Author: admin

By Ian McClintock
The Department of Climate Change base their case for Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), now referred to as ‘Climate Change’, on an uncritical acceptance of the IPCC’s Reports. Claims are made that these findings are supported by a ‘consensus’ of scientists and scientific opinion.

This however is increasingly not the case as literally thousands of peer reviewed and published papers and many thousands of highly respected scientists, including some who contributed to the IPCC Reports, are now concerned that these findings lack an adequate or convincing scientific base.

Despite the expenditure of over $50 billion to find evidence that man-induced greenhouse gasses are the primary cause of the current warming, not one piece of empirical evidence in support of this theory has been found. (JC’s note: In fact, currently the Earth is cooling and has been for a decade)

The infamous ‘Hockey Stick Graph’ (Mann et al.) has been comprehensively discredited and has been removed by the IPCC from their 4th Report. It is therefore surprising to still find it in the government’s section on the scientific justification of ‘Climate Change’.

Likewise the claims that temperature has historically over the last 650,000 years moved in close relationship with levels of CO2 in the atmosphere is disingenuous. The Vostok and other ice core data clearly show that there is an average 800-year lag time between temperature rise and the subsequent increase in CO2 levels. This clearly indicates that CO2 was not the cause of the warming but resulted naturally from it, and that the peak levels CO2 reached did not inhibit the subsequent coolings that occurred.

By Dr G LeBlanc Smith, PhD, AIG, AAPGExcerpt from the full article [PDF, 1MB]: “Knowing and understanding the past is a vital key to the future, and earth scientists can present much of this information in a context that can assist in exposing the truth and misrepresentations of the current ‘Climate Change’ debate.”

“I have yet to see credible proof of carbon dioxide driving climate change, let alone man-made CO2 driving it. The atmospheric hot-spot is missing and the ice core data refute this. When will we collectively awake from this deceptive delusion?”

SANTA FE, N.M. — Former astronaut Harrison Schmitt, who walked on the moon and once served New Mexico in the U.S. Senate, doesn’t believe that humans are causing global warming.

“I don’t think the human effect is significant compared to the natural effect,” said Schmitt, who is among 70 skeptics scheduled to speak next month at the International Conference on Climate Change in New York.

Schmitt contends that scientists “are being intimidated” if they disagree with the idea that burning fossil fuels has increased carbon dioxide levels, temperatures and sea levels.

“They’ve seen too many of their colleagues lose grant funding when they haven’t gone along with the so-called political consensus that we’re in a human-caused global warming,” Schmitt said.

Dan Williams, publisher with the Chicago-based Heartland Institute, which is hosting the climate change conference, said he invited Schmitt after reading about his resignation from The Planetary Society, a nonprofit dedicated to space exploration.

Schmitt resigned after the group blamed global warming on human activity.

In his resignation letter, the 74-year-old geologist argued that the “global warming scare is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes and decision-making.”

Williams said Heartland is skeptical about the crisis that people are proclaiming in global warming.

“Not that the planet hasn’t warmed. We know it has or we’d all still be in the Ice Age,” he said. “But it has not reached a crisis proportion and, even among us skeptics, there’s disagreement about how much man has been responsible for that warming.”

Schmitt said historical documents indicate average temperatures have risen by 1 degree per century since around 1400 A.D., and the rise in carbon dioxide is because of the temperature rise.

Schmitt also said geological evidence indicates changes in sea level have been going on for thousands of years. He said smaller changes are related to changes in the elevation of land masses — for example, the Great Lakes are rising because the earth’s crust is rebounding from being depressed by glaciers.

Schmitt, who grew up in Silver City and now lives in Albuquerque, has a science degree from the California Institute of Technology. He also studied geology at the University of Oslo in Norway and took a doctorate in geology from Harvard University in 1964.

In 1972, he was one of the last men to walk on the moon as part of the Apollo 17 mission.

Schmitt said he’s heartened that the upcoming conference is made up of scientists who haven’t been manipulated by politics.

Of the global warming debate, he said: “It’s one of the few times you’ve seen a sizable portion of scientists who ought to be objective take a political position and it’s coloring their objectivity.”

By Michael Yost, TCC, Feb 11 2009
More and more scientists are actually looking at the “climate models” and have figured out the scam being promoted. Falling global temperatures, increased polar ice, and the latest data from the Russian researchers all point to an impending “Ice Age” approaching. Wonder how long Obama will promote the lie?

Back when I was in high school, I had one of the greatest science teachers in the entire world. Alyse Cooper actually made you think and to also prove or disprove your thoughts or the thoughts of others. It involved actually putting a “theory” to the test in real life. If the prediction happened, it was proven true and conversely, if real life didn’t support the theorem, it was proven false. This one simple fact is why the computer models that predict “anthropogenic global warming”, when taken to the real world tests, are failures and our politicians are relying on bad science to promote their issues. Michael R. Fox Ph.D., has published a real life, common sense report on these failures and when the actual evidence is studied, totally shows the scam involved in AGW proponents. In his report in the Hawaii Reporter he makes a very good point about the proper way to do research:

”In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we guess it. Then we compute the consequences of the guess to see what would be implied if this law that we guessed is right. Then we compare the result of the computation to nature, with experiment or experience; compare it directly with observation to see if it works. If it disagrees with experiment it is wrong. It’s that simple statement that is the key to science. It does not make any difference how beautiful your guess is. It does not make any difference how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is—if it disagrees with experiment (observation) it is wrong.” – Dr. Richard Feynman, “The Character of Natural Law”, the MIT Press, 1965, p. 156.

He points out that when you look at the data from the late 1800’s, you find periods of cooling and warming that have little, if any, direct correlation to CO2 (man-made) and temperatures. As oceans warm, the amount of CO2 released is billions of tons greater than any man-made contribution could ever be. Additionally, he points out that when you discount 95% of the main “greenhouse gas”, water vapor, 97% of the naturally occurring CO2, and the effect of the Sun on climate, you haven’t proven anything OTHER than you have bad science being promoted by politicians as “gospel truth”. Then we move to the next article that reveals what the Russians know as being fact regarding AWG. The Vostok ice cores represent some of the oldest ice core samples ever taken from the Earth. Because of their age, the conclusions being drawn do not support the hypothesis of AWG being the cause of any warming or cooling of the earth. Instead, they point to some very simple facts that every 12,000 years, the earth enters a period of global cooling that lasts for 110,000 years. We are currently in an interglacial period (warm phase) that has lasted for well over 16,000 years from the last major Ice Age and the resulting “dawn of man”. Basically, we are 4,000 years past due to enter another serious cooling period and measurements around the globe are supporting the fact they we indeed are entering another prolonged Ice Age. The article at NewsBusters tells the entire story which I find this interesting conclusion:

The Vostok ice core data graph reveals that global CO2 levels regularly rose and fell in a direct response to the natural cycle of Ice Age minimums and maximums during the past four hundred and twenty thousand years. Within that natural cycle, about every 110,000 years global temperatures, followed by global CO2 levels, have peaked at approximately the same levels which they are at today.

Once again, we as Americans are being manipulated by our own media. Are we finding these articles being published in the New York Times, the Washington Post, or any number of Socialist/Liberal media outlets?. Not on your life as they don’t support the POLITICAL agenda of the Liberal Left. AWG is being used to manipulate our energy sources, taxes, building of new power plants that use “fossil fuels”, and will ultimately lead to total control of the population of this nation as this nonsense continues to be proposed based on VERY BAD SCIENCE. You are going to discover, very shortly, that our President Elect, Barrack Obama is the major cheerleader of this scam. He is still trying to discover the “best way” to fight AWG when the reality is, IT DOESN’T EXIST. According to the scientific evidence, our soon to be President had instead, better be looking at ways to further the production of our own energy resources, finding means to provide livable homes to mankind, and figuring out what he will do with the millions of displaced people in the northern regions of this nation as the “global cooling” and the expansion of the glaciers happens over time causing uninhabitable regions of this nation. But then again, what can you expect from the Socialist/Liberals who desire control of this nation without regard to scientific facts. I guess it’s true: Facts don’t matter if you are a Liberal, only the “intent” is what counts.SOURCE

Written by Melanie Phillips, The Spectator

Yet another example of the bogus ‘research’ masquerading as science that is used to reinforce the man-made global warming fraud. One of the difficulties the green zealots have had is that Antarctica has been not warming but cooling, with the extent of its ice reaching record levels. A few weeks ago, a study led by Professor Eric Steig caused some excitement by claiming that actually West Antarctica was warming so much that it more than made up for the cooling in East Antarctica. Warning bells should have sounded when Steig said

“What we did is interpolate carefully instead of just using the back of an envelope.”

To those of us who have been following this scam for the past two decades, ‘interpolate carefully’ sounds like a bit of, er, creative calculation. And so it has proved. Various scientists immediately spotted the flaw in Steig’s methodology of combining satellite evidence since 1979 with temperature readings from surface weather stations. The flaw they identified was that, since Antarctica has so few weather stations, the computer Steig used was programmed to guess what data they would have produced had such stations existed. In other words, the findings that caused such excitement were based on data that had been made up. Even one of the IPCC’s lead authors sniffed a problem:

‘This looks like a pretty good analysis, but I have to say I remain somewhat skeptical,’ Kevin Trenberth, climate analysis chief at the National Center for Atmospheric Research said in an e-mail. ‘It is hard to make data where none exist.’

Well, yes. But then the invention of data that does not exist and the obliteration of data that does exist has been precisely how the man-made global warming fraud has been perpetrated right from the get-go. The most egregious example of this was the piece of ‘research’ that underpinned the entire IPCC/Kyoto shebang from 2001 when it was published — the so-called ‘hockey stick’ curve, which purported to show a vertiginous and unprecedented rise in global temperature in the 20th century. The problem with pegging such a rise to the evils of industrialisation had always been the Medieval Warm Period, during which global temperatures were warmer than in modern times. So the ‘hockey stick’ study dealt with that by simply managing to airbrush out the Medieval Warm Period and its subsequent corrective Little Ice Age altogether. Some seven centuries of global history were simply excised from the data — because an algorithm had been built into the computer programme which would have been created a ‘hockey stick’ curve whatever data were fed into it. This shoddy research was subsequently torn apart so comprehensively that it has been called the most discredited study in the history of science (and has been quietly dropped by the IPCC, leaving man-made global warming theory with no more substance than the grin on the face of the Cheshire Cat. Go here, here and here for a history of the titanic battle that ensued over its unmasking). The creator of this bogus ‘hockey stick’ curve was Michael Mann. And guess what? Michael Mann was a co-author of the Steig study of Antarctica.

‘Contrarians have sometime grabbed on to this idea that the entire continent of Antarctica is cooling, so how could we be talking about global warming,’ said study co-author Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University. ‘Now we can say: no, it’s not true … It is not bucking the trend.’

And now as Andrew Bolt has noted Steve McIntyre, who with Ross McKitrick uncovered the ‘hockey-stick’ fraud in the first place, has delivered the coup de grace to the Steig/Mann Antarctica claim. Steig used data from a weather station called Harry. Bolt observes:

Harry in fact is a problematic site that was buried in snow for years and then re-sited in 2005. But, worse, the data that Steig used in his modelling which he claimed came from Harry was actually old data from another station on the Ross Ice Shelf known as Gill with new data from Harry added to it, producing the abrupt warming. The data is worthless. Or as McIntyre puts it: ‘Considered by itself, Gill has a slightly negative trend from 1987 to 2002. The big trend in ‘New Harry’ arises entirely from the impact of splicing the two data sets together. It’s a mess.’

With their reputations thus disappearing faster than the snows of Kilimanjaro, the zealots have become hysterical. Mann attacks a prominent sceptic, Lawrence Solomon, for citing the scientists’ criticisms of the Antarctica study, and is in turn answered by Solomon — an exchange reproduced in Canada’s Financial Post, for which Solomon writes, here and here. Mann repeatedly accuses Solomon of lying. In doing so, he has left himself dramatically exposed. Claiming that Solomon

repeatedly lies about my work

he cites as evidence of this that his ‘hockey stick’ study was

vindicated in a report by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences

and seeks to back up this assertion by citing the way the media reported this study as

‘Science Panel Backs Study on Warming Climate’ (New York Times), ‘Backing for Hockey Stick Graph’ (BBC), and so on.

This is, to put it mildly, disingenuous. While it is certainly true that the media reported it in this sheep-like way — thanks in part to the manner in which the NAS chose circumspectly to spin its own conclusions — it is nevertheless the case that in every important particular the NAS actually agreed with the McIntyre/McKitrick criticisms. Far from vindicating the ‘hockey stick’ graph, the NAS said that although it found some of Mann’s work ‘plausible’, there were so many scientific uncertainties attached to it that it did not have great confidence in it. Thus it said that

Mann et al. used a type of principal component analysis that tends to bias the shape of the reconstructions

and that he had downplayed the

uncertainties of the published reconstructions…Even less confidence can be placed in the original conclusions by Mann et al. (1999) that ‘the 1990s are likely the warmest decade, and 1998 the warmest year, in at least a millennium.’

What Mann also does not say in his diatribe is that a subsequent House Energy and Commerce Committee report chaired by Edward Wegman totally destroyed the credibility of the ‘hockey stick’ study and devastatingly ripped apart Mann’s methodology as ‘bad mathematics’. Furthermore, when Gerald North, the chairman of the NAS panel — which Mann claims ‘vindicated him’ – and panel member Peter Bloomfield were asked at the House Committee hearings whether or not they agreed with Wegman’s harsh criticisms, they said they did:

CHAIRMAN BARTON. Dr. North, do you dispute the conclusions or the methodology of Dr. Wegman’s report? DR. NORTH. No, we don’t. We don’t disagree with their criticism. In fact, pretty much the same thing is said in our report. DR. BLOOMFIELD. Our committee reviewed the methodology used by Dr. Mann and his co-workers and we felt that some of the choices they made were inappropriate. We had much the same misgivings about his work that was documented at much greater length by Dr. Wegman. WALLACE: ‘the two reports were complementary, and to the extent that they overlapped, the conclusions were quite consistent.’ (Am Stat Assoc.)

As Mark Twain might have put it, there are three kinds of lies — lies, damned lies and global warming science. Source

–By Daily Tech
A new threat to all life on the planet? And yes, it’s YOUR fault! Coming soon on your local news! (You’ll see…just wait!)

Atmospheric oxygen levels are declining! The sky is falling! Accompanied by scary graphs and even more frightening scenarios, the new environmental disaster of oxygen depletion seems poised to overtake the crumbling CO2 fright as the next great challenge to mankind’s survival. Someone call Al Gore! He needs to jump on the next big cash cow! Maybe he can create another “consensus” of celebrity psuedo-scientists to support him and get the mega corporations to milk it for all it’s worth! Soon our school systems will be educating the “facts” to our naive innocent children, thus inspiring even more unfounded fear and anxiety in their lives! Oh yeah, and maybe he’ll make another one of his Hollywood science fiction movies too! -JC

The story is already making converts in the media, which includes Peter Tatchell of the U.K. Guardian, who recently ran a breathless story on possible consequences, including “genetic mutations, hormonal changes…cancer, degenerative diseases” and even death.

Tatchell says the rate of decline has dramatically increased in the past 30 years. He calls for immediate “scientific research” to examine the problem, blissfully unaware that several dozen researchers have been doing just that for decades.

The decline is predictably pinned on “deforestation” and mankind’s “burning of fossil fuels”. Once again, man is trashing the planet. Sorry if I just rolled my eyes again…lol.
The only problem? It’s pure bunkum. Unlike the trace gas CO2, oxygen comprises over 20% of the atmosphere. Oxygen is the most abundant element in the earth’s crust; it accounts for nearly 90% of the mass of the ocean. While we can’t breathe water, atmospheric oxygen levels have been measured since the 1890s and haven’t varied to within three significant digits (a tenth of a percentage point). Also, forests and greenery around the world have been growing at a fast rate and have increased approximately 40% during the last 50 years, and it’s all thanks to that wonderful CO2, which is, in fact, a very beneficial gas which encourages plant growth! Back when the dinosaurs ruled, much of Earth was a lush green paradise, largely due to the fact that CO2 levels were MUCH higher than they are today.
The fearsome decline seen in the graph is the result of misinterpretation, designed to impress. The values given are relative, not absolute, and correspond to changes of a few parts per million. With O2 levels currently at 210,000 ppm, the changes we measure won’t be significant for tens of thousands of years, if then.
I’m sure Mr Gore would love to take a graph like this and project it on a four-story screen, much like his flawed “hockey stick” graph which has now been completely debunked throughout the scientific world. It’s no wonder An Inconvenient Truth has been banned from many public school systems, finally. (Even the high court of England has cited 35 major scientific errors in the film and has labeled it as “political propaganda” not suitable for the education system. Good for them!)
Dr. Andrew Manning of the Scripps Atmospheric Oxygen Research Group tells Daily Tech the miniscule rate of O2 decline is of “no concern whatsoever to human health or any ecosystem”. According to Manning, while fossil fuels do consume oxygen, an ever-increasing amount of plant life in the biosphere offsets the loss. (Thanks, CO2!)
So what is the source of this crackpot idea? Nope, not Gore this time. It stems from the writings of interdisciplinary ex-professor Ervin Lazlo. Lazlo calls himself “the recognized founder of systems philosophy”, a New Age holistic pseudo-science that has unfortunately accomplished nothing useful since he created it 35 years ago. Lazlo is the founder of the Club of Budapest, an environmental group which specializes in “planetary consciousness”. The group shares members and ideas with the Club of Rome best known for the “Limits to Growth” scare of the early 1970s. That led to a book of the same name, which became the best-selling environmental title of all time. The book was roundly called tripe by dozens of esteemed economists, and even later admitted to be nothing more than a caper to gain media attention — none of which seemed to hurt sales. Even today one can still find environmentalists still quoting the book’s conclusions as fact. The environmental movement has a long history of promoting scare stories without a shred of scientific backing. From “Silent Spring” which predicted the global death of all bird life, to forest-demolishing acid rain, to more modern scares such as Alar and GM foods, the climate change hoax, etc, the poor track record of success seems to only stimulate a never-ending stream of new drivel.

At least this time around, you’ve been forewarned.

-By Alan Caruba, Warning Signs

Like the proverbial groundhog that shows up on February 2 to announce that there will be six more weeks of winter, Albert Gore shows up in Congress to announce that the world is coming to an end and that we’re all doomed because of global warming.

He did this most recently on January 28 in front of a Senate Foreign Relations Committee chaired by John Kerry. As usual, he did so in the midst of a winter storm that dumped inches of snow on Washington, D.C. and coated the streets with ice. This has actually become known as “the Gore effect.”

Gore reminds me of a character created by the Li’l Abner cartoonist, Al Capp. “Joe Btfsplk” was a walking jinx. He walked around with a perpetual dark rain cloud over his head and every time he showed up anywhere, bad luck would happen to anyone in the vicinity.

The ability to hold two totally opposite thoughts in one’s head, a winter storm and imminent destruction by sizzling hot weather, is a kind of schizophrenia or just plain stupidity. In Gore’s case, it has a lot more with lining his pockets with millions of dollars in the sale of “carbon credits” purchased to continue emitting carbon dioxide, the gas that Gore insists will destroy the world.

Carbon dioxide is the gas on which all plant life on Earth depends for growth. Without CO2 every single piece of vegetation dies and we die with it because a lot of critters we eat are herbivores. Happily, humans exhale about two pounds of CO2 every day. Burning anything, including calories, produces CO2. Even if there is more CO2, it has little to do with climate change.

Which begs the question why President Obama and the U.S. Congress wants to pass laws requiring cars to emit less CO2 and other laws to impose a cap-and-trade or carbon tax on anything that produces CO2. This is nothing less than pure thievery.

The other question, of course, is what global warming or climate change has to do with foreign relations? Since we cannot do a thing about the climate which, by the way, has been cooling since 1998, why is a Senate committee not only listening to Al Gore bloviating about it, but falling all over themselves to lavish praise upon this bulbous charlatan?

This is particularly true in light of the way Americans now rank the environment dead last on a list of priorities to which the government should attend. That’s not going to happen because President Obama is a Green zealot and, as more Americans gain awareness of this, there is likely to be a backlash.

This is the first Groundhog day President Obama is in office. He has at least three more to go and, who knows, after that he may be unemployed again like a lot of Americans recovering from Obamamania.

Gore, like the Energizer Bunny, however, will just keep going and going and going.