2012! We're all doomed!

If you're as old as me, you've lived through more than one of those "end of the world" days. I remember in middle school the entire student body was so upset that it was rumored that on a particular day the world was going to come to end; the day came and went and here I am to talk about.

As we approach the 2012, there will be more hype as a new era predicted by the Mayan calendar begins. As our eminent demise looms more closely, I predict GOREBAL alarmist will tell us that the Mayans predicted our own self destruction, and I'm sure that many will be enticed to follow along; why not, it makes good news!

So why am I bringing this up now? Well, according to this editorial by Jeff Jacoby of the Boston Globe, Oleg Sorokhtin of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences and senior scientist at Moscow's Shirshov Institute of Oceanography is quoted as saying..

"The latest data . . . say that earth has passed the peak of its warmer period, and a fairly cold spell will set in quite soon, by 2012."

Wouldn't that be something?! How would we ever go about warming the earth?! Perhaps it will be recommended that we sell the SUV's that we traded in for eco-friendly automobiles to the world's poorest populations so they can idle them, increase CO2 emisions and save us all! However, don't expect ALGORE to give up his SUV for that cause either.

Jeff Jacoby has been cited in this blog before. He does a good job of sifting through the buffoonery that is the "shock-and-awe" of the supposedly intellectually gifted environmental movement. Here are some highlights of the article:

"Stock up on fur coats and felt boots!" advises Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences and senior scientist at Moscow's Shirshov Institute of Oceanography. "The latest data . . . say that earth has passed the peak of its warmer period, and a fairly cold spell will set in quite soon, by 2012."

A re-emphasis of the obvious...

"Carbon dioxide is not to blame for global climate change," Sorokhtin writes in an essay for Novosti. "Solar activity is many times more powerful than the energy produced by the whole of humankind."

The inescapbale truth (unless you're the lame-stream media):

Even though atmospheric carbon dioxide continues to accumulate - it's up about 4 percent since 1998 - the global mean temperature has remained flat. That raises some obvious questions about the theory that CO{-2} is the cause of climate change.

And the conclusion?

Because slashing carbon dioxide emissions means retarding economic development, they warned, "the current US approach of CO{-2} reduction is likely to increase human suffering from future climate change rather than to decrease it."

How painfully obvious is it becoming that we are in the midst of the biggest swindle in the history our species? How is it have we come down this road? How far must we travel before we start asking some serious questions?

Ultimately, as we shudder in cold and wrap ourselves blankets, ALGORE will be disgraced, or they will retool their theory to explain why their messiah, in this case, Mr. Heatmiser, hasn't presented himself.

Br-r-r! Where did global warming go?

By Jeff Jacoby
Globe Columnist / January 6, 2008

Crazy is still crazy, not matter what it looks like!

It's been a little bit since my last post. I did a very good job expanding my carbon footprint by eating my fair share of turkey, gravy, stuffing; I even opted for Idaho potatos because they have to travel much further to get to my dinner table, than the ones grown here in Maine.

The picture illustrates an important lesson, that no matter how good things may appear, they are what they are. My first wife is a good example of looks being deceiving!

David Lindorff, takes a very cheerful approach to the reluctance of those who, like myself, regard climate change as a natural phenomenon, not human induced; he would like us to drown!

In keeping with the "peace on earth" and all that other ho-hum jazz of the season, Lindorff suggest that the "Red" states, those who consistently vote conservative, lay in the flood plains of the south east, and coastal regions of California, so it's only natural that we die. Although, Lindorff who lives on the metropolitan east coast, suggest dikes and leavies could be built to protect, New York, Philadelphia, and Boston. Why not, we saw first hand how well they worked for New Orleans!

Lindorff suggests that conservatives deserve to die, due to their inaction on climate change. Now if that's the case, why would he even bother to write about it? Seem to me he would keep the secret under wraps while he, and his cronies buy up beach front property in Oklahoma.

The important thing is that we, on the higher ground both actually and figuratively, need to remember that, when they begin their historic migration from their doomed regions, we not give them the keys to the city.

So, let me get this straight, suggesting that conservatives drown, and deserve to do so is taking the "higher ground?" Huh? Well, there you have it. To me, liberals would love the Utopia that conservatives are creating for them! Why the hate then?

Global Warming Will Save America from the Right...Eventually
by Dave Lindorff

The consensus is, there is no consensus.

Not only Yeah, but HELL YEAH!

Or is it no? Consensus is a word that floats around the GOREBAL Warner circle quite often. In their minds, there is a "consensus" that human caused climate change is real and an unavoidable fact of our greed and consumerism. Perhaps they're right, I mean, I would think there probably is a general consensus among the so-called environmentalists that we are to blame for the ills of the world, despite evidence likewise.

But as human caused climate change critics swell in numbers, the "consensus" a nice little term that the legacy media likes to hang thier credibility on, is simply fading away. The IPCC is composed of 2,500 members, but not everyone is drinking the kool-aid.

Recently, and in contrast to the tears shed for the environment at the Bali conference, more and more current and former IPCC panelists are coming forward against ALGORE and his hysteria machine. At least 400 speaking out despite the political and professional pitfalls that obviously face these heretics. And as per the article...

Several scientists in the report said many colleagues share their skepticism about man-made climate change but don't speak out publicly for fear of retribution, acording to the report.

I could go on and on about about the doubt being cast on this all, but I think it is best said in the words of the dissenting members...

"I protest vigorously the idea that the climate reacts like a home heating system to a changed setting of the thermostat: just turn the dial, and the desired temperature will soon be reached," -Dutch atmospheric scientist Hendrick Tennekes

"Even if the concentration of 'greenhouse gases' double, man would not perceive the temperature impact." -Oleg Sorochtin of the Institute of Oceanology at the Russian Academy of Sciences

If you have a distrust of Russians, what does the expert reviewer for the IPCC say?

"The hypothesis that solar variability and not human activity is warming the oceans goes a long way to explain the puzzling idea that the Earth's surface may be warming while the atmosphere is not. The [greenhouse-gas] hypothesis does not do this. ... the public is not well served by this constant drumbeat of false alarms fed by computer models manipulated by advocates." -David Wojick, expert reviewer for U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

And, of course, the obvious shot at the media's role in all of this...

"The media is promoting an unprecedented hyping related to global warming. The media and many scientists are ignoring very important facts that point to a natural variation in the climate system as the cause of the recent global warming." -Chief meteorologist Eugenio Hackbart of the MetSul Meteorologia Weather Center in Sao Leopoldo-Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

So what does the GORE camp say about all this? Stop me, if you've heard this one before...

After a quick review of the report, Gore spokeswoman Kalee Kreider said 25 or 30 of the scientists may have received funding from Exxon Mobil Corp.

So where is the consensus? And as Hendrick Tennekes concludes, "The endless claims of a 'consensus' about man-made global warming grow less-and-less credible every day."

True, but as long as the legacy media can cash in on our ignorance, man-made GOREBAL Warning may have a long demise.

Scientists doubt climate change
By S.A. Miller

Sometimes I take a couple of days off from the blog to let my brain relax a little, but I'm still indexing, reading, and generally keeping an eye out for next dropping of GOREBAL guano. Then I came across this gem of an article.

Eco boat is a "zero net footprint" craft that is going to circumnavigate the world completely with bio diesel. I know what you're thinking, "what a good use of wasted french fry grease." Well, apparently french fry grease is not nearly as attention grabbing as using human body fat!

Demonstrating further commitment to the cause, Bethune underwent liposuction and donated enough to produce 100ml of biofuel, while two other, larger volunteers also had the procedure, making a total of 10 litres of human fat. This in turn produced seven litres of biofuel, which could help the boat travel about 15km.

Now here is something that ALGORE could certainly do to offset his the carbon footprint of his 10,000 acre mansion! And just think of the good now that Hollywood's elite can claim to be doing for the environment! Why I can see Rosie O'Donnell now, claiming to have offset billions of tons of carbon output!

"Politicians in Western Europe must be prepared to stand up to the oil industry, and be more supportive of the biofuels industry to make sure the production of biofuels is sustainable."

Now if they found a way to use their brains for bio fuel, I would wholeheartedly support that statement!

Eco-boat powered by human fat attempts round the world speed record

Even Global Warming causes Global Warming!

Damn it!

Well, someone did their homework, actually "This is London" did their homework, and calculated the cost, in terms of emissions, for Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary, to fly all over the world to express his deepest concerns for the environment. Apparently, concern kills!

According to This is London online, Ban Ki-Moon will be traveling from Bali to New York, adding 4,300 miles to his itinerary. And as far as irony goes....

The flight from Tokyo to New York takes him the wrong way around the world to arrive in time for the reception of a Korean concert-at Carnegie Hall, where he is the guest of honour. The concert is titled Around The World In Eighty minutes.

HUH?! Seems to me you would not want to draw attention to yourself when you're traveling back to your home country, the wrong way!

I think one of the people posting to the article sums it up best...

What’s funny is that they are contributing OUR money to “various environmentally friendly projects” to offset THEIR extravagance. - Qaton Chozeh, Detroit, Michigan

But a submission by a chap from the UK simply named Brett succinctly sums up the article..

There's something haunting, ominous and ironic about someone claiming that the world is going to end while causing it at the same time. It's like a preacher passing the collection plate for and 'end of the world fund.'

BRAVO, BRETT! BRAVO!

What a lot of hot air!
This is London
December 12, 2007

Breaking hockey sticks over their heads!

Well, I couldn't come up with any other clever titles for this post but I did post these polar bears playing hockey, so you have to cut me some slack.

Anyone that has been following the climate change debate knows the hockey stick theory. For those that do not, I've posted the graph that depicts the estimated temperature variation globally for the past 1,000 years. Around here, we call it "Lie #1."

As the article states, inconvenietly missing from the timeline is "the widely recognized Medieval Warm Period (about A.D. 800 to 1400) and the Little Ice Age (A.D. 1600 to 1850)." If such crucial data is absent from the chart, then how can an entire social movement be built upon a chart with incomplete data?! I'll have the answer to that question in tomorrow's post!

The article starts with the shaft and goes right to the blade of the IPCC's most coveted possession, the "Hockey Stick" theory, the "tip of the spear," if you will, of the IPCC's argument that my '97 F150 is creating ocean front property opportunities in Ohio. The author, David Legates, puts that tip to a grinding stone.

Starting at the shaft....

They contend that Mann and his colleagues in their 1998 and 1999 papers unjustifiably truncated or extrapolated trends from source data, used obsolete data, made incorrect calculations, and associated data sets with incorrect geographical locations.

The broken blade...

Mann’s warming estimate has grown substantially over the last couple of years, apparently to accommodate his continuing claim that the 1990s were the warmest decade of the last two millennia, but we found that the blade of the hockey stick could not be reproduced using either the same techniques as Mann and Jones or other common statistical techniques.

The uncertainy factor...

Mann and Jones’ uncertainty assessment — the estimate of how much warmer or cooler than their reconstruction the temperature could actually have been — is based solely on how well the proxy records match the observed data. However, their assessment fails to account for several significant forms of error, including:

• Biases in hemispheric air temperatures estimates
• Reconstructions based on a small number of trees
• The inability of a proxy record to represent regional air temperatures
  

The stick is broken....

Consider that if 1) the amount of uncertainty is doubled (an appropriate representation of the “sheath”), 2) appropriate 20th century increases in observed air temperature are applied (a correct representation of the “blade”), or 3) the period from A.D. 200 to 1900 correctly reproduces millennial-scale variability (a reliable representation of the “shaft”), then one can have no confidence in the claim that the 1990s are the warmest decade of the last two millennia. The assertions of Mann and his colleagues — and, consequently, the IPCC — are open to question if even one component of their temperature reconstruction is in error, let alone all three!

'Nuff said!

Breaking the “Hockey Stick”
by David R. Legates

"Do Nothings" you can really support!

Meow! Lazy kitty says, "Why bother?" And seriously, why bother? I wonder if the world spent as much energy (no punn intended) on Global hunger, would anyone go without a Big Mac today? Hmmm...I'll have to think about that one.

But on a more serious note, the United Nations, specifically the IPCC, are hell bent on stifling the opposition and those legitimate scientists who are screaming, "Show us the proof!" Why?

Well, when you're the UN and you need to line your pockets with the West's money, I don't think you'd be very well willing to give that up. And think of the power you'd be losing if GOREBAL Warning were in fact, untrue. Who can forget the "Food for Oil" program?

There is currently a conference going on in Bali being heald by the UN to discuss so called "climate change." Apparently Lord Monkton, this chap from the U.K. who is also a leading climate researcher, has soured the tea of the conference and put the IPCC on bloody report!

Here are some of the highlights:

"Climate change is a non problem. The right answer to a non problem is to have the courage to do nothing," Monckton told participants.

And if you ever wondered how open the IPCC is to differing opinion...

"UN organizers refused my credentials and appeared desperate that I should not come to this conference. They have also made several attempts to interfere with our public meetings," Monckton explained.

Oh, and there are others...

"This is the most lavish conference I have ever been to, but I am only a scientist and I actually only go to the science conferences," Evans said, noting the luxury of the tropical resort. (Note: An analysis by Bloomberg News on December 6 found: Government officials and activists flying to Bali, Indonesia, for the United Nations meeting on climate change will cause as much pollution as 20,000 cars in a year." - (LINK)

And...

Evans, a mathematician who did carbon accounting for the Australian government, recently converted to a skeptical scientist about man-made global warming after reviewing the new scientific studies. (LINK)

And yet still, what I've been saying all along...

"We now have quite a lot of evidence that carbon emissions definitely don't cause global warming. We have the missing [human] signature [in the atmosphere], we have the IPCC models being wrong and we have the lack of a temperature going up the last 5 years," Evans said in an interview with the Inhofe EPW Press Blog. Evans authored a November 28 2007 paper "Carbon Emissions Don't Cause Global Warming." (LINK)

I guess to the UN, self importance is far greater than the truth; why am I not surprised?

Skeptical Scientists Urge World To ‘Have the Courage to Do Nothing' At UN Conference
By Marc Morano