pollution from electric utilities, oil companies, large industrial sources, and other covered entities that collectively are responsible for 85% of U.S. global warming emissions. Under this program, covered entities must have tradable federal permits, called “allowances,” for each ton of pollution emitted into the atmosphere. Entities that emit less than 25,000 tons per year of CO2 equivalent are not covered by this program. The program reduces the number of available allowances issued each year to ensure that aggregate emissions from the covered entities are reduced by 3% below 2005 levels in 2012, 20% below 2005 levels in 2020, 42% below 2005 levels in 2030, and 83% below 2005 levels in 2050.

According to the Waxman-Markey draft, the bill “will create millions of new clean energy jobs, save consumers hundreds of billions of dollars in energy costs, enhance America’s energy independence, and cut global warming pollution.” None of this is true. This bill orders electric utilities to substitute expensive solar and wind power for inexpensive coal, oil, and natural gas. It would cause a loss of jobs in coal mining, oil drilling, and natural gas drilling. It would cost consumers higher prices for not only energy but for almost everything else they buy. As for enhancing America’s energy independence, a bigger and faster contribution would be made by permitting offshore oil drilling, by encouraging drilling in Alaska, or by overriding Senator Harry Reid’s opposition to developing a nuclear waste storage facility in Nevada. Environmentalists are willing to let the BRIC countries (Brazil, India and China) postpone for decades meeting environmental standards because doing so would stifle their growth, but they want us unilaterally to immediately cut back on using carbon fuels, falsely claiming this will help our economy. The worst effects of the bill would be upon United States competitiveness in international trade, thus chasing American manufacturing jobs to Brazil, India and China. In a new book just published by the Peterson Institute for International Economics, the authors pointed out that any climate bill would drive up the cost of American products, making them less competitive in U.S. and world markets, unless it includes border provisions, such as export subsidies and import duties. The draft does contain weak provisions to keep American jobs from moving overseas, but those provisions entirely depend upon bureaucratic discretion. Here is the relevant part of the summary:

Ensuring Domestic Competitiveness. To ensure that U.S. manufacturers are not put at a disadvantage relative to overseas competitors, the draft authorizes companies in certain industrial sectors to receive “rebates” to compensate for additional costs incurred under the program. Sectors that use large amounts of energy, and produce commodities that are traded globally, would be eligible for the rebates. If the President finds that the rebate provisions do not sufficiently correct competitive imbalances, the President is directed to establish a “border adjustment” program. Under that program, foreign manufacturers and importers would be required to pay for and hold special allowances to “cover” the carbon contained in U.S.-bound products.

Don’t expect much help for U.S. manufacturers from this provision. Rebates and border adjustments would violate WTO rules. Our leaders have complied, even while those WTO rules produced huge trade deficits, costing us about seven million good paying manufacturing jobs. Foreign governments continue to exploit huge holes in the WTO rules, as through currency manipulations, while the United States government does nothing. The chances of the United States government violating WTO rules in order to stand up for American industry are very low. The bill clearly imposes huge costs upon the American economy in a rush to combat global warming, but the earth is actually cooling at present. The bill’s supporters are ignoring an alternative to the carbon dioxide theory, cosmoclimatology, which holds that changes in cosmic ray influx cause global temperature changes. Cosmic rays cause ionization that forms low level clouds which reflect the sun’s heat back into space, resulting in lower temperatures. Sunspots fit into this theory because solar activity blocks out cosmic rays, leading to temporary periods of warming. For a recent summary of the sound evidence behind this theory, see Danish scientist Henrik Svensmark’s 2007 paper. Cosmoclimatology theory explains the extreme warmth of the second half of the 20th Century as resulting from unusually high solar activity, and the cooling period since 1998 as a result of reduced solar activity. Unlike the carbon dioxide theory, it explains the close correspondence between the earth’s greenhouse ages and ice ages with the movements of the solar system through the spiral arms of the galaxy. It even explains the fact that Antarctic temperatures show temperature trends opposite from those observed in the northern hemisphere. (The white Antarctic ice reflects more light back into space when there is no cloud cover, while the Northern hemisphere reflects more light back into space when there is cloud cover.) Cosmoclimatology is a fairly new branch of science. As scientists continue to gather data, they should be able to determine the amount of global warming that is left over for the carbon dioxide theory to explain. Meanwhile, with global temperatures declining as a result of lower sunspot activity, we may even be heading into a mini-ice age, like the one that occurred from 1645-1715, when sunspots were extremely scarce. With the earth cooling at present, the pressing question is not whether Washington saves the planet from global warming. The pressing question is whether Washington destroys the American economy. Thirty-one Democratic senators just voted to do so. The fact that 26 Democratic Senators crossed party lines to vote against quick passage of cap-and-tax is a very good sign for America’s economic future.

Source

Antarctic Sea Ice Up Over 43% Since 1980, Where Is The Media?

By GlobalWarmingHoax.com

Sea ice at Antarctica is up over 43% since 1980 and we hear nothing in the news, yet Arctic ice is down less than 7% and they’re all over it! We’ve been waiting for the main stream media to pick up on the increase of Antarctic ice but so far they’re been totally absent. Guess its doesn’t fit the plan.

From the National Snow and Ice Data Center, University of Colorado

Still no sign of the national media on the extraordinary growth of sea ice at the antarctic. They sure haven’t missed a chance to point out the relatively small loss of ice at the arctic. Did did it ever occur to them that perhaps there is a natural process at work that has shifted ice growth from one pole to the other? Do they not want to admit that there are things man doesn’t yet understand about how this planet works?

Remember that some of the “models” predicted increased antarctic ice, but they predicted increased “interior ice” due to increased snow fall. None of the models predicted increased sea ice around the antarctic. Yet that is what we have, and not just a little increase but a 43% increase since 1980!. This is highly significant yet hardly anyone in the main stream media (MSM) is talking about it.

Sea ice is much different than interior ice. Some of the models predicted increased ice over the interior of antarctic. If you’ve ever lived in the extreme cold temperature regions you already understand this. When it gets very cold the air become drier and it snows less, as the temperature warms towards freezing it actually snows more. Since the antarctic rarely even gets close to freezing its understandable that warming would cause more snow fall. Over time compacted snow would lead to more ice. But that is not what is happening here. We’re seeing a dramatic increase in “sea ice”, this ice is over the ocean. Sea ice is caused by colder temperatures, not by increased snow fall. An increase of 43% is highly significant, but we hear nothing from either the MSM or the scientific community. Especially compared to the out 6%-7% decrease at the arctic (this isn’t year over year, this is a 6% decline since 1980!).

Antarctic Sea Ice for March

              Extent                    Concentration
2009     5.0 million sq km            2.9 million sq km
1997     3.8 million sq km            2.2 million sq km
1980  3.5 million sq km            2.0 million sq km

This is an increase of 45% for ice concentration since 1980. This continues a long trend that has been noted here for several months..

Interior ice is also increasing but not due to warming as the models have predicted. According to NOAA GISS data winter temperatures in the antarctic have actually fallen by 1°F since 1957, with the coldest year being 2004. All the while global CO2 levels have gone up and the main stream media has been reporting near catastrophic warming conditions. They regularly show Antarctic sea ice shelves breaking apart, which is an entirely normal process (though they never tell you that part). The main stream media and certain segments of the scientific community truly must have no shame.

If you have doubts about the increase in ice you can run the numbers yourself at the National Snow and Ice Data Center’s website (part of the University of Colorado and funded by the National Science Foundation).

And if you want to read something really amusing take a gander at Michael Asher Blog about climate modelers trying to explain antarctic warming…. agh .. cooling….agh… warming it’s delightful.

Fighting the carbon scam is vitally important

By Justin Credible

Recently, I received a quick message from a dear friend of mine. The subject at hand was a curious question as to why I had a personal drive to voice my views on the CO2 scam, and more than likely, why I am investing the time and energy into online postings and obviously this website.

“re: CO2 fascination… was thinking…

I find too much attention on rebelling against something like this a choice that wastes our precious energy that could be put towards positive action in the world. Maybe helping someone:) I just think your keen insight and efforts could do some real good in the world. It hurts me to see such revelry in rebellious nature without some intention of bettering life. I am trying to see the point here… help?“

I’m going to be very detailed in my response to this, in hopes that it will help this person, a fantastic human being whom I have utmost respect for, to gain a clear understanding of my motives and hopefully avail an open mind to the big picture here. In fact, I thought it would make an excellent piece for publication (name withheld, of course) so as to possibly create awareness for anyone else in the future who may come along and ask the same questions, so that is why I am posting this on the site.

First off, I’d like to mention that it’s been over three months since this blog went online, and there are many people to thank for the explosive growth and success of ilovecarbondioxide.com. During the first month alone we managed to welcome just over 1,000 unique visitors to the site, and since then we have been linked and sourced to many other excellent webpages and climate realist blogs all around the world.

The hits have increased enormously. Emails and messages have been overwhelmingly encouraging and very supporting, with only the occasional enviro extremists attacking the premise of this site. As expected, they never attempt to debate the actual hard science of which we quote on a daily basis, largely because they cannot, but rather they simply resort to name calling and insist that human beings are “evil” and we must go back to the stone age to “save the planet” from their imagined climate crisis scenarios. As I have often said, their agendas are often not about environmentalism. It’s about anti-humanism. It’s about furthering their ideologies, and reinforcing their twisted beliefs that humans aren’t a natural part of the planet, and that civilization and industrialization is somehow “not supposed to happen” and is “unnatural”.

My answer to them is…well, what the hell are you smoking? Thus we come to the point of my motivation, this website and it’s message.

This ideology that many greens cling to so strongly just baffles me to no end. The idea that we exist solely to live in trees and should all be frolicking in the forests and using leaves to wipe our butts is absurdity in its highest form! (Yes, you can quote me on that)

Human beings have come a long way. Our journey has been full of ups and downs, but overall has resulted in great knowledge, understandings, and advancements. From that knowledge we have pushed ahead and evolved, our lives are far richer, healthier and most of all much longer. In fact, if we were still living in caves we’d be considered old agers by 25 or 30.

We now have modern technologies, medicines, transportation, and a far better understanding of the rest of the world and its people. Most of this progress is thanks to the industrial age and the fuels we burn to make it all possible. These fuels were given to us by Mother Earth, there is nothing “unnatural” about them. In fact, everything we create comes from Mother Earth. Your food, your house, your car, your computer. Everything.

Recently, a Greenpeace statement really struck a chord with me as it goes to show just how many so-called environmentalists view human beings as a whole. The statement basically said “Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions come from both natural and human sources.”

You see, right there, the very claim that CO2 is “unnatural” is unnerving in every way. It is one of the most relevant and necessary natural gases in the world. Or to claim that HUMAN-PRODUCED CO2 is unnatural puts the nail in the coffin even further. Are they attempting to convey the idea (ideology) that human beings are unnatural?

In a nutshell, yep. This disturbing religion has become the norm for so many misguided people nowadays. And it’s spread to the media, politicians, and heavily funded green organizations who have many agendas which mostly rely on making you, the people, feel “guilty” for existing and living a comfortable life. What a load of rubbish!

Take a look around you. Everywhere you are bombarded with messages telling you how you’re supposedly destroying the planet. What most people don’t see or even realize, however, is how much money is being made on this hysteria, and more importantly how many people are suffering and have died because of the green campaigns. The profits are enormous, and the legislation and taxes are coming fast and furious. Here’s a quick list of a few notable past fallacies:

– The environmentalist push to replace incandescant bulbs
Turns out CFC bulbs are mini toxic waste dumps.

– The environmentalist push to ban DDT
This has resulted in tens of millions of deaths.

– The environmentalist push to ban chlorine
Come on Greenpeace, you’ve GOT to be kidding me. Thank god this one didn’t fly.

– The environmentalist claim to ban CFC’s to save the ozone layer
Turns out even that may be misguided “science”. Heh.

– The environmentalist claims of “overpopulation”
Ha! We’ve barely even scratched the surface and there’s lots of room left. Besides, population is levelling off now. The same groups who began promoting the global warming hoax (The Club of Rome, the UN) were also behind the population scare in past decades.

– The recent nutty pop culture fad of mythical “sustainability” and a need to “conserve energy”
Sorry, but that one was concieved by population reduction advocates and extremists, including the same Club of Rome, the UN, and Big Green, all once again the anti-human camps. I’ve never bought into that sustainability myth for even a second. There are massive oil reservoirs we haven’t even tapped yet which could sustain us for hundreds of years thus allowing us to further develop and progress into new technologies for the future, but greenies are blocking all attempts to get this oil. And when I say future technologies, I don’t mean those bird-killing windmills, fairyland solar panels in the north, and biofuel crops which have taken over existing crops and are raising the price of food around the world and causing even more starvation. (Every time I see a sticker that says “Powered by biodiesel” I always wonder how many people have starved to death for that corn-fantasy fuel, which by the way not only destroys crops but also ends up producing more of that “evil” CO2 than traditional fuels)

But none of that matters, because it’s not about the environment for these campaigners, it’s simply the anti-civilization, anti-progress mentality that has taken over. They don’t accept that humans are part of the environment, in whatever way we evolve and develop, and they don’t accept that true unsustainability would soon be realized if we stopped burning fuels.

The Green Legacy continues – The gift that keeps on killing.

As Bruce Walker at American Thinker said:

“The consequences of politically correct pseudo-science always are absolutely ghastly. Rachel Carson in Silent Spring persuaded Americans that DTT would wipe out birds and decimate nature. She was absolutely wrong, but her pseudo-science was accepted by the Left as holy writ. DDT was banned and tens of millions of poor people suffered and died because of her propaganda. Sterilization of inferior races was once politically correct science, and that led directly to one of the greatest evils in human history. Politically correct but scientifically silly theories of manmade global warming are threatening to impoverish us with draconian restrictions.”

Which brings us to today’s ~~prophet~~ profit of doom, Al gore, and the unfounded claim that CO2 (carbon dioxide) emitting from our burning of fuels is going to cause climate changes or global warming.

As well documented on this site and many others, including peer-reviewed scientific papers from countless sources, the science says that is simply not true at all, and the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) is a politically-driven UN organization which ignores most of the relevant science and scientists, as do the media. Many IPCC scientists have resigned over this very issue.

The earth is actually cooling, and while extreme weather and summer ice melts are a constant media wet dream, the fact is violent weather has actually decreased over the last century, polar ice caps are larger than they were 40 years ago, and to put the icing on the cake the science also says that more CO2 equals more life! CO2 is a plant food, a nutrient, and the more we produce means faster growing forests and food crops all around the world, which is essential to a growing population. It is NOT pollution. This is an absolutely wonderful and unexpected gift from the industrial revolution, and it goes to show just how well mother nature balances everything out. It also goes to show just how natural we really are.

The earth put fuel there, we simply used it and released life-giving carbon into the atmosphere which benefits all living things. To claim that it’s “unnatural” or we’re “not supposed to” doesn’t make one shred of sense to me. In fact, NOT using it would seem a very backwards step in our evolution. It is wholly natural. And it not only benefits plant life, it greatly benefits our lives in every way. Furthermore, energy is abundant and cannot be “saved” for later. You either use it or you don’t. It’s still there. Turning your light switch off won’t save anything but a few cents on your electric bill. On that note, those who participate in propaganda events such as Earth Hour should really click here and take note of the ideology they’re supporting.

Another reality check: Currently our atmospheric CO2 concentration is only at about 385ppm (part per million), and it is well documented that plants thrive much better at concentrations of 1,000ppm or higher. Just like back when many plants developed and the Earth’s atmosphere was far richer with carbon than it is today.

Even if we burned every fuel on the planet we would not come even close to levels of the past, but the very small percent of CO2 we do emit every year (only about 3% of total CO2 is from mankind), greatly benefits all life and further “greens” the entire planet. I bet you didn’t know that U.S. forest growth has increased approximately 40% in the last half-century, did you? You can thank CO2. Isn’t it ironic that the tree-huggers are trying to demonize the very life-giving gas that feeds their trees? I find it astronomically ironic, but not surprising.

The mission of many behind these eco-guilt campaigns is very clearly financially motivated, as the global warming industry now employs tens of thousands of people and involves tens of billions of dollars in funding. Soon that figure will become TRILLIONS with assinine carbon tax schemes and the like being pushed by Obama and Gore.

But let’s forget the politicians and the mega multinational corporations who are profiting off all this green hype for a second and remember, as I mentioned above, on the environmentalist side it seems many of these people simply want to get rid of cars, suburbs, and modern civilization. It has nothing to do with the CO2 science, obviously.

Thanks to a well orchestrated and well funded campaign by Big Environment, many politicians, state controlled mainstream media, the UN, and some of the world’s elite who have openly admitted this, we now have this imagined “crisis” and everyone is demanding “eco-friendly” paper shopping bags and stuffing their families into notoriously dangerous Toyota Prius golf carts. It’s absolute insanity.

They say the only way to avert this crisis in western countries is to open your wallet and give up your freedoms, revert back to the stone age, and ignore the hundreds of millions of people who will die in the third world because these agendas are seeking to shut down development in those countries, denying them the right to burn mother natures fuels in their own nations and thus denying them the right to DEVELOP, industrialize, feed their population, and advance. Of course, if environmentalists really are anti-human, then I guess it wouldn’t matter, would it?

Please, prove me wrong. I’m desperate to be wrong. But sadly, I believe I’m far too correct.

On that note, I am not a scientist, nor an expert. However, I am a rational thinker and can see right through this global hoax like a squeaky clean window. I’ve been saying it for years now, and with the power of the internet and a current mass awakening of people realizing this obvious truth taking place, I feel it’s absolutely necessary to intensify this effort, right now.

I am just a messenger, this site a voice of reason, a channel to further spread awareness from those real experts who don’t have the backing of Big Environment and Hollywood. We will continue to debunk the alarmist rhetoric and create awareness. Thanks to the incredible support from scientists who have contacted me personally, and the brave people such as these 31,000 scientists, these 700 scientists, these 115 scientists, this institute, this institute, this institute, this institute, and all these blogs and organizations popping up all over the place, the tipping point is near.

In particular, I want to extend a special thanks to our friends and scientists at sites and newsblogs such as ClimateRealists, CO2Science, GlobalWarmingHoax, SEPP, ICECAP, NothingToDoWithCO2, ClimateChangeFraud, WarningSigns, JoanneNova, ACM, TomNelson, and many others along with all our readers. Science will ultimately prevail over science fiction. Let’s just hope it happens before we’re condemned to living in caves without the right to light a fire, or paying through the nose for permits to do so.

In conclusion to you, my dearest friend, it should be fairly obvious that I am trying to help someone. I’m trying to help 6.5 billion someones, to better their lives, and more importantly I’m trying to ensure over a third of them enjoy their right to develop, to live, to exist. It’s disgusting to me that there are forces out there who would keep the developing nations walking barefoot through extreme poverty, and do so claiming it’s all to “save the world” from a problem that does not even exist.

Many of the advocates freely admit they would like to see human population largely reduced. Now, if only these environmentalists and politicians would focus their energy on real problems, such as deforestation, extreme poverty, nuclear weapons, etc, then maybe they wouldn’t be looking quite so tainted. But oh wait, there’s no money to be made fighting any of those problems. Just like there’s no money to be made on regulating the real drivers of our climate and causes of all global warming, because how do you tax the Sun? The clouds? Water vapour? You can’t.

I cannot think of a better way to expend my energy than fighting this baseless eco-religion, and as I take every deep breath, I thank the plants for the oxygen, and in turn I thank the carbon dioxide which enabled those plants to grow.

Oh, and by the way, turns out those plastic bags aren’t worse for the environment after all. No kidding.

PS: I highly advise everyone to check out the new site from Marc Morano. He is former Communications Director for the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee and senior aide, speechwriter, and climate researcher for Senator James Inhofe, and will become the executive editor and chief correspondent for ClimateDepot.com, a pioneering climate and eco-news center. The site will be a special project of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) with the goal of becoming the most comprehensive information center on climate news and the related issues of environment and energy.

Comments on this posting are encouraged!

The Oceans Are Rising Faster Than Ever! Greatest Lie Ever Told? Let's Review Place #6: Seattle

By C3 Headlines

For years (decades?), climate alarmist scientists have been claiming that the oceans were rising with “unprecedented” speed due to human-caused global warming. These scientists claim that because of all the melting of glaciers and ice sheets, due to human-caused warming, the sea levels are rising at an accelerated pace and will continue to so – up to a 20 foot rise by the end of the century is predicted. If this accelerated sea level rising is happening as claimed, then it should be evident across the world. Fortunately, the sea rise at Seattle is less than one foot per century. This is just but one example of ocean facts countering sea-rise alarmism hype – more to follow. (On average, recent satellite measurements put global ocean level increases at 3mm/year or 1 foot/century.)

Marc Morano's ClimateDepot.com Coming Soon

ClimateDepot.com Launch Aims To Redefine Global Warming Reporting

Climate Clearinghouse to Challenge Mainstream Media’s Eco-Reporting

By Marc Morano

Washington, DC (ClimateDepot.com) – Marc Morano, former Communications Director for the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee and senior aide, speechwriter, and climate researcher for Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), will become the executive editor and chief correspondent for ClimateDepot.com, a pioneering climate and eco-news center. The news effort, set to debut this week, will be a special project of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) with the goal of becoming the most comprehensive information center on climate news and the related issues of environment and energy. ClimateDepot.com will serve as a premier news and information center for global warming and related news on environment and energy. The news outlet will be a climate and environmental clearinghouse complete with special investigative reports, voluminous data bases, and guides for policymakers, parents, teachers, scientists, and the general public. “For far too long, climate and environmental news has been tainted by the woeful reporting of journalists like ABC’s Bill Blakemore, the Associated Press’ Seth Borenstein, Newsweek’s Sharon Begley, CBS’s Scott Pelley, NBC’s Anne Thompson, Time Magazine and many others,” Morano said. “Sadly, many of today’s mainstream climate reporters would be better suited writing newsletters for Al Gore than attempting to inform the public about the latest climate science developments,” Morano added. “After nearly three years serving Senator Inhofe on the Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW), the opportunity now exists to essentially turn the award-winning Inhofe EPW Press blog into a comprehensive climate and eco-news information center. The goal is to become the Senate EPW website on steroids,” Morano said. [Note: The GOP’s Senate EPW website won the coveted Gold Mouse Award in 2007. The award was made possible by the National Science Foundation and the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.]

“Senator Inhofe has courageously stood alone to face the onslaught of Gore, the UN, and media-driven climate fears. As one of the more than 700 international dissenting scientists noted recently, Senator Inhofe will be recognized as nothing short of Churchillian in his efforts to combat unfounded man-made global warming fears,” Morano said. ClimateDepot.com, spearheaded by Morano, will serve as an information clearinghouse and one stop shopping for reporters, policymakers, students, scientists and concerned citizens to get the latest information on global warming and other key environmental and energy issues. The news center will offer a balanced perspective and serve as an ombudsman of the 4th Estate’s Eco-Reporting. The news center is a special project of CFACT, a Washington, D.C.-based public policy organization that has been working since 1985 to infuse the environmental debate with a balanced perspective, and to promote market-based and safe technological solutions to various public-interest concerns.

“The goal is to expand on key elements from the award-winning Senate EPW website and quite simply revolutionize climate and environmental news dissemination. Unlike much of the establishment media, CFACT’s news outlet will provide the public with links to all sides of the climate and environmental debate, with links to Gore’s blog, environmental groups, the United Nations, as well as skeptical voices. It is very hard to get accurate information on global warming and environmental issues. Much of what the media reports is simply a regurgitation of the rhetoric from partisan and ideologically driven environmental groups, foundations, and the United Nations, which are spinning data to promote a cause,” Morano said. The highly anticipated news outlet is set to officially launch this week! Stay tuned… Marc Morano Biography Marc Morano is the executive editor and chief correspondent for ClimateDepot.com, a global warming and eco-news center founded in 2009. Marc Morano served for three years as a senior advisor, speechwriter, and climate researcher for U.S. Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), and managed the award-winning communication operations of the GOP side of the EPW Committee. Morano joined the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee as the majority Communications Director in June 2006 after a decade and a half as a working journalist, documentary maker, radio talk show host, and national television correspondent. Morano’s Senate website won the coveted 2007 Gold Mouse Award for being the “Best of the Best.” The award was made possible by the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University and the National Science Foundation. Morano’s website got so many readers in January of 2007 that the volume shut down the entire Senate website, including every Senator’s personal websites. Morano spearheaded the 2007 groundbreaking report of 400-plus dissenting scientists and the follow-up 2008 report of 650-plus scientists dissenting from man-made global warming fears. Gallup polling organization essentially recognized the impact of the U.S. Senate EPW website in a May 29, 2008 analysis. “Republican spokespersons and conservative commentators have long challenged IPCC reports as reflecting the ‘scientific consensus’ on global warming by highlighting the views of a modest number of ‘skeptic’ or ‘contrarian’ scientists who question the IPCC conclusions.” Gallup concluded: “Growing skepticism about news coverage of global warming clearly goes hand in hand with Republicans’ declining belief that it is already occurring.” (LINK) Morano, who has spent years researching climate change, environmental, and energy issues, traveled to Greenland in 2007 to investigate global warming claims. As Senate staff, Morano also attended the United Nation’s climate eco-conferences held in Kenya, Indonesia, and Poland in 2006, 2007, and 2008. Morano has held both White House and Capitol Hill Press credentials and was a member of the Society of Professional Journalists. He has attended and reported on numerous international eco-conferences and the 2002 UN-sponsored Earth Summit in Johannesburg, South Africa. Morano was the investigative reporter for Cybercast News Service in Washington, DC. He has also served as a reporter/producer for the nationally syndicated television newsmagazine “American Investigator.” His reports have included an exposé on the Free Willy Keiko Foundation, an exclusive report on the safety of organic foods, and reports on the endangered species act and property rights. In 2000, his investigative television documentary “Amazon Rainforest: Clear-Cutting the Myths” created an international firestorm. Morano served as the television reporter/producer for the nationally syndicated “Rush Limbaugh, the Television Show,” during the show’s four-year run (1992-1996). Morano, referred to by Mr. Limbaugh as “Our Man in Washington,” had the dubious distinction of being the first journalist in history to have his television camera seized at the Clinton White House while on assignment with the Limbaugh show. His reporting has made international news, including appearances and coverage on CNN, Fox News Channel’s The O’Reilly Factor and Hannity & Colmes, BBC TV, The New York Times, The Washington Post, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Post, US Weekly Magazine, web links from the Drudge Report, the entertainment show Extra TV, and Politically Incorrect w/ Bill Maher. Morano was born in Washington, DC, and grew up in McLean, VA. He received a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science at George Mason University. Contact: Marc Morano

Journalism Today: A Very Thin Quill

By Alan Caruba

Every month for well over twenty-five years I have received a copy of the “Quill”, a magazine by and for the members of the Society of Professional Journalists.

The April issue had only in-house SPJ advertisements; none by any vendors. And it was a very slim edition, some 35 pages devoted to things like the SPJ president’s message, an analysis of the coverage of the presidential campaign that exonerated journalists of any bias, and “Examples of Ethical Excellence.”

Back in December I penned a commentary titled, “Cheerful Thoughts at the Funeral” that took issue with comments by Dave Aeikens, the SPJ president and God knows I am not picking on him, but the opening line in his April message was, “If anything will keep the demand for news strong, it will be journalist’s ability to produce reliable, timely and accurate information while using proven ethical standards.”

There is a demand for news, but it is being met on the Internet and even more there is a demand for an interpretation of what passes for news or doesn’t get published as news in the mainstream media, in this case newspapers.

When nearly half of those polled say that global warming is the very last topic on their mind these days newspapers are still full of references to a climate event that is just not happening. The Earth has been cooling since 1998. The Sun for nearly two years is virtually without any sunspots—magnetic storms—and the real news is that the Earth is truly threatened by two outcomes of this, both of which could result in the deaths of millions through starvation as increasing cold weather deters crop growth.

Aeikens knows that newspaper circulation is shrinking and web site audiences are growing and he says so. The Society’s answer, however, is a series of town hall meetings to ask people why they no longer trust the local fish-wrap. This is just a complete waste of time. This is a willing blindness to the bias and poor reporting that have come to typify the mainstream press.

Let me take a shot at what the problem is. Could it have something to do with the appalling school girl crush that the mainstream media had on a certain Barack Hussein Obama and has now extended to his wife? Could the public resent having been convinced to vote for someone who is tripling the nation’s deficit, planning new taxes, and is so tied to a teleprompter that it’s already a joke?

Could the public be sick of endless articles on how to be “Green” or why they are to blame for not adding thousands of dollars of solar panels to the roofs of their homes? Or choose to drive traditional automobiles rather than hybrids? Or articles declaring that the primary sources of energy in America, coal, oil and natural gas, are “dirty” and the cause of a “global warming” that is not happening?

Could the public be angered to have been blindsided by a financial crisis that experts had been warning about for years, but whom the press largely ignored?

The thickest section of the daily I receive is the sports section and I never read the sports section. What is left is mostly wire service stories by the horridly biased Associated Press and some comparably silly stuff by Reuters. Everything else is feature news fluff.

My subscription runs out in mid-April. Since I get my news—and plenty of it—off of the Net, I have no need for my daily newspaper.

The SPJ is asking what their members did wrong or should try to get right. Maybe that’s what they keep asking each other in the newsrooms of the major networks and in CNN and MSNBC whose ratings are in the tank while Fox News rolls merrily along providing news that strives to be “fair and balanced.”

Fair and balanced. What a concept!

C02 Global Warming's IPCC-created Hobglobin

By Dr. Tim Ball, Canada Free Press

Over 50 years ago H.L.Mencken said, “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” Nothing is more imaginary than the claim that CO2 is causing global warming and the proposal designed to lead us to safety is unnecessary and will create real problems. Imagine basing a major global policy on the output of a grossly simplistic computer model of a very complex system. Worse, the model considers only one miniscule variable known to have no effect while it ignores the major variables. In any area of science, social science or politics the insanity would be soundly rejected. However, that is what the entire world is planning to do with global energy policy to counteract the non-existent problem of global warming. It is non-existent because the world has cooled since 2000 as CO2 increased and temperatures correlate with changes in the sun. Many climate experts expect the cooling to continue at least until 2030. Why? What is their evidence it is the sun?The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC) is responsible for providing the hobgoblin of global warming. They claim CO2 is almost the sole cause of warming while effectively ignoring the sun. Their claim that the sun is of little consequence is unbelievable and only a measure of their deception and lousy science. They only looked at one part of solar influence on weather and climate and didn’t do that accurately. Instead they used it to support their claim the temperature changes are not caused by the sun and therefore must be due to CO2. They only considered irradiance (heat and light) and concluded, incorrectly, it was of little consequence. They assume, because the variation is approximately 0.1% over approximately a 30-year period, it is of little consequence. The number certainly seems small when expressed as a percentage of 100. However, it is estimated that only a 6% variation is sufficient to explain all known temperature variation in the history of the Earth. So 0.1% is significant in relation to 6%. To put this in context consider how much the temperature drops between night and day or even for the brief period of a total eclipse. As solar and climate scientist Willie Soon said, “We have known for 80 years that even small changes in solar radiation have a strong effect on Earth’s temperature and climate.” The IPCC do not include changes in sun/earth relationships collectively called the Milankovitch effect, a major cause of temperature change. They ignore the high correlation between sunspots and global temperature which has a warmer Earth with many sunspots and colder with fewer. They claimed, legitimately, you must not assume cause and effect. However, they made the illegitimate claim there was no mechanism and the research was not produced in time to meet their deadline for inclusion. Both claims are wrong. A proposed mechanism first appeared in Science in 1991 when Christensen and Lassen published “Length of the Solar Cycle: An indicator of solar activity closely associated with Climate.” Since then several articles appeared elaborating on the mechanism, most before the IPCC deadline. Why did they ignore it? Likely because it showed the sun explained temperature changes. Typical of the pattern of their manipulations they did break the deadline rule when it suited their argument. Here is how what is known as the Cosmic Theory works. Cosmic radiation (CR) streams to earth but passes through the Sun’s magnetic field to get here. The amount reaching the earth varies as the strength of that magnetic field varies. Variation in sunspot numbers is visible evidence of changes in the Sun’s magnetic field. The CR reaches the Earth’s atmosphere where electrons are set free and in the lower atmosphere act as condensation nuclei. For water vapor (gas) to become a liquid the air must cool below the dew point temperature but there must also be nuclei around which it can form. The nuclei are microscopic and the water droplets formed are also very small. It takes about 1 million of them to form a medium sized raindrop. Because they’re so small and light they remain in the air but are collectively visible as clouds. We have known for some time of a disparity between the amount of cloud that forms and the available nuclei. CR acting as nuclei explains the discrepancy. The amount of low cloud cover varies as the amount of CR reaching the lower atmosphere varies as this diagram shows.

Clouds: blue line. Cosmic radiation: red line. Source; Extension oforiginal plot from Marsh and Svensmark, 2000.

Low cloud cover blocks sunlight reaching the Earth thus creating cooling. No cloud cover and more sun heats the Earth’s surface creating warming. The cloud acts like a screen covering the windows in a greenhouse to block sunlight. Sunspot numbers reached a peak in the 1990s and have declined since. We are currently in Cycle 23 and entering Cycle 24. We know that the longer time between 11-year cycles the lower the number of sunspots in the next cycle. It’s now almost a century since the last similar low numbers. (see 1900 in the diagram). Just several more days without sunspots will give us a delay similar to that of the Dalton Minimum from 1800 to 1820. This was a very cold period that profoundly influenced the work of Charles Dickens (b. 1812) because of frequent and prolonged snow in London during his childhood and crop failures that created the social conditions he wrote about so eloquently. It won’t take a much longer delay for conditions to equal those of the Maunder minimum of sunspot numbers from 1645 to 1715, which coincided with the Little Ice Age.

Past and projected sunspot numbers. Source: Badalyan, Obridko and Sykora.

We’re already experiencing the cooler weather and the pattern is expected to continue at least until 2020 even if Cycle 24 shows up now. As it cools politicians continue to prepare for warming – the wrong hobgoblin designed by the IPCC.

Surprise! Trees grow bigger on CO2

By James Lewis, American Thinker

Your body is full of toxins — it’s just that the body self-regulates the amounts of all those molecules so they do no harm. Take NO, nitric oxide. If you breathe in pure NO gas you won’t last long. But if you release little bits of NO at just the right nerve endings inside the body, you get — Viagra! In fact, no NO, no sex. So we need NO to reproduce and have kids and all that. Every mammal in the worlds needs NO to make whoopie. The earth supports a stable biosphere, which swings back and forth a little bit in its basic variables, but largely ends up self-regulating quite nicely. That’s how mammals got to be 200 million years old. If the temps, air pressure or oxygen levels ever got way out of whack there would be no mammals today. Some time in the last 200 million years all the mice and tree shrews and human ancestors would have been wiped out. So there must be pretty good stability of the major biological variables like oxygen, CO2, temperature, and all that, even with the ice ages (which never covered the whole world, of course). So all the animals just migrated south when things got cold. The most obvious example of stability is the synergy between animals and plants. Stop me if you’ve heard this before, like in elementary school, but plants photosynthesize CO2 into O2, which animals breathe, and then convert back into CO2. Take a deep breath, and say thank you to the nice plants. Thank you! They are keeping you alive. Behold, Mother Gaia is all merciful!

Which is why it make sense that if you increase the amount of CO2 plant food in the world, plants and crops and tons of algae in the oceans will grow that much bigger. It’s called a self-regulating feedback loop, and it’s the only reason your body doesn’t explode from its own version of global warming. A whole lot of little thermostats are keeping you alive right now, just as they have kept the earth’s biosphere alive for half a billion years.

The global warming frauds have been screaming about the world going out of control! Because, in their fantasy computer games, CO2 triggers something else — like heat, or water vapor — which in turn increases CO2, which in turn makes it hotter all over the globe, which in turn kills everybody. That’s it. That’s why the scaremonger demagogues who are now running the EPA are declaring CO2 to be a poison — with cap and trade schemes to squeeze money out of all you suckers today, just for exhaling from both ends. And guess what! The Telegraph of the UK has just discovered that CO2 helps trees to grow bigger! And that means that more CO2 means more trees means more oxygen for you and me! CO2 looks like a self-regulating atmospheric gas. All those belching smokestacks and car engines are just making all the plants and algae grow more, which helps to soak up more CO2, etc., etc. This news should come as a bad shock to Carole Browner at the EPA. Because if it’s true, then CO2 is not an ever-accelerating greenhouse gas, and we’re not all going to be incinerated! Which would ruin the day for all the nutty ecofreaks all over the Western world, plus their political enablers, and their media con artists.

Richard Lindzen, the MIT Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Metereology, has analyzed the greenhouse gas disaster scenarios, and avers that earth temperature is self-regulating — it stabilizes automatically over time.

Here’s what he concludes:

The Bottom Line

The earth’s climate … is dominated by a strong net negative feedback. [That is, stabilizing self-regulation.] Climate sensitivity is on the order of 0.3°C, and such warming as may arise from increasing greenhouse gases will be indistinguishable from the fluctuations in climate that occur naturally from processes internal to the climate system itself.

Read the whole thing at “Watt’s up with that?” and send it to your friends who have been suckered so badly. If enough people get this, it will ruin the Democrats’ cap and trade scam and the whole Obama Hustle on the climate. And that would really be a disaster for the Left. Shock your liberal neighbors! Spread the word. And tell them to go back to school. Source