Pages

April 21, 2014

Notable Quotes

"Gradually I have found myself more impressed with the arguments of the climate change skeptics--the reviled "deniers"--than with the Michael Mann school of hockey stickology or the IPCC striptease in which it discards its pretences to "settled science" a glove at a time without ever getting down to bare truth."

Peter Wood

April 20, 2014

The AFP finds climate change in underground pipes


Angono Petroglyphs | Photo Credit: www.photobucket.com
Angono Petroglyphs | Photo Credit: www.photobucket.com
When I read the headline "Climate Change threatens 5,000-year-old artwork in the Philippines" on a nAFP  article my first thought was that it must be about sea level rise threatening the ancient artwork which are carvings known as petroglyphs.  As I read the article I quickly realized my first assumption about sea level being the danger was incorrect when I came to this:
The carvings are in mountains about 90 minutes' drive from Manila that only a few decades ago were entirely forested.
Obviously sea level rise was not an immediate concern so I continued reading the article searching for the climate change which was "threatening" the artwork. The article was filled with interesting facts about the carvings including :
 The carvings were first documented by acclaimed Philippine artist Carlos Francisco in 1965 while he was leading a Boy Scout troop on a hike.
I also learned that the carvings were on land owned by a real estate developer who donated the hillside where the carvings are located back to the National Museum, which maintains them.  The article seems to imply a certain disappointment that more land was not set aside for the historic site since "upper-class" homes, a golf course and  a road are nearby but the "underfunded" museum is unable to adequately protect the 127  stone age carvings which are classified as national treasures.
However after reading the entire article I was unable to determine exactly what "climate change" was "threatening" these precious artifacts. Perhaps, I thought, I had missed something so I re-read the article and in order of their appearance here are all the listed dangers to the artwork.
...encroaching urbanisation, vandals and the ravages of nature are growing threats....
...But that has done little to stem the powerful tide of neglect....
...Wind and rain, as well as plant roots creeping through the stone, have also damaged the soft rock where the carvings are etched....
...vandalism is also a constant worry.
People have scrawled their names on the rock and there are slash marks on some carvings that archaeologists have determined were only made recently.
Mining at a nearby gravel pit a few years ago also shook the ancient site...
... new housing developments nearby would mean more underground pipes, which could weaken the hillside.
Nowhere in the article is there a connection between "climate change" in any of its alleged manifestations and the ancient Philippine carvings.
Interesting enough the carvings were put on an endangered list back in 1996 before the "ravages" of climate change were well understood.
The World Monuments Fund, a New York-based private group that works to protect historical sites, placed the Angono Petroglyphs on its list of endangered monuments in 1996 and has provided help in their preservation.
So I went to the World Monument Fund'web site in search of the "climate change" that was responsible for its inclusion on their list. Here is what they have to say about the dangers confronting these world archaeological treasures.
....Almost immediately after they were brought to public attention, the National Museum of the Philippines made several molds of the carvings. Subsequently, the site underwent cleaning and preliminary conservation during the 1980s. By the early 1990s, the Angono Petroglyphs were threatened by regional development pressure. After investigations, the importance of the site was fully recognized and measures were taken to protect the area and the carvings.
Although granted protection from total destruction, there was fear that new road construction and blasting into the hill behind the petroglyphs might have threatened the cave’s stability. The reshaped earth also raised concerns about the increasing threat of water damage to the site. Uncontrolled vegetation and fauna had causes erosion of the petroglyphs over time.
The website goes on to explain the wonderful work that the WMF has done to help protect the site, but nowhere in their history of involvement with ancient carvings as in the AFP story is there anything at all remotely resembling a "climate change" danger to the artwork.
Although this is an extreme example, it has become all too common in the world's media that there need be no true direct link to any real climate event let alone scientific evidence to "pin" climate change on negative occurrences.  If, as in this case, mankind's advancement plays a role in the event then it seems to be almost accepted media practice to just blame "climate change" knowing that an indoctrinated citizenry will translate it all to mean "man-made global warming caused this."

April 17, 2014

The Real Green Machine

(Re-posted from my column in The Brenner Brief)



CO2 not the villain in global warming fight


global warming fight
Appalachian Cove Forest|CREDIT: Wiki Commons

Global warming fight pointing fingers at CO2

A recent Reuters article has a headline which illustrates just how insane the global warming fight has become.  Without the least bit of embarrassment or for that matter objective analysis Reuters headline reads “Act fast to curb global warming or extract CO2 from the air-UN.” Extract CO2 from the air?
The entire premise of the “man-made” global warming hypothesis is predicated on a narrative, a narrative which itself is predicated on pseudo-science.  The narrative is that CO2 (carbon dioxide) being a greenhouse gas is warming the atmosphere and man’s burning of fossil fuels is responsible for this increased CO2  and thus global warming. The first point that needs to be understood is that CO2 is not toxic, not pollution and not even that “smokey” substance coming out of smoke stacks or car exhausts you see every time a news agency does a report on “climate change.”  Carbon dioxide is a harmless invisible trace gas that is vital for all life on planet Earth.  Does the term “carbon based life” ring a bell?
Everything on earth is made up of combinations of different elements – all of which can be found on the periodic table. Considering that the periodic table contains 118 elements itseems a pity that organic life tends to feature only five or six of those elements in any vast quantities. The main one being carbon. It would be impossible for life on earth to exist without carbon. Carbon is the main component of sugars, proteins, fats, DNA, muscle tissue, pretty much everything in your body…
Carbon dioxide is after all what we exhale, perhaps the UN ought to recommend periods of mandatory breath holding as a means to “extract” CO2 from the air.  But Co2, what little of it that there is in the air, is absolutely vital to our planet.   As the renowned physicist Freeman Dyson explains:
“The fundamental reason why carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is critically important to biology is that there is so little of it. A field of corn growing in full sunlight in the middle of the day uses up all the carbon dioxide within a meter of the ground in about five minutes.  If the air were not constantly stirred by convection currents and winds, the corn would stop growing.”
The Reuters article gives away this important fact when they explain one of the methods being contemplated to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. Theproposal which ironically is listed under the sub-heading of “Riskier Options” in the article is this:
Simpler methods to extract greenhouse gases from the air are to plant trees, which soak up greenhouse gases as they grow.
The truth is that this “simpler method” this “Riskier Option” is actually an ongoing natural process that needs no administration from an international political body, it is called the carbon cycle.  This particular aspect of CO2  extraction  has been a part of Earth’s ecosystem for millions of years.  Even if you buy into the idea that “man-made” carbon dioxide is heating the Earth any place outside of computer model forecasts of a political and financially motivate cadre of activist scientists, Old Ma Nature is fully capable of absorbing our excesses. In fact nature thrives on this particular man-made excess.
Back in 2003 as the global warming scare was beginning to be hyped as a cataclysmic man-made disaster a group of scientists at NASA’s Earth Observatory published an article, entitled “Global Garden Gets Greener” where they reached the following conclusion:
Leaving aside for a moment the deforestation and other land cover change that continue to accompany an ever-growing human population, the last two decades of the twentieth century were a good time to be a plant on planet Earth. In many parts of the global garden, the climate grew warmer, wetter, and sunnier, and despite a few El Nino-related setbacks, plants flourished for the most part.
The study represented a time frame when the Earth actually was warming. The fact that there has been no discernible heating of the Earth’s atmosphere for sixteen years ought to have buried this agenda driven “theory” but given the investment in it by so many powerful institutions and governments it is doubtful it will die an easy death.  The lack of warming however does not mean that mankind has not continued to pour this plant food, CO2, into the atmosphere in ever-increasing quantities.  This disconnect between the climate cult’s projections for warming as opposed to the reality of the world we live in, has caused an ever more frantic effort by the cult to explain away reality.
It has also been a boon for plant life on Earth, though propaganda by the “experts” would lead you to believe the opposite in 2009. Despite  evidence to the contrary and relying only on their cherished computer models the alarmist scientific community declared that the Amazon forest would soon wither and die away due to droughts. This they proclaimed was the direct result of mankind’s insatiable desire to advance through the burning of fossil fuels.  Their Cassandra calls were echoed throughout the media such as this from the UK Guardian :
Global warming will wreck attempts to save the Amazon rain forest, according to a devastating new study which predicts that one-third of its trees will be killed by even modest temperature rises. The research, by some of Britain’s leading experts on climate change, shows that even severe cuts in deforestation and carbon emissions will fail to save the emblematic South American jungle, the destruction of which has become a powerful symbol of human impact on the planet. Up to 85% of the forest could be lost if spiraling greenhouse gas emissions are not brought under control, the experts said. But even under the most optimistic climate change scenarios, the destruction of large parts of the forest is “irreversible”
Irreversible is a pretty definitive claim and one that one would hope that scientists would not use lightly or without definitive proof, but science just isn’t what it used to be and what was irreversible in 2009, well we shall let the facts speak for themselves.
On the home page of Prof. Ranga B. Myneni’s Climate and Vegetation research group in the Department of Earth and Environment at Boston University is this remarkable map of the planet Earth.
What is remarkable about this map is not the areas that are green, you would expect that, but these areas are where the Earth has become greenerin the past three decades. In other words what you are seeing based on actual satellite observations is the greening of the Earth. But it gets better.Studies show the reasons behind this remarkable greening and this is where the reality of life’s natural processes deviate sharply from the computer model world of the climate cult. The study shows that 50% of this increased greening is the result of “climate constraint” e.g.temperature, water or solar radiation having been relieved, meaning improvements for plant growth.   For example an area of land where plant growth was once limited due to lack of water has, in the past three decades, seen an increase in water and therefore there has been additional “greening”. But the more remarkable finding is that the reason for the remaining increased greening is the direct result of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide.
CO2, as we were taught in grade school biology far from being a killer is in fact the very breath of life, it is after all what you breathe out, and plants need in order to grow and provide us with oxygen.  Ninety Eight percent of oxygen in the atmosphere is the result of photosynthesis by plants and other organisms; photosynthesis is not possible without carbon dioxide.
This reality could no longer be denied when in 2013 a group of scientists had to back track on their previous predictions  of the Amazon’s demise and admit that they had not factored in the positive effect of  CO2 on the Amazon’s ecosystem and like the gods they believe they are issued a reprieve for the worlds largest rain forest. Evidently nothing is irreversible or actually “settled science”.  From Reuters in 2013:
The Amazon rainforest is less vulnerable to die off because of global warming than widely believed because the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide also acts as an airborne fertilizer, a study showed on Wednesday. The boost to growth from CO2, the main gas from burning fossil fuels blamed for causing climate change, was likely to exceed damaging effects of rising temperatures this century such as drought, it said.
In fact the new study which factors in the positive effects of CO2 shows that the nasty bi-product of the industrial age, CO2, is a net positive to the Amazon rain forest.  The cult in its quest to scare the world into submission to their agenda had chosen to leave the calculations, intentionally or not, out of their revered climate models until the science showing the opposite results became overwhelming. It is entirely possible that climate models were not previously capable of forecasting the positive effects of CO2 on plant life however the fact that CO2 is a plant fertilizer and is a boon to plant life is not some new scientific discovery, it is well-known biological factgoing back to the eighteenth century.  They just chose to ignore that grade school biology in order to advance their doom and gloom “scenarios.”
The simple truth is that far from being the scourge of planet Earth, CO2 is its life milk.  Mankind in our advancement from caves to space has remarkably, some might say divinely, stumbled upon a green machine which we should proudly embrace called the Industrial Revolution. Carbon Dioxide released by our burning of fossil fuels far from being destructive is in fact a blessing to both plants and mankind and that is the reality which is being denied by a scientific community which has lost all perspective in its quest to advance political causes.

April 7, 2014

The truth never needs such methods,

The fact that the UN's IPCC uses inaccurate and unproven climate models to promote fear in order to obtain influence for their agendas is reprehensible but to be expected from a corrupt organization such as the UN. But what is truly disturbing and will lead to the collapse of societies if not corrected is that once great institutions, both scientific and political not only do not call out this obvious fraudulent scam, they leach onto them for their own gain.

You cannot continue to build your foundation on lies without consequences. The fall out from the collapse of the "climate change" lie is growing in direct proportion to the height of it's promoter's influence on society. These lies are of such importance to their benefactors that historically lies of such magnitudes have led to genocide in order to protect them. For all of our advances, we are but one lie away from barbarism. If power is not taken away from the "alarmist" segment of those who wield this lie, they will use that power to destroy "deniers." We are just a few short years from inquisitions of those who do not "believe."

As the man once said "you shall know them by their fruits" the fruits of the climate change cultist are growing ever more panicky and increasingly dictatorial. The truth never needs such methods, the truth is obvious to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear.

IPCC WGII report relies on exaggerated climate model results

February 20, 2014

Dame Julia's very big storm.

Attributing events to "climate change" while at the same time claiming that the "cause" of climate change, global warming has "paused" is about as despicable as, well the whole global warming narrative.  I have mentioned this before but I believe it is important to point these things out every time they occur.

The most recent example comes from the UK Met office and its head Dame Julia Slingo, the Met Office’s chief scientist. Here is what she had to say,

“In a nutshell, while there is no definitive answer for the current weather patterns that we have seen, all the evidence suggests that climate change has a role to play in it,”

Of course she presents no such evidence and the "journalist" seems not to be interested in  any evidence but there may be a very good reason for this,  There is no evidence, how could there be when there has been no warming?  But consider what the "senior scientist" actually said. On the one hand "there is no definitive answer for the current weather pattern," yet somehow "all the evidence suggests  that climate change has a role to play in it,"

What "climate change" is presenting the  evidence?  It is like saying that "climate change" broke down the Arctic vortex causing cold weather in the United States this winter. What was the "climate change" that caused this?  As far as I am aware there is only one.  The World Wildlife Fund describes it very well, the narrative that is:
The increase of CO2 in the atmosphere thickens the 'greenhouse blanket', with the result that too much heat is trapped into the Earth's atmosphere. This causes global warming: global temperatures rise and cause climate change.
This is what Dame Julia is talking about right?  The climate change caused by global warming caused by man's CO2 right?  Well how could this flooding event be consistent with or evidence of something that is not occurring?  The Met Office itself has gone to great lengths to explain this "pause" in global warming:

The recent pause in warming

Climate projections over the globe

July 2013 - Global mean surface temperatures rose rapidly from the 1970s, but have been relatively flat over the most recent 15 years to 2013. This has prompted speculation that human induced global warming is no longer happening, or at least will be much smaller than predicted. Others maintain that this is a temporary pause and that temperatures will again rise at rates seen previously.

The Met Office Hadley Centre has written three reports that address the recent pause in global warming....

 In fact in one of the Met Offices own reports trying to explain away the pause in global warming says:

There is greater uncertainty in recent changes in surface specific and relative humidity (RH) over the oceans than over the land. It is also important to note that changes in relative humidity (RH)6, a measure which more directly relates to human comfort and other societal impacts, has declined over land during the last decade.  
This drying out over land (in the relative sense) may be linked to the fact that the oceans, the major source for water vapour, have warmed slower than the land. This may also be linked to changes in global circulation and therefore regional rainfall patterns. Provisional research suggests that a decrease in RH in the mid-latitudes is partially offset by an increase in some other regions.
So how is a drying out of the atmosphere over land, in the mid latitudes,
consistent with  climate change caused by global warming which isn't, able to cause "severe storms that have flooded thousands of homes in Britain,"?



despite the fact that" there is no definitive answer for the current weather patterns " they actually have a dozy.  It is the result of rain in Indonesia:

According to new analysis from the Met Office, persistent rainfall over Indonesia and the tropical West Pacific triggered a global weather system that included the severe storms that have flooded thousands of homes in Britain, as well as the exceptionally cold weather in North America.

Let's put this in a formula shall we?

Increased CO2 = No global warming = climate change = heavy rain in Indonesia = floods in Britain and cold weather in North America.

Now that non global warming caused climate change induced rain storm in Indonesia is the reason for record snow fall in Boston and floods in Moorland in Somerset, Great Britain.

Makes sense to me how about you?

December 30, 2013

A hundred years and a hundred miiles



The global warming theological society which call themselves scientist are always Johnny on the spot to remind us that one single event or one short period of time does not climate make, at least until it works in their favor. When some dramatic weather event such as Katrina or "superstorm" Sandy occurs or we have a particularly severe drought, or a particularly wet spring, it really does not matter the weather event, these events are said to be what we can "expect" as the result of climate change.

Of course this in a very real sense is true, climate changes which causes weather events. But what these theologians mean is all of these occurrences are the result of "man made" climate change.

This is what makes the ongoing saga of the Australian Antarctic Expedition of 2013 so delightfully ironic. This "expedition" comprised of eco-tourist, climate change scientist and environmental journalist whose publications were the primary benefactors of the expedition are, as everyone is now aware, stuck in sea ice miles away from the actual continent of Antarctica.

The purpose of the expedition was to retrace the Mawson expedition of 1912 and take duplicate "readings" of that expedition in order to show how much climate change has effected Antarctica in the last century. The alleged journalist joined the alleged scientist so that they might record and report on the destruction of Antarctica by man made climate change.

One suspects that what they hoped to record and report to an anxiety filled world were scenes and readings which showed Antarctica melting away due to global warming. Scenes not unlike those shown in the attached video at their intended landing spot. Unfortunately for our intrepid modern day explorers they are still stuck in 2-3 meter thick ice over a hundred miles short of the spot where Mawson and his true explorers landed a century earlier.

You will note in the video which was made from a film shot by the original Mawson expedition upon landing that much of the landscape is rocky, not snow and ice covered and their wood sailing ship is anchored off shore in the open waters.

This very film, if it were taken today as it was intended to be taken by the Australian Antarctic Expedition of 2013, with the onlooking penguins on a rocky shore would have been used as "proof" that Antarctica is melting away. The very fact that this film taken 101 years ago almost to the day by a primitive yet truly scientific expedition compared to the now ice trapped "expedition" should be proof positive that indeed the climate does change, just not always as these nincompoops would have the world believe.

Any thinking human being and they seem to be growing in shorter supply, would look these two expeditions and ask themselves how it is possible for a "scientific" community to make such outlandish claims about climate when the photographic evidence exists to disprove it. The Mawson film is a hundred years and a hundred miles ahead of its time.

It is undeniable that the "weather" at the time of the Mawson expedition was far milder than that of the "weather" at the time of the 2013 expedition. If the "weather" over a century ago was milder than today then is that not proof that any changes in the "weather" is probably not man caused but natural?

It is not just this example, the record is filled with examples of how this "fraud" perpetrated by dupes masquerading as scientists are misleading a trusting public in order to continue an agenda not based on science but mostly on ideology and profits. Every scare tactic propagated by these childish actors is eventually retracted yet the belief lives on. A belief in a world that at least in this case existed a century ago.

I suspect that history will label this time period as "The Age of Fools."

H/T Watts Up With That

August 26, 2013

An inconvenient chill

FROM-Editorial-The Washington Times

Global-warming proponents will face a day of reckoning on Capitol Hill

Al Gore and the climate doomsayers are at it again. The former vice president took to Twitter this week to declare the planet “under threat,” and he already has a solution. Mr. Gore’s group, the Climate Reality Project, is running a “put the heat on denial” campaign throughout August to remind people that it’s hot not because it’s summer, but because Americans are using their air conditioning and driving automobiles.

Alarmists hope to convince the public that the only way to avert certain catastrophe is to force everyone to use “green” energy. Mr. Gore coincidentally stands to profit handsomely from such a conversion through his politically correct investment firm, Generation Investment Management.

So far, Americans have been cold to the idea of giving up the conveniences of modern life. Because the planet has refused to warm up and cast doubt on the alarmist prophecies, Mr. Gore has stepped up his proganda game. In the past month, there have been 2,055 cities across the country reporting chilly summertime peak temperatures. In Texarkana, Texas, for example, the mercury can soar beyond 110 degrees in August. Residents on Friday enjoyed balmy temperatures in the 70s, beating a record set three decades ago.
Forget the evidence. The left insists proof of planetary overheating is overwhelming. “Nine of the 10 hottest years on record have occurred since the year 2000,” says Mr. Gore’s climate group. “Extreme weather events like heat waves, heavy rains and drought are becoming more common and more severe. Coastal communities all over the world are preparing for the impacts of sea level rise.” Those predictions have proved less reliable than the local weatherman’s forecast.

Hurricane season began June 1, and there haven’t been any hurricanes yet. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s index of drought conditions has been well below normal over the past 12 months. The seas aren’t rising because the polar ice isn’t melting. The National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado Boulder reports Arctic sea ice is maintaining “average” levels while “Antarctic sea ice is near a record maximum extent for mid-August.” In short, everything is just fine, and that has Mr. Gore and his allies worried.

They ought to be. On Thursday, the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power announced plans next month to grill bureaucrats from a dozen federal agencies about how they’ve been using taxpayer funds to advance a global-warming agenda. This presents an ideal opportunity for Congress to insist the government get out of the propaganda business. Mr. Gore is a wealthy man with plenty of cash to advance his own business interests.