CLIMATE FALLOUT

I just found a great video about the ClimateGate scandal.

Check it out.

The wheels are really falling off the bus.

The fallout is reaching incredible proportions now.  There is a new report about IPCC claims of African crops decreasing 50% being completely false.   Claims of increased storm intensity is unsupportable.  Now that scientists aren't afraid of being blackballed for skeptical results, there are more and more of them out there checking the IPCC/CRU data and finding it wanting.  It seems that every day there is a new report of errors and fallacies in the Nobel Prize winning 2007 IPCC report on climate change.

The level of BS involved in the report is simply staggering. 

The African crop projections were based on theories that directly contradicted the information gathered.  Whole areas of the report were based on non-scientific magazine articles and unpublished student theses.   More and more true scientists, who propose a theory and then attempt to prove or disprove it scientifically, are testing the CRU's and IPCC's theories on AGW and finding major holes in the 'science'.

Finally, disgraced 'scientist' Phil Jones of the CRU came out this weekend and admitted that there hasn't been any measurable global warming for the past 15 years.  In addition, he admitted that temperatures during the Medieval Warming Period were higher than what we are experiencing now.  What's more, those temperatures remained high for a period of about 500 years, from about 800 AD to about 1300 AD.  The MWP ended with the Little Ice Age, a period of unusual cold that lasted until the early 1800's.

The MWP was a time of global prosperity.  It was so warm that wine was grown in England and Iceland.  The world's population exploded due to increased harvests of cereal grains, which are intolerant to cold, and warmer winters, which meant less illness and disease.  Trade flourished throughout Europe and the Mediterranean and into Asia.  The Vikings explored the ice-free Atlantic ocean in their longboats and discovered Greenland (which really was green then, thus the name), Nova Scotia and quite possibly northeastern America. 

Times were easier in the MWP because of the added warmth.  With full bellies and full purses, people were able to turn their attention from subsistence to leisure.  There was an explosion of scientific discovery and artisitic achievement.

AGW alarmists tried to hide the MWP, to pretend that it didn't exist, because it's mere existence put the lie to man-made global warming.  There were no cars or factories spewing CO2 into the atmosphere back then, and yet it was warmer than it is today.  The MWP was a huge threat to AGW, and so they tried to revise history yet again and pretend that the MWP never happened.  By the way, the Little Ice Age was possibly caused by the 'Maunder Minimum', a period of extremely low sunspot activity.  We are possibly going through another period of extremely low sunspot activity right now.  Coincidence?  Well, what do you think the odds are that less activity from the giant superhot ball of gas in the center of the solar system might cause temperature changes in our atmosphere?  I'd have to say the sun would have more effect on our climate than our exhalations and flatulent cows, but what do I know?

The MWP proves the theory of Climate Change, but not AGW, which is a very different thing.  Climate Change is a natural, cyclical phenomenon that has very little to do with the activities of man.  AGW, in contrast, blames man for everything.  Humans are the plague of the Earth, bent on it's destruction, in the minds of AGW alarmists.

Yes, the climate is changing.  It has always changed - the climate we have now is nothing like the climate of 10 million years ago, 10,000 years ago, or even a mere 1,000 years ago - a drop in the climate bucket.  We may be in the midst of a warming period that may or may not be over - in about 100 years or so we will be able to look back over this newest cycle and have a clearer picture what was happening. 

The AGW hysterics scream 'there's a difference between climate and weather, you know!'  Yes, I do know.  Do you? 

The people who are claiming a few blizzards and some broken records doesn't mean it is getting colder are the very same people who jump all over a summer heat wave and claim that it proves global warming - see, it's hotter outside!  They are also the people who touted the lack of snow a few winters ago in DC proved global warming as well.  Now they are saying the cooler temps and major snowstorms are proof of global warming.  To prove this theory, they have come up with a tortured, circuitous explaination involving the increased temps causing increased water vapor in the air resulting in more precipitation, but because it is happening in winter with colder temps, the precipitation shows itself as snow.  Basically saying it is colder and snowier because the temperature is rising.  They seem to have taken to heart the little adage "If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with bullshit".

Even Donald Trump is calling AGW a hoax, and has called for Al Gore to be stripped of his Nobel Prize.  Considering he got it in conjunction with the fatally flawed 2007 IPCC report, they should all be stripped.  While they are at it, how about the Oscar, too?

Even liberal Penn State, home of Michael Mann, a leading climate scientist and crony of the CRU's Phil Jones and author of many of the incriminating emails released in December, has students that are demanding answers.  The Young America's Foundation protested the bogus internal 'investigation' of Michael Mann, claiming it is biased.  They are demanding the investigation be conducted by a neutral, unaffiliated, external group and that the findings be released to the public.  Right now the review is being conducted by three Penn State employees and the findings will only be released to donors.  By the way, Michael Mann just recieved $2.4 million in stimulus funds for his climate research - even in the midst of an investigation. 

Our federal masters are refusing to waver from their AGW stance, and have even talked about reviving Cap and Trade.  Tone deaf and crazy, right?  No, more like politically expedient.  The liberals seem to think that saying something often enough makes it true, so they are clinging on to their hysterical ranting about climate catastrophe.  Let's face it - they have a lot at stake, and they'll be damned if they are going to give it up without a fight.  Cap and Trade is a masterpiece of political money laundering.  They will use it to pillage literally trillions of dollars from corporations, small businesses and taxpayers.  They can put that money into a nice little slush fund and claim they are using it for carbon credit offsets and other such untraceable schemes.  They have created such an illusion of major catastrophes that when they don't occur they can claim that their Cap and Trade scheme was a success and saved us from annihilation.

But now it's all falling apart. 

As is usually the case with liberals, they pushed too hard, and their rhetoric just couldn't stand up to the facts.  They tried to silence their critics, but that only works for so long.  They have now resorted to name calling and claiming that any change in weather whatsoever is proof of their theory.  Those are desperate tactics and are being seen as such by a rapidly growing majority.

There is no doubt whatsoever that the climate is changing.  There is a great deal of doubt, however, that man is the cause.  Our AGW Icaruses have flown too close to the sun and are now paying the price.

Better them than us.

AGW IS MELTING AWAY

There has been a lot trickling out over the past week or so regarding the UN's IPCC and erronious reports.  The first report was about a part of the 2007 report that talked about the glaciers of the Himalayas melting completely away by 2035.

The melting glaciers were a major talking point for AGW alarmists.  Their argument was backed up by the IPCC report citing their demise, and, of course, the science was irrefutable because the IPCC only puts out quality, well researched reports. 

Eh, not so much.

Turns out the 'report' was the product of a quote from a scientist during a media interview that wasn't backed in any way by studies or science.  It was basically hysterical ravings that were taken as proven fact and published by the preeminent panel for AGW.  It was just a mistake, the IPCC explained.

Then came the revelation that it was put in the report for purely political reasons.  Apparently the lead author of the 2007 report knew that the claim was false but included it anyway in order to pressure world leaders to take stronger action on AGW.

“We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action.” In other words, Rose says, Lal “last night admitted [the scary figure] was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.”

James Delingpole of the UK's Telegraph has the scoop on the latest.  In the 2007 report, the claim is made that up to 40% of the Amazon rainforest is in danger of a drastic reaction to changes in precipitation due to climate change.  The report asserts that the reaction would be a change from a rainforest environment to a tropical savannah.  The report cites Andy Rowell and Dr. P.F. Moore's 2000 report on global forest fires.

The problem with Andy Rowell and Dr. P.F. Moore and their report is that they are affiliated with WWF and IUCN.  The World Wildlife Foundation is an environmental activist group focused on conservation, as is the International Union for Conservation of Nature.  Dr. Moore is not an Amazon specialist, he is a policy analyst.  As for Andy Rowell, he is a green activist and a reporter for the UK's Guardian newspaper.  Their non-peer-reviewed paper is apparently just the tip of the iceburg.  It turns out there is a long list of non-peer reviewed WWF papers that have been cited as evidence in the IPCC report.  That violates the IPCC's rules for inclusion - all papers must be peer reviewed.  And, one would assume, based on some sort of science, not some scientist spitballing a what-if scenario to illustrate their alarmist visions.

Let's not forget, too, that the chairman of the IPCC, Dr. Rajendra Pachuri, is in hot water himself.  Mr. Pachuri has been investing heavily in companies that are being recommended by the IPCC.  He has shrugged it off, of course, as has the other champion of AGW, Al Gore.  There are those calling for his resignation, but he refuses to step down, naturally. 

The 2007 IPCC report that has all of the flaws I have been discussing is also the one that won the shared Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore.  Since the report is being shown daily to be filled with false information and supposition, not science, does that mean the prize will be rescinded?

Oh, if only.....

Global warming is now dead last on the list of priorities for Americans, so at least it seems people are paying attention instead of just blindly believing the AGW hysterics.  It's a start.  When the Europeans start wising up, I'll breathe easier.  But at least people are wising up to the scam, and it's happening before our governments sink trillions of dollars into it and cede our sovereignty to some global government.

So when do we get to bring Gore up on charges?  How about taking away his Oscars and all the other prizes his fraudulent 'documentary' garnered? 

Heck, I'd just be happy if they would stop peddling this AGW crap in the schools - I'm getting tired of having to deprogram my kids every year.

THE SNOWS OF KILLIMANJARO

For anyone familiar with Al 'The Goracle' Gore's hysterical rantings about death, doom and destruction by anthropogenic global warming (AGW), it will come as no surprise that his allegations that AGW is causing the snows of Killimanjaro to melt are being investigated.

This is the nature of science, and a major reason why transparency is such an issue.  Scientists test each other's theories all the time. 

In the case of Killimanjaro, Gore has been using the image of its vanishing snow pack to illustrate the catastrophic changes AGW is allegedly causing.

Turns out, it's not so much AGW as natural cyclical climatic change.

Leon DeWinter of Pajamas Media covers the story.

Professor Sinninghe Damste’s research, as discussed on the site of the Dutch Organization of Scientific Research (DOSR) — a governmental body — shows that the icecap of Kilimanjaro was not the result of cold air but of large amounts of precipitation which fell at the beginning of the Holocene period, about 11,000 years ago.

The melting and freezing of moisture on top of Kilimanjaro appears to be part of “a natural process of dry and wet periods.” The present melting is not the result of “environmental damage caused by man.”


Professor Damste studied organic biomarker molecules in the sediment record of Lake Challa, near Mount Kilimanjaro, and reconstructed the changes and intensity of precipitation in this part of Africa over the last 25,000 years. They observed an 11,500 year cycle of intense monsoon precipitation.

In the dry period between 12,800 and 11,500 years ago, Kilimanjaro was ice-free.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure there weren't any cars, factories or airplanes 12,000 years ago.  And yet, Killimanjaro was ice-free.  How can this be? 

The AGW house of cards is collapsing around his ears, and what is his response to it all?  According to the Times Online, Copenhagen isn't going to do enough, in Al's opinion.

The last paragraph in the article is the best:

He also brushed aside questions over the reliability of climate science that have followed the publication last month of leaked e-mails between climate experts. He claimed that the scientific consensus around climate change “continues to grow from strength to strength”. He added: “The naysayers are in a sunset phase with a spectacular climax just before they subside from view. This is a race between common sense and unreality.”

For once I agree with the High Priest of Gaia - this really is a race between common sense and unreality.  He is just confused as to who is suffering in unreality and who is showing common sense.  But, then again, it seems to be the the M.O. of his crowd - when in doubt, ridicule, shout down opposition, and make them seem crazy and fringe. Climategate is destroying the 'science' he has built his carbon credit scam on, but it's the 'naysayers' who are in a "sunset phase" and are going to soon "subside from view".

His 'facts' are being shot down left and right, but we are the ones in denial. 

Sure, Al.  Whatever you say.

THE ONLY PLACE GETTING HOTTER IS EAST ANGLIA

The heat is on at East Anglia University's Climatic Research Unit.  According to the UK's Mail Online, the pressure is on for the head of CRU to resign due to his role in the ClimateGate scandal.  A leading environmentalist, George Monbiot, is calling for Phil Jones to quit.

'I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I'm dismayed and deeply shaken,' he said. 'There are some messages that require no spin to make them look bad.
'There appears to be evidence of attempts to prevent scientific data from being released, and even to destroy material that was subject to a Freedom of Information request.
'Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics, or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.'The head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign. Some of the data discussed in the emails should be re-analysed.'

So far, Jones has refused calls for his resignation, stating,

'We absolutely stand by the science we produce here at the University of East Anglia and it has been peer reviewed and published.


'Some of the emails probably had poorly chosen words and were sent in the heat of the moment, when I was frustrated. I do regret sending some of them. We've not deleted any emails or data here at CRU.

'I would never manipulate the data one bit - I would categorically deny that.;

Hmmm...really?  Is that your final answer, Mr. Jones?  You might want to rethink it.  No, technically they didn't delete it - they just lost track of it.  Not that he didn't try to get some of them deleted. 

There is also a possibility that the emails were released because of the FOIA requests.  The had apparently been assembled by East Anglia staff.  Why were they actually released and why is Jones saying they were hacked?  Well, maybe they accidentally released the stuff they were supposed to bury, and are trying to say it was a crime in order to make themselves the victim and try to distract from what the emails contained.  Or maybe they really were hacked, and the accidental release is just another rumor.

At least we know the emails are real now.

And things are starting to happen.  Like investigations.  Hopefully the British authorities will check into the much larger crimes perpetrated by those scientists, and not just if or who hacked the emails.

As Pat Michaels so aptly put it, "This is not a smoking gun, this is a mushroom cloud."

THE HOAX REVEALED? Updated

Christmas sure came early this year! Instead of elves, though, we have hackers to thank for it.

I've been dying to post on this all day.

Hackers got into email accounts for a major climate change research center in the UK, the East Anglia Climate Research Unit. When it comes to climate change research, they are one of the biggies. But now a decade's worth of emails have been leaked from this highly regarded facility onto the web, and boy, is it juicy.

The emails discuss manipulation of climat change data, because apparently the data wasn't supporting the theory. Now, I'm no scientist, but I thought the data was supposed to either prove or disprove theories. This blatant manipulation of data to force it to support a theory is a lot of things, but science it is not.

You know what's great about all of this? What it must be doing to the people behind such posts as this one. Oh, how I would love to be a fly on the wall in Al Gore's mega CO2 footprinted mansion. He has a new book out right now, and so there is a wealth of material from the past month or two of him talking about how passing climate legislation is practically guaranteed to bring down the temps. Maybe because he knows it's just a matter of showing the real numbers? More fun about the book tour in a minute.

East Anglia is coming out swinging, though. The spokesperson said, ""We are aware that information from a server used for research information in one area of the university has been made available on public websites. Because of the volume of this information we cannot currently confirm that all this material is genuine. This information has been obtained and published without our permission and we took immediate action to remove the server in question from operation. We are undertaking a thorough internal investigation and have involved the police in this inquiry.""

They are attempting to plant the seed of doubt, and mentioning the police instantly turns them into a victim. Which they are, considering their files were hacked. But if these emails are true, then the real victims are the taxpaying citizens of the world who have been forced to comply with government mandates costing billions of dollars.

Thank God this came out before the Copenhagen summit. That summit could potentially cost us trillions of dollars and possibly our sovereignty. Hopefully this scandal will at least cause people to take a step back from the cliff and take a good long look at what's going on.

It will be interesting to see how this all pans out. Stay tuned!

Oh, I almost forgot - the Goracle, on his media blitz for the new book, is touting geothermal energy. It's hard to take him seriously, though, when Mr. Science misstates the temperature of the earth's core. By a few million degrees. Hey Al - according to the Dept. of Energy's Ask a Scientist webpage, the earth's core is considered to be between 3,000 and 5,000 degrees Celsius. If it were 'several million' degrees, earth would be a star, not a planet.

Seems like the High Priest of Gaia needs to brush up on his science.

Better not do it at the CRU!

UPDATE: Sorry, the Hadley Centre is not one and the same with East Anglia's CRU. The Hadley Centre gets its information from the CRU and the emails in question are from the CRU. I have changed the post to reflect that.

UPDATE II: Not only were the CRU 'scientists' falsifying information, they were apparently also throwing their well respected weight around making sure scientists with differing opinions were not given a forum for their papers to be published - and then scoffed at their lack of published papers as proof they and their scientific opinions were not taken seriously. According to Pajamas Media, "The emails suggest the authors co-operated covertly to ensure that only papers favorable to CO2-forced AGW were published, and that editors and journals publishing contrary papers were punished. They also attempted to “discipline” scientists and journalists who published skeptical information."

I highly recommend you read the whole article. It includes links to the actual emails as well as a summary of the scandal.

SOUND THE (GLOBAL WARMING) ALARM

The lovely weather we here in Florida have been experiencing for the past couple of days has been just wonderful. Low 70's during the day, chilly enough for a jacket at night. I look forward to this weather not just because it is a rare opportunity to shut off the air conditioning (thus saving a few bucks on the power bill), but also because the cool weather is just so refreshing after summers featuring 90+ temps and 90%+ humidity.

It is extremely rare for such cool weather so early in the season, and there are cold weather records being broken all over the country, from Pennsylvania to Nebraska to California.

The record cold temps across the country has had no effect on cooling the ardor of the global warming alarmists, however.

Politicians in Europe and the US are still eagerly looking forward to the Global Climate Treaty talks in Copenhagen this December, and there is a general consensus that this time the US will sign on the dotted line.

Pressure must be brought to bear on our representatives to stop approval in the event this treaty goes to the Senate for consent. Our Constitution requires our Senate to consent to any foreign treaties with a two-thirds majority before being sent to the President for ratification. Once the President signs on, it's a done deal.

This treaty must not be implemented.

Lord Christopher Monckton, an outspoken critic of Al Gore and global warming, has been making a concerted effort over the past weeks to educate Americans on the pitfalls of the coming Copenhagen treaty. He has requested a debate with Gore on numerous occasions, but Gore refuses to engage - just like he refuses to take questions when he speaks, probably to avoid embarrassing situations like this. The questioner in the video clip is filmmaker Phelim McAleer, who's new movie, "Not Evil, Just Wrong" is a rebuttal to Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth". The Hollywood/political elite refuse to allow the movie to be screened, but you can purchase it online at McAleer's website http://www.noteviljustwrong.com/. Check it out. I could go on for days about the erroneous 'facts' in Gore's movie, but I'll just link up to the findings of the British court McAleer was referencing in his chat with Gore.

Gore's touting of a scientific 'consensus' is just as false as his movie. Even the IPCC has defectors. The fact is, there is still room for debate, no matter what Mr. Gore says.

Which is why the upcoming Global Climate Treaty is so frightening.

This agreement isn't really about saving the planet. It's about redistribution of wealth and creating a global government. According to Lord Monckton, who has read the treaty, if we sign on, we will be ceding our sovereignty to a global government.

All for a theory that our own Senate acknowledges is unproven, although the House is still in deep denial. Why is our government going along with Gore and the Europeans? Simple.

Money and power.

This is the greatest redistribution of wealth the world has ever seen, and it is our wealth that will be spread around. They have not proven that CO2 is causing global warming, and they cannot prove their schemes for 'carbon offsets' are effective in neutralizing CO2 'footprints' even if CO2 were the culprit for climate change, which is highly debatable. At least, it would be debatable, if someone would be willing to debate it. Al Gore's motives are easy to see - he founded the carbon offset company favored in the cap and trade legislation.

We must raise our voices to protest this treaty and ensure our government does not ratify it. This goes beyond taxation, although the tax issue is a weighty one. This comes down to our right to be a free nation.

This treaty is a major, irreversible step towards global governance.

Spread the word. Share the links.

Save our Republic and stop the insanity.

AN INCONVENIENT REBUTTAL

From CNSNews:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/52543

I can't wait to see it. Hopefully it will have some totally awesome slides like Gore's flick. Except factual. Do you think this will get any attention at all? After all, it sounds all scientific-y and stuff.

Not to mention HERETICAL!!

How dare they attack the Super Duper Totally Holy Church of Global Warming?

They must hate the planet!