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.

August 24, 2013

The Deep Blue Sea

Unable to find increasing warming where it had been projected,  a  new culprit for the "missing" heat in the global warming saga has been assigned, heat is now being trapped deep in the oceans.
Huge amounts of heat – equivalent to the power of 150 billion electric kettles – are being continuously absorbed by the deep ocean, which could explain why global warming has “paused” over the past 10 to 15 years, scientists have concluded in a series of reports to explain why the Earth’s rate of warming has slowed down.
Interesting isn't it how the climate science community which has for years assured us that the science was settled seem to have been caught unaware by this possibility. After all, not only did they not project this "pause" they have never said that this deep blue hide away was a  concern to their ever evolving theory.

The reason that they are now telling us that the heat is in the oceans is because it is not increasing in the atmosphere where they had said it would be and this simple but extremely large failure of their theory should be enough to end this charade, but it won't.

My question is a simple one, how did it get there? How did the heat bypass the atmosphere as projected and go directly to the ocean depths?  I mean, if the scientist who claim to know how the climate system works have been telling us for decades that global warming was going to heat the atmosphere but now that it has paused, they now tell us that it has gone deep under the waves instead, then what caused this transformation of the theory? In some ways it is like their entire theory has fallen into a previously unknown sink hole and we are supposed to just accept this new development with unquestioning faith.

I have looked at all the projections and graphs that those IPCC folks put out and not once have I seen, heard or read anything about an ocean vacation for global warming  Did the atmosphere reach some previously unknown saturation point for heat so the heat had no choice but to take a dive into the ocean?
Consider the great lengths that science and scientist went through to prove or disprove Einstein's General Theory of Relativity yet here we have the scientific community just accepting a major change in the most important scientific theory of our time as if this was common practice and indeed it is  becoming common practice.

I remember reading something that  Kevin Trenberth wrote explaining heating the Earth, he said " the incoming radiation may warm up the ground or any object it hits, or it may just go into drying up surface water. After it rains and the sun comes out, the puddles largely dry up before the temperature goes up."

Now the worlds oceans are by no means "puddles" but isn't the  theory of  the enhanced greenhouse effect based on the belief that a slight heating of the atmosphere by CO2 will cause a positive feed back of more evaporation? And this evaporation will cause increased water vapor in the atmosphere to magnify the natural green house effect? Did this happen? Have we reached some new tipping point where, rather than causing evaporation, the heat now is forced into the deep oceans?

Remember that the global warming theory is not about the sun directly heating the Earth, that they claim is constant, rather the theory depends on radiant heat being trapped by demon CO2 in the atmosphere. So to be valid this new claim can have nothing to do with increased sun heating the oceans so to speak, but rather increased air temperatures heating the oceans. Try warming a bathtub by turning up the heat in your bathroom, you will be waiting a long time. So in affect what they are saying is that we have reached a point where the atmosphere is so warm that the increasing heat rather than heating the atmosphere is now heating the oceans,  the deep oceans no less.

It is bad enough that these "scientist" can suddenly change the criteria by which their theory is measured,  they have been doing that from the beginning, now they are changing the theory's dynamics to explain that which they did not theorize or at the very least they are changing  the sequence by which their "settled science" operates.

It is not as if they were not specific about what we should expect their theory to produce. The IPCC made projections
 The committed warming trend values show a rate of warming averaged over the first two decades of the 21st century of about 0.1°C per decade, due mainly to the slow response of the oceans. About twice as much warming (0.2°C per decade) would be expected if emissions are within the range of the SRES scenarios.
As Richard Courtney explains (emphasis in original)

In other words,
The IPCC expected that global temperature would rise at an average rate of “0.2°C per decade” over the first two decades of this century with half of this rise being due to atmospheric GHG emissions which were already in the system.

This assertion of “committed warming” should have had large uncertainty because the Report was published in 2007 and there was then no indication of any global temperature rise over the previous 7 years. There has still not been any rise and we are now way past the half-way mark of the “first two decades of the 21st century”.

So, if this “committed warming” is to occur such as to provide a rise of 0.2°C per decade by 2020 then global temperature would need to rise over the next 7 years by about 0.4°C. And this assumes the “average” rise over the two decades is the difference between the temperatures at 2000 and 2020. If the average rise of each of the two decades is assumed to be the “average” (i.e. linear trend) over those two decades then global temperature now needs to rise before 2020 by more than it rose over the entire twentieth century. It only rose ~0.8°C over the entire twentieth century.
The IPCC and the climate change activist have to find an explanation for the "lost" heat  in their projections so they simply bury it in the ocean where it is far more difficult to monitor and where the ability to monitor is so new as to take even more decades to verify any claims. they make.

In their arrogance they expect society  to just accept all of this at face value as they continue to promote policies that devastate economic growth and propagandize their shape shifting theory to school children. Now they have finally reached what amounts to the depths of their desperate attempt to maintain credibility by burying the heat deep in the oceans where no one can see or feel it. In truth the only thing that needs to be deep sixed is this nonsensical theory that has plagued mankind for a generation.

August 20, 2013

Hubris Defined

“Sea level is going to keep rising even if we stabilize other aspects of the climate system,”
Kevin Trenberth

August 14, 2013

Skeptics From Around The Globe


Prof. Horst-Joachim Lüdecke

For decades Germans were misinformed and successfully "brought up" in an eco-ideological way. This was possible, because the green movement has conquered the editorial staffs of the leading German media, like e.g. public service television, the Süddeutsche Zeitung, die ZEIT, and others. In addition, eco-ideologists also have taken over the important academic key positions. Professor Hans-Joachim Schnellhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Research (PIK) and the Chancellor's climate adviser, is one good example. He is propagating a "great transformation" and the removal of democratic rules in order to achieve this goal. --

Climate protection has nothing to do with genuine nature conservation (as e.g. protection of rain forests and fish populations in the oceans). The prescribed means for reducing CO2 are effectless and meaningless . --