Another Global Warming threat.....

[Magox]

Another Global warming threat bites the dust....

 

First it was the purposeful manipulation of data to back their evangelistic crusade on "Global Warming" on the "Climate Gate" issue, then we find out that their claims on the Himalayans ice caps melting was utter bull ****, now this.

 

It’s not just the threat of Himalayan glaciers disappearing by 2035.

 

Now another headline grabbing IPCC scare story is melting away. A report in Sunday’s London Times highlights new humiliations for the IPCC.

 

“The most important is a claim that global warming could cut rain-fed north African crop production by up to 50% by 2020, a remarkably short time for such a dramatic change. The claim has been quoted in speeches by Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman, and by Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general.”

 

There is however one teensy-weensy little problem. As Professor Chris Field, the lead author of the IPCC’s climate impact team has now told reporters that he can find “no evidence” to support the claim in the IPCC’s 2007 report.

 

There’s more. When the glacier story broke, IPCC apologists returned over and over again to a saving grace. The bogus glacier report appeared in the body of the IPCC document, but not in the much more carefully vetted Synthesis Report, in which the IPCC’s senior leadership made its specific recommendations to world leaders. So it didn’t matter that much, the apologists told us, and we can still trust the rigorously checked and reviewed Synthesis Report.

 

But that’s where the African rain crisis prediction is found — in the supposedly sacrosanct Synthesis Report.

 

So the Synthesis Report contains a major scare prediction — 50% shortfall in North African food production just ten years from now — and there is no serious, peer-reviewed evidence that the prediction is true.

 

But there’s more. Much, much more. Readers of the Times and the Telegraph are watching the IPCC’s credibility disappear before their eyes. The former head of IPCC has publicly said the organization risks losing all credibility if it can’t clean up its act. The head of the largest British funder of environmental research has joined the head of Greenpeace UK in criticizing the IPCC. (At Greenpeace, they want Pachauri to resign.) The Dutch government has demanded that the IPCC correct its erroneous assertion that half of the Netherlands is below sea level. Actually, it’s only about a quarter. A prediction about the impact of sea level increases on people living in the Nile Delta was taken from an unpublished student dissertation. The report contained inaccurate data about generating energy from waves and about the cost of nuclear power (this information was apparently taken without being checked directly from a website supported by the nuclear power industry). The deeply environmentalist Guardian carries a story documenting the decline in both public and Conservative Party confidence in the need to address global warming.

 

[DC Tom]

Another Global warming threat bites the dust....

 

First it was the purposeful manipulation of data to back their evangelistic crusade on "Global Warming" on the "Climate Gate" issue, then we find out that their claims on the Himalayans ice caps melting was utter bull ****, now this.

 

 

 

 

I wish to reiterate: the IPCC is a political body, not a scientific one. In a sane world, stories like this would have no impact on the science itself, as in a sane world people would understand the IPCC is not just full of ****, but is mandated to be full of ****.

 

In THIS world, however...people assume the IPCC is a scientific body.

[Magox]

I wish to reiterate: the IPCC is a political body, not a scientific one. In a sane world, stories like this would have no impact on the science itself, as in a sane world people would understand the IPCC is not just full of ****, but is mandated to be full of ****.

 

In THIS world, however...people assume the IPCC is a scientific body.

The only problem is people like Ban Ki-Moon repeat these claims to push their agenda, which in all actuality would have a tremendous impact on the global economy.

[DC Tom]

The only problem is people like Ban Ki-Moon repeat these claims to push their agenda, which in all actuality would have a tremendous impact on the global economy.

 

And let me reiterate: the IPCC is a POLITICAL organization that is full of **** by mandate. Of course Ban Ki-Moon repeats their claims - the IPCC lobbies to him, according to their mandate of pushing the idea of man-made climate change to the expense of any and all other possible explanations.

 

LaDumbass would call that scientific FRAUD [sic]. Fact is, it's not even science, it's policy. The IPCC does not "do" any science, it "consumes" (so to speak) science and generates policy...and is the worst example of how to derive public policy from science.

 

Now, is that a "problem"? Not within the context of the IPCC itself, since it does exactly what it was created to do.

[Magox]

And let me reiterate: the IPCC is a POLITICAL organization that is full of **** by mandate. Of course Ban Ki-Moon repeats their claims - the IPCC lobbies to him, according to their mandate of pushing the idea of man-made climate change to the expense of any and all other possible explanations.

 

LaDumbass would call that scientific FRAUD [sic]. Fact is, it's not even science, it's policy. The IPCC does not "do" any science, it "consumes" (so to speak) science and generates policy...and is the worst example of how to derive public policy from science.

 

Now, is that a "problem"? Not within the context of the IPCC itself, since it does exactly what it was created to do.

But but they won the Nobel Peace Prize along side Al Gore. That's got to count for something.

 

You're right though, they only base their conclusions not on any sort of discoveries that they find but on peer review and published scientific literature.

[/dev/null]

Heretics!

 

Repent or the Earth shall do unto us as was done to Haiti for our lack of faith in Copenhagen. Have you not read the Gospel of Danny Glover?

[DC Tom]

You're right though, they only base their conclusions not on any sort of discoveries that they find but on peer review and published scientific literature.

 

Not even, by the looks of what we're finding out.

[IDBillzFan]

Another Global warming threat bites the dust....

 

First it was the purposeful manipulation of data to back their evangelistic crusade on "Global Warming" on the "Climate Gate" issue, then we find out that their claims on the Himalayans ice caps melting was utter bull ****, now this.

 

Looks like Barry has had enough, and will tackle Global Warming on his own.

 

Administration Proposes New Agency to Study Climate Change

 

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration on Monday proposed a new agency to study and report on the changing climate, which has drawn concern among many scientists in recent years.

 

Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and Jane Lubchenco, head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, announced NOAA will set up the new Climate Service to operate in tandem with NOAA's National Weather Service and National Ocean Service.

 

"Whether we like it or not, climate change represents a real threat," Locke said Monday at a news conference.

 

Lubchenco added, "Climate change is real, it's happening now." She said climate information is vital to the wind power industry, coastal community planning, fishermen and fishery managers, farmers and public health officials.

 

NOAA recently reported that the decade of 2000-2009 was the warmest on record worldwide; the previous warmest decade was the 1990s. Many atmospheric scientists believe that global warming is largely due to human actions, adding gases to the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas.

 

Researchers and leaders from around the world met last month in Denmark to discuss ways to reduce climate-warming emissions, and a follow-up session is planned for later this year in Mexico. But a U.N. report that preceded the conference in Copenhagen has been widely disputed after much of the data in it was found to have been gathered unscientifically.

 

"More and more people are asking for more and more information about climate and how it's going to affect them," Lubchenco explained. So officials decided to combine climate operations into a single unit.

 

Portions of the Weather Service that have been studying climate, as well as offices from some other NOAA agencies, will be transferred to the new NOAA Climate Service.

 

The new agency will initially be led by Thomas Karl, director of the current National Climatic Data Center. The Climate Service will be headquartered in Washington and will have six regional directors across the country.

 

Lubchenco also announced a new NOAA climate portal on the Internet to collect a vast array of climatic data from NOAA and other sources. It will be "one-stop shopping into a world of climate information," she said.

 

Creation of the Climate Service requires a series of steps, including congressional committee approval. But if all goes well, it should be finished by the end of the year, officials said.

 

In recent years, a widespread private weather forecasting industry has grown up around the National Weather Service, and Lubchenco said she anticipates growth of private climate-related business around the new agency.

 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

[Alaska Darin]

Looks like some more of the "Change" we've been sold that's actually wrapped up in "**** we've been doing and can't afford".

 

A new agency. Huge surprise.

[DC Tom]

Looks like Barry has had enough, and will tackle Global Warming on his own.

 

So let's see if I have this straight: We already have NOAA's NWS and NOS, and NASA, and the NSF, and the GCRP created by the GCRA Act of 1990 that includes DOD, HUD, DOE, HHS, USAID, the EPA, and DOT all studying and reporting on climate change. So the clear and obvious solution to climate change is to create another !@#$ing government agency????

 

 

Funny thing is, it's a better jobs creation program than his actual jobs creation program.

[Frit0 Bandit0]

Meanwhile, can someone figure out a solution for Plastic soup in our ocean

[Alaska Darin]

Meanwhile, can someone figure out a solution for Plastic soup in our ocean

That's pretty much the argument I've been making all along. If envirohippies were serious about the environment, they'd demand that all this money that's going toward this garbage science be used to deal with real environmental problems.

[LaDairis]

DC Tom is trying to weasel-wordsmith his way out of the truth that he both believed The FRAUD and pushed it here.

 

 

The FRAUD was always a FRAUD, an OBVIOUS ONE at that.

 

Nobody worth a salt in science was ever fooled by it.

[DC Tom]

DC Tom is trying to weasel-wordsmith his way out of the truth that he both believed The FRAUD and pushed it here.

 

 

The FRAUD was always a FRAUD, an OBVIOUS ONE at that.

 

Nobody worth a salt in science was ever fooled by it.

 

You and conner really have to get together and discuss my pro/anti-global warming leanings. I'd pay money to watch that argument.

[Gary M]

But but they won the Nobel Peace Prize along side Al Gore. That's got to count for something.

 

You're right though, they only base their conclusions not on any sort of discoveries that they find but on peer review and published scientific literature.

 

And they promoted the "scientific consenus" which was a group of climbers.

[/dev/null]

Senator Jim Demint R-SC tweets:

It's going to keep snowing in DC until Al Gore cries "uncle"

 

http://thehill.com/blogs/twitter-room/othe...ore-cries-uncle

 

[Magox]

Senator Jim Demint R-SC tweets:

It's going to keep snowing in DC until Al Gore cries "uncle"

 

http://thehill.com/blogs/twitter-room/othe...ore-cries-uncle

 

I saw that

[Alaska Darin]

DC Tom is trying to weasel-wordsmith his way out of the truth that he both believed The FRAUD and pushed it here.

 

 

The FRAUD was always a FRAUD, an OBVIOUS ONE at that.

 

Nobody worth a salt in science was ever fooled by it.

There is a policy on this board about crusading. I'm giving you a very public warning because you seem to need it.

[DC Tom]

There is a policy on this board about crusading. I'm giving you a very public warning because you seem to need it.

 

Please...not until he explains my unabashedly pro-global warming stance.

 

 

You may as well just ban him now. You know he's going to respond to your warning with something akin to "My dad can beat up your dad!"

[LaDairis]

Please...not until he explains my unabashedly pro-global warming stance.

 

 

You may as well just ban him now. You know he's going to respond to your warning with something akin to "My dad can beat up your dad!"

 

 

 

You specifically ripped me for claiming GW is a fraud. You said it was not a fraud. Well, you were wrong. Different day, same result...

[Keukasmallies]

Once more, with feeling, damn that George Bush!

[LaDairis]

Once more, with feeling, damn that George Bush!

 

 

 

George Herbert Walker Bush was a great President who did his best to control spending with a totally Dem controlled Congress and united the world to defend documented UN borders (well, other than the borders Israel violates...) in Desert Storm. As a result, he was trashed with the most vicious media coverage of any major party Prez candidate in modern history in 1992 for not selling out our troops to the Israel lobby. Zionists Larry King and others did an "October Surprise" five days before the election with an intentionally fake Iran-Contra piece as GHWB was closing on Clinton.

 

 

George W Bush was the worst President in US history, a completely sold out idiot and traitor who spent like nobody since LBJ, socializing senior drugs by lying to Congress about the cost, with predictable economic results. W took a superpower with a surplus and sold out anything and everything he could to the Zionist lobby to get the money and especially the media coverage his pappy did not = our troops, the DOJ, the CIA, the Fed, the Treasury. W made those who hit us "not a priority" and sent way too few after them in Afghan, and then flipped off our allies in Afghan with our troops still deployed there, just as Israel wanted. W then intentionally lied and dumped our heroes in uniform in Iraq, just as Israel wanted. When the US economy collapsed because of W's porkfest, W bailed out the Chosen on Wall Street, just as Israel wanted. Jews in the US were above the law under W, including Madoff and those rabbis in NJ selling Palestinian body parts, just as Israel wanted. Under W, we were not the "United States," rather, we were the "States sold out to the Zionist Lobby." Thank you, President Obama, for deciding not to sell out the DOJ to the Zionist Lobby and instead prosecuting Zionist crooks like Madoff and those war criminal rabbi butchers.

[DC Tom]

You specifically ripped me for claiming GW is a fraud. You said it was not a fraud. Well, you were wrong. Different day, same result...

 

I specifically ripped you because you're a dumbass who doesn't know what he's talking about, and aren't even remotely capable of judging the science as fraudulent or not.

[LaDairis]

I specifically ripped you because you're a dumbass who doesn't know what he's talking about, and aren't even remotely capable of judging the science as fraudulent or not.

 

 

 

Oh, really...

 

I've been calling it a FRAUD since 1995, and definitely since I first started posting here.

 

Well, are you going to dispute that or agree with it, or stick your head back in the snow and toss another card.

 

 

It IS a FRAUD, just as I've been saying all along, and precisely the FRAUD I identified, the

 

 

DELIBERATE MISINTERPRETATION OF THE URBAN HEAT SINK EFFECT ON THE SURFACE GROUND TEMPERATURE SERIES

 

 

 

the only "raw" series that shows any warming at all...

[keepthefaith]

Oh, really...

 

I've been calling it a FRAUD since 1995, and definitely since I first started posting here.

 

Well, are you going to dispute that or agree with it, or stick your head back in the snow and toss another card.

 

 

It IS a FRAUD, just as I've been saying all along, and precisely the FRAUD I identified, the

 

 

DELIBERATE MISINTERPRETATION OF THE URBAN HEAT SINK EFFECT ON THE SURFACE GROUND TEMPERATURE SERIES

 

 

 

the only "raw" series that shows any warming at all...

 

 

Obama and company could gain more support for the green initiative if they simply focused on the the opportunitiy to reduce our dependency on foreign oil. That is of strategic importance to us long-term, it can create a lot of jobs and it can reduce emissions at the same time. That's the real opportunity and one that I believe would have broad support across party lines.

[LaDairis]

You don't quite get it.

 

"Emissions" of CO2 aren't harming anything, because they aren't warming anything (the only accusation against CO2 is the phony "greenhouse" one), and hence every single dollar we spend on "reducing emissions" ...

 

 

A) doesn't do anything

 

and

 

B) prevents that dollar from actually helping the real environment, such as in CA by building desal to reduce fresh water consumption and hence reduce those awful fires

 

 

 

 

President Obama would earn a ton of respect if he checked the raw data himself and stopped wasting our taxdollars paying liars to keep lying to us.

[Magox]

A voice of sanity.

 

Exaggeration and alarmism have been a chronic weakness of environmentalism since it became an organized movement in the 1960s. Every ecological problem was instantly transformed into a potential world-ending crisis, from the population bomb to the imminent resource depletion of the “limits to growth” fad of the 1970s to acid rain to ozone depletion, always with an overlay of moral condemnation of anyone who dissented from environmental correctness. With global warming, the environmental movement thought it had hit the jackpot — a crisis sufficiently long-range that it could not be falsified and broad enough to justify massive political controls on resource use at a global level. Former Colorado senator Tim Wirth was unusually candid when he remarked in the early days of the climate campaign that “we’ve got to ride the global-warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing — in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” (Not surprisingly, after Wirth left the Senate and the Clinton administration he ended up at the United Nations.)

 

That explains alot

[DC Tom]

Oh, really...

 

I've been calling it a FRAUD since 1995, and definitely since I first started posting here.

 

Well, are you going to dispute that or agree with it, or stick your head back in the snow and toss another card.

 

 

It IS a FRAUD, just as I've been saying all along, and precisely the FRAUD I identified, the

 

 

DELIBERATE MISINTERPRETATION OF THE URBAN HEAT SINK EFFECT ON THE SURFACE GROUND TEMPERATURE SERIES

 

 

 

the only "raw" series that shows any warming at all...

 

Dispute what, precisely? That the science is fraudulent? Yes, I'll dispute that: it's bad science, not fraudulent science.

 

And most of what you're bitching about anyway is policy, not science. You have as little understanding of the science as you do everything else.

[LaDairis]

Dispute what, precisely? That the science is fraudulent? Yes, I'll dispute that: it's bad science, not fraudulent science.

 

And most of what you're bitching about anyway is policy, not science. You have as little understanding of the science as you do everything else.

 

 

It absolutely is fraudulent. The FRAUD began after the Global Cooling fizzled in the mid 1980s. Truth be told, that was the first mistake deliberately made by the media, accepting the "cooling" during Global Cooling, which is much more accurately described as cooling "on the surface of growing urban areas disproportionately in the northern hemisphere" because that's where the "data" originated. While Mann, Gore, and Hansen were too young to be behind Global Cooling, they were fascinated with the response the Time and Newsweek stories got. People BELIEVED Global Cooling. There is even a "SuperFreinds" cartoon episode about it. After inspecting the planet's temperature data in the mid 1980s, that being

 

1. slight overall warming on and up and down 30 year cycle pattern for Surface Ground - surface of growing urban areas

2. no warming in the atmosphere according to satellites and balloons

3. no warming in the oceans

4. no evidence of any net ice melt

 

 

Mann and Hansen figured out that if they could just define "temperatures" as just Surface Ground, that series would "warm" as the cities where the measurements are taken grew over time. The timing was also perfect because SURFACE GROUND was coming off its 1970s "Global" "Cooling" near term lows and hence would likely swing higher in accordance with that 30 year or so pattern SURFACE GROUND shows (40-70 cooling, 70-98 warming, 99- cooling). The FRAUD was on. Leftist media allies would take it hook line and sinker, define those behind it as "the top scientists," censor all evidence refuting it, slander anyone questioning it, blaming each and every weather event on it (the latest being TIME claiming the snowstorms in DC are "because of" this "warming" that is only present ON THE SURFACE OF GROWING URBAN AREAS). Global Leftists saw tremendous opportunity to use THE FRAUD to GROW GOVERNMENT, RAISE TAXES, and INTRUDE ON PEOPLE's rights. The UN saw it as the ticket to empowering itself to TAX instead of BEG.

 

Twenty years later, the felons behind it have deleted a lot of the data on which their claim's are based, the ClimateGate emails show vast conspiracies to lie, to fudge data, to deny access to sceptics, and to delete data after the "peer reviewed study" is out (cover the tracks of the real raw data which showed NO WARMING).

 

Meanwhile, Planet Earth's data on temperature continues to read the following

 

 

PRECISELY NO WARMING

 

1. in the atmosphere according to highly correlated satellites and balloons

2. in the oceans, even NPR admits it

3. on the surface of Antarctica and Siberia (no urban areas there)

 

 

4. PRECISELY NO NET ICE MELT

5. PRECISELY NO BREAKOUT IN CANE ACTIVITY

6. PRECISELY NO RISE IN OCEAN LEVELS

 

 

 

 

 

You say that is not a "fraud." It was ALWAYS a FRAUD.

[Chalkie Gerzowski]

When you have too much Mighty Taco?

 

[IDBillzFan]

I try not to use Newsbusters as a link here, but I have to make an exception in this case.

 

To discuss Global Warming, MSNBC's Rachel Madcow reached deep into the authoritative mailbag to interview the Climactic King of Climate Change...Bill Nye the Science Guy, who argues that we have to pay attention to the people warning us about global warming because IPCC "got a scientific prize for making a discovery. They didn't get a minor award. This is a big deal." I had this vision of IPCC getting a box delivered with the Nobel Prize in it, and one of the guys looking at it saying "FRA-GEE-LAY! It must be from Italy! It's a major award!"

 

Bill Nye and Rachel Madcow: Setting the record straight.

[erynthered]

Flash back..........How do you like the snow fall this winter idiots?

 

 

http://www.breitbart.tv/flashback-clips-sn...-urgent-action/

 

 

 

I know, I know this means nothing..............

[DC Tom]

Flash back..........How do you like the snow fall this winter idiots?

 

 

http://www.breitbart.tv/flashback-clips-sn...-urgent-action/

 

 

 

I know, I know this means nothing..............

 

Increased warming would mean winter weather patterns over North America featuring weaker high pressure over the central US, meaning the flow of moist gulf air from the southwest would tend more westerly than usual, meaning the nor'easter snowstorms that usually hit New England and the Maritimes would instead tend to develop further west and hit the mid-Atlantic.

 

So yes, increased snowfall in the mid-Atlantic would be a sign of global warming. In as much as one could predict long-term trends from short-term data...which one can't.

[erynthered]

I'll just throw this here.......

 

 

No way he wrote that himself.

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/opinion/...e&st=Search