"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong." Richard P. Feynman

Thursday, December 25, 2014

Global warming brings more white Christmases !

 According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".
"Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said.
Nature continues to defy the predictions of climate "scientists" with snow at Christmas in the US becoming more prevalent in the last two decades compared to the previous two.
When real data from Rutgers Snow lab is analysed for the US it shows how idiotic these warmist predictions have been.
The map shows the percent change in snow-covered days over the week of Christmas between 1990 to 2013 and 1966 to 1989. The colour blue indicates areas where the ground was more frequently snow-covered in recent years. Brown indicates areas where Christmases in longer-ago decades were indeed whiter.
The map shows the percent change in snow-covered days over the week of Christmas between 1990 to 2013 and 1966 to 1989. The colour blue indicates areas where the ground was more frequently snow-covered in recent years. Brown indicates areas where Christmases in longer-ago decades were indeed whiter.
The colour blue indicates areas where the ground was more frequently snow-covered in recent years, and 
The map below shows the percent change in snow-covered days over the week of Christmas between 1990 to 2013 and 1966 to 1989.  
'Many of us wondered whether we could trust our memories of how snowy the holidays were when we were kids compared to now,' the Goverment's climate team wrote.
'Just for fun, we asked the experts at the Rutgers Snow Lab to show us what their data (based on NOAA satellite images) had to say about whether the U.S. snow extent during the week of Christmas has changed at all in the past 50 years. 
'As you can see, fans of glistening tree tops have had a better time in the past few years - there seem to have been more white Christmases between 1990 to 2013 in the U.S.'

Wednesday, December 24, 2014

For Alan- More Fraud at NOAA

Blog postings have been light lately as I was reminded by a friend who follows Climate Common Sense for up-to-date correct  information on the Global Warming Scam.
Climategate showed the dishonesty of those climate "scientists" entrusted with maintenance of the global temperature record and the new scandal on Ph measurement is just as shocking.
As global warming has paused alarmists have been focussing on ocean Ph or acidity levels claiming they are caused by CO2 and are causing all sorts of havoc in our oceans.
This scare was supported by a paper which cherry-picked data from 1989 and omitted over a century of readings which completely falsified the conclusions of the paper.
James Delingpole has the story:
Christmas has come a couple of days early for climate sceptics, in what may well prove to be one of the biggest blows to the Global Warming religion since Climategate.
This time the pillar of green faith which has been rudely dismantled by sceptical investigators is an alleged phenomenon known as “ocean acidification.”
For years this has been touted by environmentalists as possibly the greatest threat to the planet after “global warming.”
According to Jane Lubchenko, the head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), it is “climate change’s equally evil twin” because of the disastrous consequences it may have for everything from the navigational systems of spawning salmon to the health of coral reefs.
Ocean acidification is said to be caused when excess atmospheric carbon dioxide is absorbed by the sea, reducing its pH levels to make it more acidic.
But, as Watts Up With That reports new evidence unearthed by an inquisitive graduate student suggests that “ocean acidification” may be a scientific fraud to rank with the great “man-made-global warming” scare.
At the centre of the scandal is NOAA, the US federal scientific agency which measures and researches changes in the oceans and atmosphere, and which maintains one of the temperature datasets used to measure “global warming.”
One of NOAA’s departments – the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (PMEL) – also happens to be one of the mainstays of the alarmist narrative about “ocean acidification.”
A 2004 paper by two of PMEL’s senior oceanographers – Dr Richard Feely and Dr Christopher Sabine – is often cited in support of “ocean acidification” theory and is reproduced, in simplified form, at NOAA’s website.  It also formed part of testimony that Feely gave to Congress in 2010, again to the effect that increasing atmospheric CO2 is causing a reduction in seawater pH.
It warns:
“The impacts of ocean acidification on shelled organisms and other animals could negatively affect marine food webs, and, when combined with other climatic changes, could substantially alter the number, variety, and health of ocean wildlife. As humans continue to send more and more carbon dioxide into the oceans, the impacts on marine ecosystems will be direct and profound.”
“The message is clear: excessive carbon dioxide poses a threat to the health of our oceans.”
However, it now seems that the paper’s certainty is at best misplaced, at worst outright dishonest. Not unlike Michael Mann’s discredited Hockey Stick graph it appears to depend on cherry-picked data and misleading projections in defiance of real-world evidence.
The alleged fraud was uncovered by Mike Wallace, a hydrologist with nearly 30 years’ experience now working towards his PhD at the University of New Mexico. While studying a chart produced by Feely and Sabine, apparently showing a strong correlation between rising atmospheric CO2 levels and falling oceanic pH levels, Wallace noticed that some key information had been omitted.
Mysteriously, the chart only began in 1988. But Wallace knew for a fact that there were oceanic pH measurements dating back to at least 100 years earlier and was puzzled that this solid data had been ignored, in favour of computer modelled projections.
When Wallace emailed his query to Feely and Sabine, however, he found them less than helpful.
Sabine replied that it was inappropriate for Wallace to impugn the “motives or quality of our science” and warned that if he continued in this manner “you will not last long in your career.” Having provided Wallace with a few links – all of which turned out to be useless – he concluded his email by saying “I hope you will refrain from contacting me again.”
This response, again, calls to mind the behaviour of Michael Mann in response to queries from Steve McIntyre about where to find the raw data for his Hockey Stick. Mann was similarly obfuscatory, rude and dismissive.
Undeterred, Wallace eventually got hold of the instrumental records which Feely and Sabine had chosen to exclude from their graph of doom and plotted a time series chart of his own, covering the period from 1910 to the present.
His results were surprising. What they suggest is that global acidification is a figment of Feely’s and Sabine’s imagination: there has been NO reduction in oceanic pH levels in the last century.
Wallace says: “Oceanic acidification may seem like a minor issue to some but, besides being wrong, it is a crucial leg to the entire narrative of ‘human-influenced climate change’.”
He adds: “In whose professional world is it acceptable to omit the majority of the data and also not disclose the omission to any other soul or Congressional body?

Sunday, December 7, 2014

Alarmists ramp up BS in run-up to Paris conference.

With data tampering at NASA in overdrive to meet the 2014 "warmest year ever " requirement for Paris next year Paul Homewood examines the RSS satellite record for the year to date and compares it to previous years.

As the satellite record does not suffer from UHI or locality issues it acts an accurate indicator of global temperature . It shows 2014 in 7th place which hardly justifies the hysteria alarmists are trying to generate.
For those of you who don't know what data tampering at NASA looks like it is basically cooling past temperatures and elevating current temperatures to achieve a distorted warming signal. From Steven Goddard:


Wednesday, November 19, 2014

Four feet of global warming hits Buffalo

The farce of the US president touring the world to raise funds to cool an allegedly overheated globe is starkly shown by the start of another devastating winter at home with four feet of snow falling in Buffalo. Children in Buffalo certainly know what snow is contrary to the past  loony predictions of warmist "scientists".
View image on Twitter
Carpark in Buffalo
 Parts of New York are measuring the season’s first big snowfall in feet, not inches.
As many as four feet fell in parts of the Buffalo area on Tuesday, with some forecasts predicting up to six feet through Thursday.
Conditions have been made worse by lake-effect snow, a condition in which cold winds blow over a lake’s warm water surface. 

Saturday, November 15, 2014

News from the Obanana Republic

The Manchurian Candidate has announced an agreement with China that he would attack the US economy with stringent and expensive cuts in emissions in return for China agreeing to continue increasing emissions on it's way to becoming the globe's economic super-power.This brilliant agreement has been hailed as a major breakthrough by his intellectually challenged supporters.
Obama has only two years left to complete his mission and time is running out for him and his EPA stormtroopers to inflict further damage.
The latest news is that he plans to borrow 3 billion dollars from China to send to third-world countries to "combat" climate change ,whatever that means. This is not going to go go over well at home where US voters have different priorities like better schools and hospitals and similar silly things.

The New York Times revealed today that the president is about to announce that three billion dollars of U.S. taxpayer money will be given to other countries to help “the world’s poorest adapt to the ravages of climate change.”
The Democrats love to taunt Republicans about not “getting” the science of climate change. Well, if the president goes through with his plan to hand billions to foreign countries as part of his global warming crusade, he will be getting another lesson in the political science of foolishly wasting American tax dollars on climate change, an issue many Americans don’t really care about.
The new Republican majorities in the House and Senate could seize on this latest blatant tone-deaf overreach and use it to build serious opposition to the Democrats’ dream of a wealth transfer from America to who knows where.  Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) already said the president’s agreement with the Chinese “is the latest example of the president’s crusade against affordable, reliable energy that is already hurting jobs and squeezing middle-class families.” Republicans in the House and Senate are going to be focused on passing the Keystone XL Pipeline, rolling back onerous EPA regulations and increasing American energy security in the 114th Congress – not on helping the president raise Americans’ power bills and sending money we don’t have to foreign lands.  I would love to see a poll on whether or not American voters think we should borrow money from the Chinese to send to remote places around the globe to fight “global warming.”

Friday, November 7, 2014

Inhofe may front Senate environment committee

The US elections have delivered the Senate to Republicans and we should now see proper Senate Committee investigation into the farcical global warming data published by NASA and NSDC . With tireless skeptic Jim Inhofe likely to head the Senate  Environment Committee changes can be expected.

  NASA and NCDC  will have to justify their warming propaganda masquerading as scientific data and answer questions such as those raised by Steven Goddard:

NCDC and NASA say that 2014 is the hottest year ever. They are lying.
Satellites show that this year is no where near the warmest, and temperatures are on an 17 year long downwards trend.
ScreenHunter_4367 Nov. 06 06.25
Arctic sea ice extent is at a 10 year high, and very close to the 1981-2010 average.
Antarctic sea ice extent is near a record high.
Northern Hemisphere snow cover is also near a record high.
None of the data is compatible with the claims of record heat by NASA and NCDC. They are committing fraud, and need to be investigated by Congress.

Tuesday, October 21, 2014

Fred Singer - Vindication is sweet!

Fred Singer
Fred Singer, one of the greatest living scientists and a prominent climate skeptic has been ridiculed because he gave an opinion as a scientist that second-hand smoke was not harmful. For that his reputation has been slimed by the intellectual pygmies that infest the Global Warming underworld . They have used his connection to tobacco to discredit his global warming skepticism with Naomi Orestes calling him a "Liar for Hire" , a statement which now may have  legal consequences.
A definitive scientific study has found that Fred was completely correct about the link between second hand smoking and cancer.
A large-scale study found no clear link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer, undercutting the premise of years of litigation including a Florida case that yielded a $350 million settlement.
The article in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute details a study of 76,000 women over more than a decade, which found the usual link between smoking and cancer. Lung cancer was 13 times more common in current smokers, and four times more common in former smokers, than in non-smokers.
The study found no statistically significant relationship between lung cancer and exposure to passive smoke, however.
Fred Singer's bio is below.
S. Fred Singer
BornSeptember 27, 1924 (age 90)
NationalityAustrian, American
EducationB.E.E electrical engineering (1943)
A.M. physics (1944)
Ph.D. physics (1948)
Alma materOhio State University,Princeton University
OrganizationProfessor emeritus of environmental science,University of Virginia
Founder and president,Science & Environmental Policy Project
Known forEarly space research; first director of the U.S. National Weather Satellite Service (1962–1964); involvement inglobal warming controversy
AwardsHonorary doctorate, University of Ohio, 1970; Special Commendation from President Eisenhower for the early design of satellites, 1954; Gold Medal Award for Distinguished Federal Service

CO2 - A lovely gas feeding billions

Dr Will Happer ,phycisist from Princeton University has prepared a Powerpoint presentation called The Myth of Carbon Pollution , the title of which is self-explanatory. The graph below shows the greening of the globe caused by increased CO2 , an  average of 11% which applies to food crops across the world , a fact conveniently ignored by the scientific charlatans promoting the Global Warming scam.

The increase in crop yields specifically caused by CO2 is feeding more than a billion people and the effect is shown dramatically in CO2 plant growth tests.
World class graphic ,by Dr Sherwood Idso . 2 yr old Eldarica pines . Click for almost great .pps

For those who think that these are just crack-pot ideas you only need to check the credentials of William Happer and his group listed below including Freeman Dyson recognised as Einstein's successor.

Saturday, October 18, 2014

Nitwit of the week award

John Kerry claims that climate change and Israel is to blame for ISIS implying that if we reduce the .04% of CO2 in the atmosphere ISIS will promptly cease cutting off heads on TV  and join rehab  programs for misunderstood assassins. Obviously nothing a few group-hugs won't fix!
 Secretary of State John Kerry on Thursday night rejected any link between Islam and extremism practiced by the likes of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS/ISIL/Daesh), pointing instead to factors such as poverty among youthful Mideast populations, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – and climate change.

Friday, October 10, 2014

Wind turbines cause hearing loss

Residents living near wind turbines will be heartened by the latest research published by the Royal Society showing low frequency noise causes hearing damage interfering with the normal ear function. The wind lobby and a largely compliant medical profession has continually downplayed and ignored innumerable complaints from distressed wind farm neighbors who now have real ammunition against these ugly birdmincers.
Living close to wind farms may lead to severe hearing damage or even deafness, according to new research which warns of the possible danger posed by low frequency noise. 
The physical composition of inner ear was “drastically” altered following exposure to low frequency noise, like that emitted by wind turbines, a study has found.
The research will delight critics of wind farms, who have long complained of their detrimental effects on the health of those who live nearby.
Published today by the Royal Society in their new journal Open Science, the research was carried out by a team of scientists from the University of Munich.
It relies on a study of 21 healthy men and women aged between 18 and 28 years. After being exposed to low frequency sound, scientists detected changes in the type of sound being emitted from the inner ear of 17 out of the 21 participants.
The changes were detected in a part of the ear called the cochlear, a spiral shaped cavity which essential for hearing and balance.
“We explored a very curious phenomenon of the human ear: the faint sounds which a healthy human ear constantly emits,” said Dr Marcus Drexl, one of the authors of the report.
“These are like a very faint constant whistling that comes out of your ear as a by-product of the hearing process. We used these as an indication of how processes in the inner ear change.”
Dr Drexl and his team measured these naturally emitted sounds before and after exposure to 90 seconds of low frequency sound.

Sunday, October 5, 2014

BOM ignores inconvenient data

Dangerous warming in the 1880's obviously caused by horse flatulence.

The Australian Bureau of Meteorology has been under sustained attack recently for blatantly cooking the temperature data books to achieve "unprecedented" warming due to an increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. But just as the declining arctic ice scam requires starting the record in 1979 when ice was at a very high level , the BOM has scrapped temperature records prior to 1900 to preserve the scam..
Real Science has the story:

Climate experts now pretend that the Australian temperature record began in 1910. They do this to hide all of the record hot years before 1910.
ScreenHunter_3249 Oct. 02 07.31
The BOM is a national disgrace and the so-called "unprecedented warming" has been created by unprecedented fiddling of the  books!

Saturday, October 4, 2014

Tell me why!

From Pointman comes a moving plea for humanity.

You plant saplings in your leafy suburbs doing your bit to save the Earth while the poor in the developing countries are running out of shrubs to burn to keep themselves alive. You talk about living in harmony with God’s good green Earth to your plump congregations while the world’s poor can do nothing more than lay damp towels over their dying children and hope for the fucking best. 

Read the whole article.

Thursday, October 2, 2014

Other people's money

Francois Hollande and Segolene Royal at a French Socialist meeting, with Julie Gayet in the background, 22 October 2011

Francois Hollande , France's socialist president took some time off from his complicated love life  to blow a billion dollars of his constituent's money with a pledge to  the UN slush fund known as the  Green Climate Fund. Finding a spare billion dollars when France's economy is in the toilet is no mean feat but obviously the money was not required for roads,schools or hospitals or other luxuries for the French peasantry .
Meanwhile more responsible leaders from Australia and Canada had no trouble avoiding such grandiloquent gestures and sensibly kept their wallets firmly closed.
 View image on Twitter

Wednesday, October 1, 2014

Bureau of Manipulation

Australia's Bureau of Meteorology is still under fire for tampering with the Australian temperature record turning cooling into warming with unjustified changes. BOM is being forced to set up an independent review board to audit procedures.
An article Maurice Newman of the Australian sums it up.

WEATHER bureaus are a protected species. Often criticised, their workings remain a mystery to most of us. They continue to ­escape close scrutiny.
In an op-ed in Britain’s The Telegraph (December 19, 2010), the mayor of London, Boris Johnson, blamed much of the city’s pre-Christmas transport chaos on the Met Office. The Met had predicted 1C to 1.5C warmer temperatures. The reality was the coldest December in 100 years. “Is it really true no one saw this coming?” Johnson asked. Well no. He identified Piers Corbyn of Weather Action, a private weather forecaster, and went on: “He has no telescope or supercomputer. Using a laptop, huge quantities of publicly available data and a first-class degree in astrophysics, he gets it right, again and again.”
Perhaps a predisposition to man-made global warming accounts for the Met Office’s failure to predict abnormally harsh winters in Britain? After all, its chairman for two full terms was Robert Napier, a global warming activist and former head of WWF UK. The Met’s leaning came to light in leaked emails and revelations from Russian scientists. It and the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia were shown to have systematically contorted data past and present to achieve the desired warming dir­ection. The frustrated CRU climatologist-programmer, Ian “Harry” Harris, admitted to struggling with the complex computer programs and conceded he would do what the CRU usually did, “allow bad databases to pass ­unnoticed and good databases to become bad”.
The leaked emails also informed us of Australia’s collusion in the warming hype. There was an email from Phil Jones referring to Australia “inventing” the Dec­ember 1995 monthly value, and there was reference to Australian scientists who “would like to see the section on variability and extreme events beefed up if possible”. The head of climate monitoring and prediction ser­vices at the Bureau of Meteorology boasted about a policy that “snows” sceptics.
Doctoring data or throwing inquirers off the track to deliver an outcome is unscientific and unacceptable at any time. Yet in climate science there seems to be a culture of toleration. In 2009 John Theon, retired chief of NASA’s Climate Processes Research Program, testified to a US Senate inquiry that “scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results”.
Fast forward to today. This newspaper’s environment editor, Graham Lloyd, published information that raises questions about the quality of Australia’s temperature records. In a series of articles, Lloyd published details about the Bureau of Meteorology’s data “homogenisation”, the practice that involves the mixing, matching and deletion of temperature records and that seemed to create its own discontinuities. The bureau claims to observe world best practice. Perhaps. But homogenisation practices globally are under challenge, so conformity provides little comfort. If temperature manipulation can happen somewhere, why not elsewhere?
In response to The Australian’s report, the BoM quietly released a “nothing to see here” summary of the impact of temperature adjustments at 112 locations around Australia with the list of reference stations used for comparison. The stated reasons for homogenisation seem arbitrary. Words like “merge”, “move” and “statistical”, provide little understanding of the thinking behind each decision or the reason stations were chosen. Colonial records are dismissed, notwithstanding the existence of Stevenson screens and the undoubted diligence of record keepers pre-1910. To the layman, the list of so-called “nearby” stations used to homogenise data raise questions of suitability. Is Bathurst jail really an appropriate site to include for homogenising Bourke’s records?
As a member of the World Meteorological Organisation, the BoM is inevitably caught up in global warming politics. After all it was the WMO that part established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and it remains an anthropogenic warming propagandist.
The BoM is a large and expensive agency, employing 1700 people and costing more than $300 million a year to run. The importance of its database and the reliability of its forecasts go well beyond direct operating costs and daily bulletins. As the bureau says, 10 per cent of Australia’s GDP is weather sensitive. This makes its input to public policy potentially valuable. But it must first dispel suspicions of a warming bias. The memory of Climategate and its casual approach to celsius conversion, lingers. It should explain why homogenisation consistently turns cooling trends to warming and why pre-1910 records were dropped and, with them, the extreme heatwaves of the Federation drought.
The record is error-ridden. Even to an amateur, the latest information dump prompts more questions than answers. The concerns about Rutherglen raised by Lloyd as to why a 0.35C cooling became a 1.73C warming still have no satisfactory explanation. No supporting documentary evidence, algorithms or methodology have been produced, leaving the unfortunate impression that temperature records were falsified.
As Einstein warned, “Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.” Indeed, those who doubted the reliability of the “high quality” records that were abandoned for the 2011 ACORN-Sat data are unlikely to find much comfort in the latest release. But it’s not only temperatures where doubts exist.
In 2008, David Stockwell, a niche ecological modelling expert, found: “The most worrying failure was that simulations (CSIRO/BoM models) showed increases in droughted area over the last century in all regions, while the observed trends in drought decreased in five of the seven regions identified.”
Lending its name to clearly partial scholarship only increases concerns that the bureau puts ­climate change advocacy ahead of scientific rigour and transparency. Trust in our national climate records is critical. Yet the more we see, the more we question. Now is not the time for a tame review.For the sake of public ­policy and the BoM’s reputation, the air must be cleared.
Nothing short of a thorough government-funded review and audit, conducted by independent professionals, will do.

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Pause is old enough to vote in Australia

It is now 18 years since any global warming occurred according to accurate satellite data. An eighteen year old whose birthday was today would be able to vote and yet have seen no statistical change in global temperatures during his lifetime.

Sunday, September 28, 2014

Dr Karl and cherry-picking

A good friend of mine who is a true believer has informed me that he gets his global warming science from Dr Karl who has an ABC radio program and who also writes articles for the ABC . Giving the doctor his due he answers questions on many scientific questions well and it seems that only when he gets into the global warming area that science goes out  the window and is replaced by the global warming catechism.
His latest foray on the subject should be titled Dr Karl's Great Moments in Nonsense it is so bad. In it he joins the warmist world in it's desperate attempts to keep their failed theory alive after nearly 20 years of no warming. He accuses skeptics talking about the "global warming pause" of cherry picking facts. He then does some extraordinary cherry picking himself.
Claim 1: Two bodies, the Royal Society and the US National Academy of Sciences, warned that "climate change is more certain than ever."
Their accurate data shows that the climate, as measured by surface temperature of air and water, is still getting hotter.
There are four major global temperature data sets all showing Dr Karl has got it wrong.
The most accurate record is the RSS satellite data showing 18 years of no warming and even the massively tampered GISS record shows a 10 year flat record. 
Claim 2.
There are other indicators that inform us about the state of the global climate.
They include the volume of the Arctic sea ice (which has been shrinking), snow in the Northern Hemisphere (also shrinking) and glaciers (more shrinking).
Arctic ice records from satellites only go back to 1979 when it was at a high level due to global cooling and it is true that Arctic ice has been cyclically shrinking since then. Dr Karl neglects to mention there was a lot less ice in the seventies than now. He also neglects to mention the huge recovery of Arctic ice this year increasing a whopping 64% from 2012. He also does not mention the all-time record high for Antarctic sea ice this year.
ScreenHunter_3049 Sep. 25 06.10
Records from NOAA  show 1979 start  date distorts graphs.

Northern Hemisphere snow cover seems not to be shrinking.
And if you are a skier you would love this last decade looking at NH winter snow increasing at a great rate.

Claim 3
In the oceans we measure the sea level (which has been rising as an accelerating rate).
We can simply check our own Brisbane Bar tide gauge showing very little sea level rise.

 We can also check with a real expert on the oceans Professor Axel-Morner

In summary it would seem that the good Doctor Karl has been doing some cherry-picking himself !

Thursday, September 25, 2014

Over 1000 real scientists stand up against scam

How climate consensus is achieved.
An updated list of over 1000 real scientists challenging the global warming pseudo-science  has been recently updated. From Global Research:

Nobel Prize-Winning Stanford University Physicist Dr. Robert B. Laughlin, who won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1998, and was formerly a research scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
“In essence, the jig is up. The whole thing is a fraud. And even the fraudsters that fudged data are admitting to temperature history that they used to say didn’t happen…Perhaps what has doomed the Climategate fraudsters the most was their brazenness in fudging the data”
 Link to Complete 321-Page PDF Special Report
More than 1,000 dissenting scientists (updates previous 700 scientist report) from around the globe have now challenged man-made global warming claims made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and former Vice President Al Gore. This new 2010 321-page Climate Depot Special Report — updated from the 2007 groundbreaking U.S. Senate Report of over 400 scientists who voiced skepticism about the so-called global warming “consensus” — features the skeptical voices of over 1,000 international scientists, including many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN IPCC. This updated 2010 report includes a dramatic increase of over 300 additional (and growing) scientists and climate researchers since the last update in March 2009.

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

Alarmist anger at Wall Street Journal snub to climate march

The Wall Street Journal relegated the climate march to a small section inside the paper having important news for the front page and even then concentrated on the arrests of demonstrators and not the end of the world is nigh message the true believers felt appropriate.
More than 100 demonstrators were arrested in lower Manhattan on Monday after blocking traffic along Broadway for hours as part of a climate-change rally.
The protest, called Flood Wall Street, included a brief march and a sit-in around the Charging Bull statue in the Financial District.
The Guardian is upset that the WSJ is taking such a rational approach to the march. Perhaps the fact that it hasn't warmed in two decades and global warming is no longer real news has something to do with it. It also goes into damage control on an article by Steven Koonin on climate model inaccuracy preciously reported here.

As has become the norm for media outlets owned by Rupert Murdoch, just before a half million people participated in the People’s Climate Marcharound the world, The Wall Street Journal published an opinion piece downplaying the risks and threats posed by human-caused global warming. The editorial was written by Steven Koonin, a respected computational physicist who claims to have engaged in “Detailed technical discussions during the past year with leading climate scientists,” but who is himself not a climate scientist.

Koonin did admit that the climate is changing and humans are largely responsible, and noted,

There is well-justified prudence in accelerating the development of low-emissions technologies and in cost-effective energy-efficiency measures.

This is a step in the right direction. Unfortunately, Koonin’s editorial focused almost exclusively on the remaining uncertainties in climate science. Ironically, he stated,

Any serious discussion of the changing climate must begin by acknowledging not only the scientific certainties but also the uncertainties, especially in projecting the future.

But Koonin himself got the certainties wrong. For example, we know that humans are the main cause of the current climate change, responsible for about 100% of the global warming since 1950.

Hypocrite alert

Celebrities were thick on the ground in New York at the "climate" march having jetted in in their private jets and limousines to tell the  proletariat to reduce their living standards to "cure"the planet by reduction of consumption.
Of course doubling of electricity and fuel prices is of no consequence to the uber-rich who exhorted the masses to do what they say and not what they do. Even with some of them having carbon footprints the size of small cities the hollywood hypocrisy is still lost on the true believers .
From the  Climate Depot:
New York City – Actor Mark Ruffalo declared certain questions off limits to the media today at the People’s Climate March in New York City.
During the media availability press event, Ruffalo was asked in a one-on-one interview with Climate Depot if celebrities like Leonardo DiCaprio, who boasts that he will fly around the world to fight global warming and former VP Al Gore,  are the best spokesmen for global warming given their huge carbon footprints. (See: Leo DiCaprio: ‘The Argument Is Over. Climate Change Is Happening Now’)
“Oh brother. That is a question you shouldn’t be asking here today because that defies the spirit of what this is about,” Ruffalo told Climate Depot. 

Tuesday, September 23, 2014

Greenie Garbage

Disrespectful: Trash can be seen littering the route following the climate change march on Sunday
They tell us there were hundreds of thousands  in New York telling us how we should live and love the planet and to provide a shining example for all of us. Unfortunately the example given was that of pigs .Obviously the sandalista,Communists,activists and fellow travellers crowding into New York to make a political point care little about the environment if the garbage left behind is an example.
The Daily Mail has the story:
Climate change skeptics have branded protesters who marched through Manhattan on Sunday as hypocrites for leaving litter strewn across the city.
New Yorkers uploaded images to social media sites showing piles of trash - included ditched paper and cardboard signs - left behind after thousands took part in the People's Climate March.
'Their love for the Earth is so real, they couldn't even use a trash can,' one critic, known as @chelsea_elisa on Twitter, wrote beneath an image of an overflowing trash can.
'Somehow this doesn't seem too green 2me,' David Kreutzer, a research fellow at the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation, wrote alongside another photo of litter on the ground.


Monday, September 22, 2014

Goebbels would be proud!

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.  .” Joseph Goebbels
The propaganda department at Climate Change Central has gone into overdrive as climate data, including a massive jump in Arctic sea ice ,record Antarctic sea ice and a cooling globe increasingly contradicts their failed theory.
With a 64% increase this year  in Arctic summer ice over 2012 the same old "Arctic death spiral" story has been re-released with the date moved forward from 2013 completely ignoring 2014 data.
“The Arctic ice cap is in a death spiral,” said Peter Wadhams, professor of ocean physics at Cambridge University. He has just returned from a research voyage in which the thickness of Arctic sea ice was measured by sending a mini-submarine under the floes.
Remember this from the "settled science department":
ScreenHunter_409 Jan. 18 21.32

Meanwhile AAP releases the days-old fraudulent "hottest August ever" story already covered here but picked up uncritically in the main stream media including the Australian.

Sunday, September 21, 2014

Germany- Ill wind blows no good!

Germany is now beginning to suffer from excessive and  foolhardy investments in subsidised "green" energy as many wind investments go into the red as forecast by skeptics.The ailing wind industry in Germany should be a salutary lesson to Australia , the USA and other countries going down the same path . The under-performing wind industry in Germany was oversold  and is now in trouble as red ink mounts with two thirds of projects running "badly or very badly".
From NoTricksZone:

Wind parks experienced a gold rush atmosphere during the last decade, with thousands of turbines being erected over the last 15 years. Now the data are coming in on their real performance. It looks pretty bad. The German SWR TV report (can be viewed at Youtube) first presents the background on wind energy development in Germany and tells the story of “disappointed investors”, especially in the western German state of Rhineland Palantinate.

Initially investors’ expectations of getting rich on wind were high, the report says. Big returns were promised (between 400 and 800% in 2006). But for a wide majority that dream has shattered violently as losses mount.

“2/3 of all projects are running badly to very badly”

The SWR report at the 1:20 mark says the promises of huge returns were based on overly optimistic wind model forecasts. Werner Haldorf of the pro-wind-energy German Association of Wind Energy analyzed wind park performance and sums up the “surprising” results at the 1:38 mark:

We can say that one third of all projects have pleased the investors, or at least have been satisfactory – depending on how high or low the subjective expectations were, satisfied also with respect to the planning results. And two thirds of all projects are running somewhat badly to very badly.”

Some sanity at last!

With most scientific institutions throughout the world in the hands of activists supporting global warming catastrophism I am delighted to see that the august American Physical Society may be putting science before politics and revising the Society's stand on global warming. The APS represents physicists and others in the physical sciences in the US and is one of the premier scientific bodies in the world.
Following public resignations by renowned phycisist and Nobel Laureate Hal Lewis and others over the issue a sub-committee was set up to revise the APS Climate Change statement with physicist Dr. Steven Koonin as chair.
The good doctor has written an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal which will terrify warmists as it is an intelligent review of climate change by a senior scientific figure not supporting the "consensus".
We often hear that there is a "scientific consensus" about climate change. But as far as the computer models go, there isn't a useful consensus at the level of detail relevant to assessing human influences.
It will be very interesting to see the final position statement of the APS.
H/T The Hockey Stick