Our Dear Leader has recently threatened to take on limiting carbon emissions through regulatory agencies, since Congress “won’t act”. I’d like to remind everybody that a Democratic controlled Senate refused to ratify Kyoto years ago by a vote of 99-0.
Many, if not most people believe than man is on the road to causing catastrophic global warming, after all, Al Gore, Barack Obama and legions of others tell us incessantly that the science is settled, why there is even scientific “consensus”, even though the very concept of scientific consensus is antithetical to the concept of science itself.
Climate Forcing! Feedbacks, The PDO and The AMO! Aerosols, Greenhouse gases, the Sun and the Clouds, oh my! Don’t forget La Nina and el Nino, the Little Ice Age, and the Medieval Warming Period, to say nothing of cows belching and farting…and especially politics!
Here is my RichTAkes! on Anthropogenic Global Warming!
(as always, my comments appear in cayenne, and the use of a flash-blocker to disable auto-play is recommended due to multiple embedded vids.)
US physics professor: ‘Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life’
“It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion.”
American Physical Society Sees The Light: Will It Be The First Major Scientific Institution To Reject The Global Warming ‘Consensus’?
– Confident predictions of catastrophe are unwarranted.
Lindzen’s 2009 WSJ piece appeared after the Climategate CRU* email scandal erupted
Perhaps the preeminent US climate scientist, Lindzen was Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He was lead author of Chapter 7, ‘Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,’ of the IPCC Third Assessment Report on climate change.
Anthony Watts has assembled a fine set of articles chronicling the Climategate scandal
The Climategate Whitewash Continues: Don’t Believe the ‘Independent Reviews’ About Goings on at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia
The science isn’t settled and we still don’t know how best to solve the energy problems of our planet.
Professor Judith Curry’s take on the recent Bengtsson controversy
One of the most telling features of climate science is just how few climate scientists changed their minds as the evidence changed. The pause in global temperature in the last 15 years or so has been unexpected. Now we know why:
Former NASA scientist Dr. Roy Spencer and University of Colorado climate scientist Roger Pielke, Jr. slammed Holdren for his “pseudo-science rambling.” Plenty of links here
a primer on positive and negative feedback loops.
“We check the main predictions of the climate models against the best and latest data. Fortunately the climate models got all their major predictions wrong. Why? Every serious skeptical scientist has been consistently saying essentially the same thing for over 20 years, yet most people have never heard the message.”
No media bias here folks. Nothing to see, move along now.
It is a real shame that Obama politicized NASA, and this is the crap we get for it. A listing of political, government organizations/lobbies who have all chosen to repeat a lie often enough.
Climate Consensus and ‘Misinformation’: A Rejoinder to Agnotology, Scientific Consensus, and the Teaching and Learning of Climate Change.pdf
Hansen and Schmidt of NASA GISS under fire for climate stance: Engineers, scientists, astronauts ask NASA administration to look at empirical evidence rather than climate models
former NASA scientists harbored doubts about the significance of the C02 climate change theory and have concerns over NASA’s advocacy on the issue
James Hansen et al., from 1999:
“…in the U.S. the warmest decade was the 1930s and the warmest year was 1934…First, regarding U.S. temperature, we have argued (Hansen et al., 1999a) that the next decade will be warmer than the 1990s, rivaling if not exceeding the 1930s…” I guess he was wildly incorrect with that prediction.
the 97% Lie
An interesting segment with John Stosell, Roy Spencer, and Gavin Schmidt. Separately. Schmidt refused to appear with Spencer. Very strange indeed. Also, burning hydrocarbons is good for the environment, it saves trees and helps plants grow faster.
Perspective On The Hot and Dry Continental USA For 2012 Based On The Research Of Judy Curry and Of McCabe Et Al 2004 | Climate Science: Roger Pielke Sr.
more on the PDO and AMO
bet ya didn’t know it was a contest, I didn’t! Our clean coal-fired plants are being shut down, while China is bringing online hundreds of dirty coal-fired plants each year. Guess where our manufacturing base is moving to? (GE and GM has pretty much moved there too)
The war on coal continues. More Obama regs to come soon which coal will not be able to meet by design.
Leaked IPCC Report: Scientists Got Global Warming Rate Wrong | The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)
The 31-page ‘summary for policymakers’ is based on a more technical 2,000-page analysis which will be issued at the same time. It also surprisingly reveals: IPCC scientists accept their forecast computers may have exaggerated the effect of increased carbon emissions on world temperatures – and not taken enough notice of natural variability.
* They recognize the global warming ‘pause’ first reported last year is real – and concede that their computer models did not predict it. But they cannot explain why world average temperatures have not shown any statistically significant increase since 1997.
* They admit large parts of the world were as warm as they are now for decades at a time between 950 and 1250 AD – centuries before the Industrial Revolution, and when the population and CO2 levels were both much lower.
* The IPCC admits that while computer models forecast a decline in Antarctic sea ice, it has actually grown to a new record high. Again, the IPCC cannot say why.
* A forecast in the 2007 report that hurricanes would become more intense has simply been dropped, without mention.
This year has been one of the quietest hurricane seasons in history and the US is currently enjoying its longest-ever period – almost eight years – without a single hurricane of Category 3 or above making landfall.
“The slowdown is a bit of a mystery to climate scientists”
“So far, no one has been able to provide a compelling answer to why climate change seems to be taking a break,” IPCC Lead Author Hans von Storch told der Spiegel in a June 2013 interview. Storch said the IPCC will have tone down its climate models unless warming quickly and rapidly accelerates ”According to most climate models, we should have seen temperatures rise by around 0.25 degrees Celsius (0.45 degrees Fahrenheit) over the past 10 years. That hasn’t happened. In fact, the increase over the last 15 years was just 0.06 degrees Celsius (0.11 degrees Fahrenheit) — a value very close to zero,” Storch told der Spiegel.
The IPCC asserted in its 2007 report that the Himalayan glaciers would likely melt by 2035 due to global warming, prompting great alarm across southern and eastern Asia, where glaciers feed major rivers. As it turned out, that prediction was traced to a speculative magazine article authored by an Indian glaciologist, Syed Hasnain, which had absolutely no supporting science behind it. Hasnain worked for a research company headed by the IPCC’s chairman, Rajendra Pachauri. IPCC’s report author, Marari Lai, later admitted to the London Mail, “We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policymakers and politicians and encourage them to take action.”
Can we count upon objective conclusions from scientists who feel “called to action”? Consider commentary by the late Stephen Schneider who served as a lead author for important parts of three sequential IPCC reports. In a 1989 interview he told Discover magazine: “On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, on the other hand, we are not just scientists, but human beings as well. And like most people, we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that, we need to get some broad-based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of the doubts we might have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”
Oh, by the way… while “climate” is generally associated with periods spanning at least three decades, Schneider’s alarmist global warming position completely reversed a view he championed little more than a decade earlier. His 1976 book, The Genesis Strategy, warned that global cooling risks posed a threat to humanity.
there never was a consensus
Earth ‘Serially Doomed’: UN Issues New 15 Year Climate Tipping Point – But UN Issued Tipping Points in 1982 & Another 10-Year Tipping Point in 1989!
You too can do your own climate modeling right at home.
Lord Christopher Monckton weighs in on the fairly recent theory that the oceans are providing a heat-sink for AGW increases.
From March, 2012. If you read nothing else, this one is worth a look.
“The real cutting edge in climate science was publicly exposed recently in a book by one of the long time leaders of the German environmental movement, Fritz Vahrenholt, in his new book, The Cold Sun. The book expresses the growing concern among more careful real climate scientists, rather than political scientists, that trends in solar activity portend a return to the cold, limited agricultural output, and widespread disease of the Little Ice Age, or even a more full blown, overdue by historical standards, real ice age.
The root of the global warming confusion is that the UN is not a disinterested party that can be trusted to compile and interpret the climate science on which the world’s policymakers can rely. The UN sees the theory of man caused catastrophic global warming as a tremendous opportunity for gaining the regulatory and taxation powers of a world government.”
Michael Mann threatened to sue, so the first vid was re-done. He did sue Mark Steyn (see the previous embed), Mann seems to spend a lot of time with his lawyers, doesn’t he?
According to the new report, “natural causes are very likely to be [the] dominant” cause of climate change that took place in the twentieth and at the start of the twenty-first centuries. “We are not saying anthropogenic greenhouse gases (GHG) cannot produce some warming or have not in the past. Our conclusion is that the evidence shows they are not playing a substantial role.”
The authors of the new report go on to say “the net effect of continued warming and rising carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere is most likely to be beneficial to humans, plants, and wildlife.”
Thanks for looking!
* University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit