How much has NASA's GISS climate research unit increased global warming under the Obama administration?
The earliest monthly global dataset that we have available from NASA is the one produced for the August 2005 reporting period. Overall, that dataset contains 1,508 monthly observations since the beginning of 1880.
It seems that under Obama, NASA has conducted a global warming fabrications corrections effort, especially focused on the most recent decades since the 1970's.
Specifically, when comparing the newly adjusted NASA dataset to the one reported in August 2005, out of the 308 months spanning January 1980 through August 2005, NASA has warmed 302 months (only 2 months were cooled and 6 were left unchanged from the 2005 dataset).
Of the total warming adjustments corrections applied to the 1980's, 1990's and 2000's (through Aug 2005) they average out to a bureaucrat-made warming increase of +0.08°C per month.....
===> that's equal to a 96°C per century warming trend if NASA continues with a pattern of similar "corrections."
This NASA non-random treatment and purposeful changes of past empirical evidence is beyond just being anti-science. It is fraud-like, with the root cause being attempts by bureaucrat-scientists to meet the political and propaganda agendas of government elites - agendas that have been blatantly obvious over recent years.
Prior to the upcoming, yawn-producing UN's 2015 Paris COP21 greenhouse gas fear-mongering conference, one could surmise that NASA was charged with creating global temperatures that were the hottest ever, regardless of the integrity and credibility damage that the science community and objective scientific methodologies would sustain.
NASA provides ample evidence why scientists, bureaucrats and political elites should be held in contempt by the public. Literally, their utterances should never be trusted on any issue that requires an objective, impartial scientific treatment.
'Never trust, only verify' should be the new motto for the public to take to heart.
If you have some free time this weekend, watch the video below to understand why the gathering of "elites" in Rio is such a gigantic waste...and read thesethreearticles, which cover why catastophic global warming is nonsense and why use of the term "denier" is wrong.
Read here. The United Nations and European Union elites and bureaucrats must possess that unique combination of being idiot-savants and pathological liars. The people that continue to massively mismanage the global economy and financial markets, also claim that the 1997 Kyoto Protocol for CO2 emissions was a resounding success. It was sooooo successful that they now want a Kyoto II.
In fact, the empirical evidence clearly shows the Kyoto Protocol to be an abysmal failure. Instead of reducing CO2 emissions by 5.2% of the 1990 base year, actual 2010 CO2 emissions were some 46% higher and 2011 emissions are likely to be even higher. The UN and EU experts predicted the 5.2% reduction by year 2012.
Did we say abysmal failure yet? (click on any above chart to enlarge)
The leftmost chart at top is total global CO2 emissions starting in 1965. Despite the UN and EU forcing the majority of countries to become Kyoto signatories, the CO2 emissions just kept on growing.
The middle chart reveals that the U.S., without signing or agreeing to the Kyoto Protocol, reduced per capita emissions the most. The EU, the principal Kyoto promoter, failed to match the U.S. accomplishments - completely opposite of what the UN experts predicted.
The final chart on the right documents the vast superiority of the U.S. free market approach to CO2 emissions: over the 2-year period ending 2010, the U.S. has robustly led the world in reducing emissions, without the penalty of the failed Kyoto regulations.
However, this incredible failure of a predicted outcome by the EU/UN elites is not admitted to. Instead, their mass stupidity, self-delusion and arrogance has pushed them to propose the Kyoto II protocols. Simply amazing.
This gross failure of the Kyoto has an additional twist. At the time the Kyoto Protocol was being reviewed by the U.S. Senate, one of today's infamous Climategate's scientist estimated that if all countries signed and actually reduced emissions by 5.2% the impact on global warming would be an almost immeasurable 0.05 degree reduction.
"There has been some discussion over the years regarding Tom Wigley’s 1998 estimate that even if Kyoto were to be 100% successful in meeting its targets, it would only have reduced temperatures by an estimated 0.05 degrees Celsius by 2050. Since Wigley was and is a strong supporter of Kyoto, this was a significant admission. Kyoto has been a crazy waste of money, Kyoto nations have spent billions and billions of dollars on the off-chance of cooling the earth by an amount too small to be measured..."
Conclusion: All the EU elites have managed to accomplish is to waste their taxpayer billions on regulations that don't work, destroyed multiple EU economies and the EU currency in the process, while making sure to enrich wealthy investors and corrupt friends in bogus green energy scams. Simply brilliant, no?
The UN's Climategate scientists and bureaucrats continue pushing the "severe weather" lies at Durban IPCC climate conference
Since time immemorial, humans have been talking about how bad the weather has been over the 'past year' or over the 'past growing season.' This uniquely human trait is often exhibited throughout the ancient text of the Bible. Yet the corrupt United Nations and its Climategate perpetrators continue to claim that recent bad weather is actually only due to "global warming" and human CO2 emissions.
Unfortunately for the UN 'liars of Durban,' the world's previous severe weather incidents includes a gigantic list of bad weather events happening well before dangerous CO2 levels.
In addition, the immense preponderance of modern climate peer-reviewed studies can find no connection between human CO2 emissions and modern severe weather.
And now, adding further empirical evidence misery to the UN's Climategate liars' claims, comes this startling factoid: severe hurricane landfalls in the U.S. have plummeted over the last 6 years!
Combine these type of actual facts with the recent extreme weather science report that is being suppressed at Durban ("Uncertainty in the sign of projected changes in climate extremes over the coming two to three decades is relatively large because climate change signals are expected to be relatively small compared to natural climate variability"), and it is no wonder that public and policymaker support for global warming and climate change policies has crumbled over the last few years - bureaucracy lies and science corruption usually have that sort of outcome, thankfully.
The United Nations bureaucrats & its Climagegate scientists continue pushing the big lies of man-made global warming and climate change
It has been well documented, and agreed to by the vast majority of climate scientists, that global warming has subsided since 1996. This has occurred despite the large increase in CO2 levels; and, of course, despite the prognostications of the UN's Climategate-savant "scientists" who apparently spend most of their research time and monies plotting against other scientists than doing actual science.
With the recent publication of October 2011 HadCRUT global temperatures (the IPCC's gold-standard), it is again confirmed by the empirical evidence that global warming is not driven by atmospheric levels of CO2, which means that the feared climate change is not being driven by man-made CO2 emissions either.
Climate Models Vs. Reality
15 Years - October 2011
17 Years - October 2011
As the above charts reveal, the United Nation's Durban climate conference claims that human CO2 emissions are causing unprecedented, unequivocal and accelerating warming (ie. climate change) are nothing more than fabricated, robust lies. The left most chart plots actual global temperatures (HadCRUT and GISS) versus the predicted outcomes of one of the preeminent climate models. (click on each image to enlarge)
The middle chart plots global temperatures and atmospheric CO2 levels over the most recent 15 years ending October 2011. The chart on the right is same data plotted but for the 17-year span ending October 2011 (some Climategate scientists insist an extra 2 years makes all the difference when speaking of global warming). The polynomial fitted curves on these two charts indicate that global warming is becoming cooling, and at most, global warming is projected to be less than 1 degree by 2100.
And, as these charts reveal, clearly the IPCC's favored climate models are significantly wrong by orders of magnitude that smack of total incompetence. The UN's anti-scientific claims of global warming, repeated by political hacks like of Al Gore, Obama and Jon Huntsman, are meritless lies designed to push the agenda of global governance favored by the elites, the wealthy and the corporate special interests.
The lies that perpetuate the global warming and climate change hysteria exhibited by Durban conferees are both insidous and never-ending (note the most recent release of Climategate emails). These lies emanate from the bowels of the UN's IPCC and its senior climate "scientists" with no shame or remorse.
"OK, so you are a serial liar. Like I said, I’ve made my peace with that. It used to rankle me, but not any more. I just accepted that you can’t be trusted and I moved on. I do have compassion for you, Dr. Jones. None of you guys set out to do the ugly things you ended up doing. You all got caught by Noble Cause Corruption, by the vision of being smarter than everyone else and of being the only people standing between us and global destruction. It’s heady, treacherous stuff...I have been a victim of that same self-delusion myself. I understand the sweet seduction that arises from the conviction that your mission is of vital, crucial importance to the whole planet."
Read here. Yep, the Mexican president proposes replacing all his country's incandescent bulbs for the global warming crusade. This act of sacrifice will reduce future global warming by about one-ten-thousandth of a degree Celsius. Did we say pathetic yet? Hmmm.....I wonder if he signed the petition to ban the world's must dangerous substance, dihydrogen monoxide.
Of course, if the emperor of Mexico was really serious about global warming as he claims to be, he can do two things immediately to act on his true beliefs, and his compassion for Gaia and the rest of humanity.
1. Stop all fossil fuel extraction in Mexico, including all oil pumping.
2. Stop his country's citizens from fleeing Mexico, which will reduce fossil fuel use in the evil, CO2-spewing U.S.
Certainly, Mexico's brilliant and courageous leader must have the cojones to walk the talk of making the world climate-safe, right? These two simple steps will illustrate whether he is just another UN eunuch, or the real-deal hombre. Don't hold your breath, though - one thinks he's all sombrero, no cattle.
Read here and here. The infamous, never-before-seen, IPCC climate model prediction of scary, positive AGW-feedback has now been vanquished by scientific empirical research. NASA's researchers have just pushed the button of detonation, which will likely hasten the collapse of the IPCC's version of "climate science" upon itself.
Simply stated, the IPCC's Climategate scientists and computer models conjured up the scary prediction of a 3 to 5 degree Celsius temperature increase from a doubling of CO2, along with requisite, speculative, calamitous events of biblical destruction proportions. But now the latest research finds that CO2 doubling causes an increase of only 1.64 degrees, which is within the range of outcomes that skeptical scientists have been saying for decades.
Per physicist Luboš Motl, the NASA researchers, Bounoua et al., concluded the following:
"The article in Geophysical Research Letters combines their climate model with the feedbacks linked to vegetation, especially evapotranspiration - the sum of plant transpiration and evaporation from leaves...What is their result?...The resulting climate sensitivity attributed to the CO2 doubling from 390 ppm today to 780 ppm expected in 200 years from now (under business-as-usual) is just 1.64 °C - less than a Celsius degree per century or so. This figure is below 2 °C, the low end of the interval guessed by the IPCC." [Note: study's authors - L. Bounoua, F. G. Hall, P. J. Sellers, A. Kumar, C. J. Tucker, M. L. Imhoff (2010)]
From another publication comes this:
"A group of top NASA boffins says that current climate models predicting global warming are far too gloomy, and have failed to properly account for an important cooling factor which will come into play as CO2 levels rise...According to Lahouari Bounoua of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, and other scientists from NASA and the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), existing models fail to accurately include the effects of rising CO2 levels on green plants. As green plants breathe in CO2 in the process of photosynthesis – they also release oxygen, the only reason that there is any in the air for us to breathe – more carbon dioxide has important effects on them...In particular, green plants can be expected to grow as they find it easier to harvest carbon from the air around them using energy from the sun: thus introducing a negative feedback into the warming/carbon process. Most current climate models don't account for this at all, according to Bounoua. Some do, but they fail to accurately simulate the effects – they don't allow for the fact that plants in a high-CO2 atmosphere will "down-regulate" and so use water more efficiently."
Based on this newest research, we now know the following:
The climate models are definitely, and spectacularly, wrong.
The IPCC (and the UN's Cancun conference) is wrong.
Al Gore and all other leftist/liberal/progressive hack politicians are wrong.
Hollywood celebrities and MSM reporters are wrong (okay....nothing new here).
Self-righteous, self-misinformed, lame "science" writers are wrong. (Dudes, climate models are not science; they're fancy spreadsheets projecting non-empirical, non-proven output about as scientific as a Ouija board or a crystal ball output.)
Read here and here. The scientific dismembering of the UN's AGW hypothesis continues. It's become a killing field for this pseudo-science of the elites - the stampede of evidence-oriented scientists continue to bail on the ruling-classes' idea of science.
Hey, the good news is that the scientific truth ultimately wins. The bad news is that the UN will always attempt to dictate bad and bogus science - it's part of its DNA.
"The chorus of skeptical scientific voices grew louder in 2010 as the Climategate scandal -- which involved the upper echelon of UN IPCC scientists -- detonated upon on the international climate movement. "I view Climategate as science fraud, pure and simple," said noted Princeton Physicist Dr. Robert Austin shortly after the scandal broke. Climategate prompted UN IPCC scientists to turn on each other. UN IPCC scientist Eduardo Zorita publicly declared that his Climategate colleagues Michael Mann and Phil Jones "should be barred from the IPCC process...They are not credible anymore." Zorita also noted how insular the IPCC science had become. "By writing these lines I will just probably achieve that a few of my future studies will, again, not see the light of publication," Zorita wrote. A UN lead author Richard Tol lead author grew disillusioned with the IPCC and lamented that it had been "captured" and demanded that "the Chair of IPCC and the Chairs of the IPCC Working Groups should be removed." Tol also publicly called for the "suspension" of IPCC Process in 2010 after being invited by the UN to participate as lead author again in the next IPCC Report."
Read here. Every tin-horn, corrupt, developing country leader (and Cancún UN official) claims that human CO2 emissions are to blame for severe weather events. This same claim is also made by corrupt insurance companies and false prophets of the IPCC Climategate science community. Time, and time again, this claim has proven to be false. Yet the AGW climate-liars, stupid billionaires, and the parrots of the MSM, keep repeating it.
Now, another study [Di Baldassarre et al.] just released shows that the modern African flooding damage is not associated with human caused climate change but more likely has been exacerbated by other human influences.
"Based on the results of both continental and at‐site analyses, we find that the magnitude of African floods has not significantly increased during the Twentieth Century, and that climate has not been a consequential factor in the observed increase in flood damage. This is consistent with the results previously obtained.....the intensive and unplanned urbanization in Africa and the related increase of people living in floodplains has led to an increase in the potential adverse consequences of floods and, in particular, of the most serious and irreversible type of consequence, namely the loss of human lives. This can be shown, at the continental scale, by analyzing the dynamic of African population and the most recent deadly floods." [Di Baldassarre, G., A. Montanari, H. Lins, D. Koutsoyiannis, L. Brandimarte, and G. Blöschl (2010)]
The super CO2-spewing lifestyles of the billionaires makes many of them very vulnerable to the mega-rich guilt syndrome, leading to the support of left-activist oriented issues. A classic example of this phenomenon is the left dominated global warming fear-mongering.
Because of the guilt-complex, billionaires often will become the useful idiots of the anti-CO2 left. Thus, billionaires, such as Bill Gates, will condone and engage in the mindless CO2 fear-mongering promulgated by leftists, yet are completely reluctant to sacrifice his/her outlandish, personal $30,000 per month CO2 electric bill. Instead, the billionaires propose the rest of humanity should sacrifice by reducing their electric bill (CO2) to zero. (See below for the latest peer-reviewed article about climate-model-idiocy.)
Okay, the facts are still real world facts, despite the zombie billionaire dreamworld - reducing industrial and transportation CO2 emissions to zero by 2050 is totally impossible. And unless the billionaires are recommending that all fire combustion and human breathing be banned, the zero-CO2 idea is simply galactic stupidity on the scale of the stupidity that is exhibited by,....well....er....a 66,000 square foot house for a few family members, just for example.
How did Bill Gates and other Cancún-loving billionaires become so galactically stupid about global warming and CO2?
Simple. They've been infected by the computer virus contagion known as "virtual climate models" that only makes a stealthy jump from the Window's operating system (XP, W7, etc.) to very rich humans. It's been speculated that this stupidity-inducing virus was created by the combined effort of Indian/Chinese government hackers, in hopes of assuring massively idiotic economic and energy decisions being self-imposed on Western economies. [Caution: Attempting to remove this virus causes a human variety of the BSOD syndrome in those mega-CO2 emitting individuals already afflicted with megalomania and severe guilt complex. Removal failure is confirmed by continuous re-boot to the stupidity-state when confronted with real climate evidence and science.]
Soooo, back to the real world and no more Microsoft bashing in this post - what's the latest peer-reviewed science really say about climate models? In summary, one has to be really, really billionaire-stupid to believe any climate model's predictions:
"1. "the physics of unresolved phenomena such as clouds and other turbulent elements is not understood to the extent needed for incorporation into models," so that...
2. models are presently merely "experimental tools whose relation to the real world is questionable," that...
3. "current models depend heavily on undemonstrated positive feedback factors to predict high levels of warming," that...
4. "there is compelling evidence for all the known feedback factors to actually be negative," that...
5. "even supercomputers are inadequate to allow long-term integrations of the relevant equations at adequate spatial resolutions," that...
6. "current models all predict that warmer climates will be accompanied by increasing humidity at all levels" but that "such behavior is an artifact of the models since they have neither the physics nor the numerical accuracy to deal with water vapor," and that...
7. "the models' predictions for the past century incorrectly describe the pattern of warming and greatly overestimate its magnitude." In this regard, Lindzen further states that a doubling of the air's present CO2 content might lead to a warming of only "0.5 to 1.2 degrees centigrade," [Lindzen, Richard 2010]
Read here. As most U.S. conservatives and libertarians (and a growing number of middle-of-the-road independents) recognize, the decades long fear-mongering about global warming has nothing to do with climate change risk. It's all about the objectives of power, control and money, and the Copenhagen/Cancun conferences have been the elites' means to accomplish these objectives.
Now, we have a peer-reviewed article by climate scientists that cleary documents the real concerns of those vested in climotology research: "Where's the money?" It's defintely a case of more-toys-for-the-boys mindset, and the climate science pork machine "we want it now" mentality, despite the known evidence that climate models don't work (which they even admit in their study).
Toward a New Generation of World Climate Research and Computing Facilities (Shukla et al. 2010)
"This paper is part of an ensemble of papers proposing an international multidisciplinary prediction initiative.....Since current climate systems models are not able to provide predictions with adequate accuracy and detail, climate prediction needs to be revolutionized to be able to fulfill society’s expectations……We recommend the creation of a small number (at least three) of highly connected multinational facilities with computer capability for each facility of at least 20 petaflops in the near term, 200 petaflops within five years, and 1 exaflop by the end of the next decade.....Soon the societal demand for policy-relevant climate predictions will be so great that the most advanced technology and the best available talent must be brought to bear to address this great challenge. The time to begin that process is now!" [J. Shukla, T. N. Palmer, R. Hagedorn, B. Hoskins, J. Kinter, J. Marotzke, M. Miller, J. Slingo, 2010]
"The Shukla et al paper perpetuates the top-down global model driven perspective to provide regional and local information to the resource communities.....The expenditure of large funds for a small set of computer centers devoted to multi-decadal climate predictions therefore, in my view, is a very poor use of tax money."
Read here for the Cancún money quote about seeing drowning polar bears. Obviously, it's highly probable that either Greenpeace or the World Wildlife Federation shared this recent UK MSM story with the Seychelles truly brilliant, but demonstrably gullible ambassador.
Hmmm...okay...not to jump to conclusions...maybe he meant drowning lions in his language...btw, does he have a photo of the drowning animal per chance?
Hey, maybe he also heard of the new UK-AGW spontaneous combustion science and is now worried about polar bears bursting into flames....sounds far-fetched but stranger things have come out of Al Gore's mouth.
Read here. As European greens and government policymakers are frolicking and polluting at Cancun's paradise resorts for two weeks, their countries' soot emissions are destroying the Himalayan glaciers and drinking water of billions of people. Instead of fixing the black carbon (soot) pollution they are responsible for, the EU activists continue to rail about the atmospheric trace gas CO2, which, by the way, doesn't melt glaciers, sea ice or polar ice sheet caps.
There are multiple studies, including this latest article, that point to soot as a prime culprit in climate warming and ice melting.
"“….Angela Marinoni of the Institute of Atmospheric Sciences and Climate in Bologna explained to an audience at the 2nd Third Pole Environment Workshop in Kathmandu on October 27th, the high Himalayas are also under an onslaught from this sort of pollution. Even at altitudes above 5,000 metres (16,400 feet), soot is widespread. And when it lands on glaciers it accelerates their melting.....By analysing atmospheric circulation patterns, Dr Marinoni and her colleagues found that winds could bring soot and dust from as far away as Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. And if that were not bad enough, the Himalayan valleys act as chimneys, pumping pollutants from the Indian plains to the mountain peaks. Dr Marinoni estimates that the combined effect of this crud could reduce the glaciers’ ability to reflect light by 2-5% and increase the amount of melting by 12-34%."
Those über-serious global cooling deniers down in Cancún are just starting to party hard and enjoy the immense benefits of a warm climate, while the average person of the Northern Hemisphere is experiencing the harshness of record cold and bitter climates. [Note to self: If a warm climate causes death and destruction from severe weather, why are these people at the fossil fuel-built, tropical resort of Cancún? Why not Palin's Alaska?]
Read here and here. Mexican President Felipe Calderon at UN-2010 (COP16) climate conference in Cancun bemoans the hypothetical 2010 deaths of 60 Mexican citizens due to CO2-induced climate change. But amazingly, he fails to mention the 19,000 murders that took the lives of Mexican citizens during 2009, or the 69 citizens that perished by murder in a single day during January 2010.
(Update: Yep, the Cancun party animals look real concerned about 60 "climate deaths.")
This level of politician CO2-myopia/AGW-insanity, versus the real problems the average person faces, is exhibited world-wide by elites. The climate and CO2 fixation by the world's elites assures that the violence, and other dominant, common health/death issues facing the world's population will never be solved.
It's no wonder that the world's populace is turning against the governing class, and their attachment to climate change fear-mongering. Obviously, when the elites' focus is only on the 60 climate-deaths, versus the 19,000 violent-deaths, the faith in their governing abilities is lost. Unfortunately, a preponderance of world politicians seemed to be possessed by this myopic, governing insanity, much to the detriment of all citizens.
Read here. I'm sure the UK's Mike Hulme will be considered going over to the "dark side" by the green, anti-CO2 fanatics, but a statement made by him, a year after Climategate, is very revealing and important for policymakers. In a way though, some policymakers are way ahead of Mike on grasping reality with both hands.
"The events of the past year [Climategate, Copenhagen, etc.] have finally buried the notion that scientific predictions about future climate change can be certain or precise enough to force global policy-making."
Although he is stating the obvious, common sense view of the failed climate model output, it is critical that the bureaucrat/politician elite are finally starting to hear this message from the scientist ranks of pro-CAGW believers.
Read here. The UN's continuing incompetence and corruption is not only legendary, it's never ending. The most recent, highly visible examples of UN fraud and ineptitude were the fiascoes that became known as Climategate and Copenhagen, which happened literally back-to-back.
Yet, despite the decades of documented serial failures and malfeasance, the UN secretly plots their resurgence, relying on the IPCC faux-science of global warming to push and implement their global governance agenda, across the political, economic, and cultural spaces.
Below are discussion points and objectives from UN bureaucrat papers and talks during a secretive meeting held in Austria during early September, 2010. They clearly indicate that UN bureaucrats are not humbled by their recent failures and not really concerned about world's climate/weather systems, per se. Their interests are more self-interested - more in line with the known seven deadly sins, versus any hypothetical seven degree change in global temperatures:
"How to restore “climate change” as a top global priority after the fiasco of last year’s Copenhagen summit
How to continue to try to make global redistribution of wealth the real basis of that climate agenda, and widen the discussion further to encompass the idea of “global public goods”
National sovereignty — meaning the refusal of major powers like India, China and the United States to go along with sweeping global agendas — was specifically indicted for the failure of the much ballyhooed Copenhagen summit on climate change.
“the U.N. should be able to take the lead in setting the global agenda, engage effectively with other multinational and regional organizations as well as civil society and non-state stakeholders, and transform itself into a tool to help implement the globally agreed objectives.”
“it will be necessary to deeply reflect on the substance of sovereignty, and accept that changes in our perceptions are a good indication of the direction we are going.”
Nonetheless, the U.N. leaders intend to keep trying to change that, especially when it comes to the climate agenda. “The next 40 years will prove pivotal,” one paper argues, while laying out the basis of a renewed U.N. climate campaign, the “50-50-50 Challenge.”
According to the paper prepared by Secretary General Ban’s own climate change team, however, the newly rebranded challenge still depends on the same economic remedy proposed for Copenhagen: a drastic redistribution of global wealth, “nothing less than a fundamental transformation of the global economy.”"
The United Nations has always been a byzantine institution of
little value and of extraordinary waste. The recent U.N. sponsored
climate studies and conferences have certainly provided ample evidence
of these traits, with the U.N. consumed only with a political agenda of gaining a
world governance position for itself that controlling CO2 emissions
Read here. The revelations of IPCC scientific incompetence just keep on coming. How any rational, objective person could still maintain that the UN/IPCC effort could be rehabilitated is beyond comprehension. There is no doubt now that the UN/IPCC global warming product (propaganda?) is the antithesis of solid and accurate science.
From Richard Tol, an expert IPCC reviewer and one of the world's leading economists:
"In a number of instances, authors mainly quote their own work. This is unworthy. In a number of instances, authors mainly quote other IPCC material. This is incestuous. The quoting of IPCC material is most pronounced in the scenario discussion, which can be summarised as "We, the IPCC, declare that all previous IPCC work is great." This is silly...In many places, the authors are out of their depth; the selection of papers is haphazard, the assessment superficial. I also found too many references that are simply wrong; the authors cannot have read these papers. For a supposedly expert panel, this is very serious....In a number of instances, the draft material reads like a political manifesto rather than a scientific document. In other instances, the authors have tried to hide their political message in pseudo-scientific language. For a supposedly independent panel, this is very serious....Part of the literature review is haphazard; it seems as if the authors have not systematically searched the literature, but simple [sic] quote a few papers that happened to lie around. Another part of the literature review is severely biased; the authors quote their own work, and that of their friends, but systematically ignore the work of many authors. This is particularly true in the presentation of model results; results are shown for a subset of models only..."
Read here, here and here. Phil Jones, former director of the UK's Climate Research Unit center, has finally come clean about the IPCC "global warming" science. He should be commended for coming forward and setting the record straight - it definitely had to be incredibly painful for him to do so in a BBC interview:
"Specifically, the Q-and-As confirm what many skeptics have long suspected:
Neither the rate nor magnitude of recent warming is exceptional.
There was no significant warming from 1998-2009. According to the IPCC we should have seen a global temperature increase of at least 0.2°C per decade.
The IPCC models may have overestimated the climate sensitivity for greenhouse gases, underestimated natural variability, or both.
This also suggests that there is a systematic upward bias in the impacts estimates based on these models just from this factor alone.
The logic behind attribution of current warming to well-mixed man-made greenhouse gases is faulty.
The science is not settled, however unsettling that might be.
There is a tendency in the IPCC reports to leave out inconvenient findings, especially in the part(s) most likely to be read by policy makers."
Phil Jones should be encouraged (provided an incentive?) to share more of the IPCC "global warming" science skeletons so as the public finally becomes informed about the true realities of climate change. In addition, further information from Jones may precipitate needed actions by U.S. trial lawyers, state's attorney generals, and/or criminal prosecutors to go after the remaining smug, miserable, arrogant climate "scientists" who willingly choose to perpetuate the AGW-CO2 global warming hoax.
For any U.S. politician who wants to get on the right side of this global science fraud, he/she should call for Congressional hearings. Additionally, demands for independent forensic audits of all climate historical and temperature data published would be appropriate, plus forensic audits of all software used by global warming scientists used in the most recent IPCC 2007 review - it's time to know conclusively what "science" the $79 billion in research funding grants has actually been based on.
Read here. This book covered many of the "Team's" efforts (duties?) that resulted in corrupting the peer-review process; evading compliance with FOIA requests that they were obligated to comply with; and, "hiding" what their research data actually indicated about warming during the late 20th century. The book did not cover though the Team effort to produce propaganda supporting global warming alarmism meme. The Climategate emails do reveal that effort (duties?) also.
"Several of the recently leaked Climategate e-mails reveal backstage manipulations to produce a propaganda tool, the Statement of European Climate Scientists on Actions to Protect Global Climate, intended to be unveiled at the Kyoto Climate Conference. Members of the Jones Gang from East Anglia University organized efforts to get just about anyone to sign this statement to push up the numbers. In an e-mail dated 9 October 1997, Dr. Joseph Alcamo admonishes other members of the Jones Gang to forget credentials and just get signatures."
The most recent scientist(s) propaganda effort to influence policymakers is presently unraveling with the new Glaciergate expose. The safest conclusion at this juncture is not to trust any scientist who expresses confidence ("consensus") in the science of CO2-AGW. They appear all to have been corrupted in some manner and degree.
Read here and here. Check out these links showing contents of NASA emails that were recently released under a 'Freedom of Information Act' request, which speak to zero or little AGW warming in the U.S. Yet at the same time as these insider emails are getting scrutinized, the MSM is trumpeting the PR releases from U.S. climate agencies screaming that the 2000's were the warmest global decade evaaaar! Of course, the climate agencies and press are not about to ballyhoo the significantly cooler temps over the last few years in the U.S., as the below chart indicates (click to enlarge):
But the "warmest" decade makes the press go on a tear! Definitely a disconnect, which begs even more scrutiny.
Now, what would really be both 'hot' and 'cool' at the same time is if some reporter had just a teensy-weensy bit of intellectual curiosity about the discrepancy between U.S. and global temperatures and asked the simple, "WTF"? Here's a story that an enterprising reporter can own and run with for a long time, especially since the skeptic blogs have done so much of the grunt work. Let's see if we can provide the enterprising reporter with some starting points and answers to her basic questions....
1.) "Why is global warming not affecting the U.S.?"
Maybe because the rest of the world doesn't have the brains to at least maintain a decent set of thermometers to record temperatures accurately? Or, is it because the U.S. climate agencies let the climate reporting network slip into disrepair and then into oblivion, despite $70+ billion spent on climate research?
2.) "What's that got to do with U.S. temperatures?"
Well, Ms. Reporter....see the U.S. has a bunch of thermometers recording temperatures (see the red and blue dots on map) but most other countries have a few, or even none. Take Bolivia for example. This high, cool mountainous country has no thermometers it seems, thus NASA and the NCDC have to fabricate (makeup) temperatures for Bolivia. They do this by using temperatures from the Amazon jungles and beaches of Chili. Guess what, Ms. Reporter, Bolivia now has a serious warming problem they didn't even know existed.
3.) "Don't they have computerized adjustments to take care of all that?"
Eureka! That's the point isn't it? They do a lot adjustments and manipulations to literally manufacture temperatures instead of relying on a first-class global network of thermometers. By the time they get done with all the different types of questionable adjustments, the global warming is created out of thin air. Ms. Reporter, you do realize that what you and others are reporting as the "warmest" decade ever is in fact mostly computer generated warming, not real warming. You do understand that, correct? Right?
4.) "But is there a story here?"
You've got to be kidding. Despite the outright lies about the faux-warming, the entire global warming and climate catastrophe is column inches of fraud, international and national government waste, corruption and who knows what else - it's a Pulitzer waiting to be picked up off the ground!
5.) "But the weatherman on Good Morning, America says we need to stop the warming so the seas don't rise 240 feet! What should we do?"
Read here. Obama's Copenhagen climate solution turned out to be a cruel joke, causing a literal fiasco. Recognizing that failure, it now appears Obama will be adopting the Bush strategy. How bad is that for his fanatical, global warming alarmist, UN world government supporters? It's way bad, and now it's reeeaaaaly a cruel turn of events for Bush-haters.
"So now what? It turns out that President George W. Bush has already paved the way for President Obama. In September 2007, Bush convened the Major Economies Meeting on Energy Security and Climate Change in Washington, D.C. The meeting included representatives from the world’s 16 biggest economies....President Bush urged the representatives to set a long term goal for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and argued that the best way to address climate change was through developing low-carbon energy technologies....the Obama administration convened the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate. Obama’s forum membership is identical to Bush’s meeting membership...the Obama administration will sideline the cumbersome United Nations climate negotiations process....it is “impossible to imagine a negotiation of enormous complexity where you have a table of 192 countries involved in all the detail." So instead, the Obama administration and leaders of the other major economies will negotiate among themselves how each of them will address man-made global warming."
Let's hope China sabotages this attempt at energy and economic control also.
Read here. Climategate has exposed the attack on fundamental scientific principles by the heavily politicized IPCC and overly funded climate research communities. Their political objective was to "prove" that human CO2 was causing global warming, which would result in catastrophic calamities that only an international, "well respected" body of politicians (like we saw at Copenhagen) could solve.
Luckily, for all the rest of us, Climategate has provided the crack in the prison door of politically correct science, allowing a growing number of previously silent, respected scientists and professionals to speak out and save us a fate from the dungeons of an Orwellian environment of political lies and double-speak.
Amazingly, the crack has even allowed the the NYT to do some bashing of the politically correct, liberal/left, global warming extreme stupidity! The stupidity and climate science fraud have gotten pretty bad when it appears the NYT's no longer 'has their back.'
Andy Revkin: “Our coverage, looked at in toto, has never bought the catastrophe conclusion and always aimed to examine the potential for both overstatement and understatement.”
And BTW, it is now safe to point out to the local high school jerk teacher, who continuously shows the Al Gore film to your children, that even the New York Times (with the exceptions of 'Twin's Moronic', Krugman and Friedman) doesn't buy into the polar-bears-are-dying shtick any longer.
Read here. Again proving that alarmist science is based on scientific untruths, speculation and hype, two new studies confirm what objective scientists have actually observed: recent past global warming is not causing an increase on severe storms. One should note, that despite the Copenhagen COP-15 scary predictions from the leftist/liberal advocates, despite the mainstream media pandering to the alarmists, despite the typical non-scientific illiterate despot/tyrant/western leader calling for massive climate reparations, and despite the scientific fraud coming from Climategate endeavors, good, objective science is still being produced that sheds light on the very un-settled science of the climate.
"“The results from this study suggest that natural climate variability will play an important role in future changes in storminess, and thus could overwhelm any anthropogenic signal there might be.” We completely agree, and yet, the popular press continues to suggest that global warming is to blame for anything from few storms to big storms – it is all climate change!"
Read here, here and here. Most people, on every side of the AGW debate, would agree that chopping down a rain or boreal forest to promote development of renewable fuels is an extremely bad idea in terms of earth's climate. Unfortunately, the failure of Copenhagen also keeps these forests at risk because of the previous idiotic legislation/regulations previously agreed upon or promoted (Kyoto, cap & trade, U.S. renewable energy schemes, etc.).
Because of the Climategate scientists fraudulent science, and their propaganda of imminent world catastrophes if nothing was done about CO2 emissions immediately, it caused all the focus to be on a questionable, nebulous problem with an impossible political/economic solution, instead of actually focusing on real world climate and environment problems that could be solved. Climategate lies cause trees to die.
Read Pt.1 here and Pt.2 here. From the dictionary: "Unequivocal - admitting of no doubt or misunderstanding; having only one meaning or interpretation and leading to only one conclusion." The "unequivocal" boast of warming alarmists amounts to the same as "the science is settled," which every thinking person with a pulse knows to be untrue. This one single chart depicting temperatures of Brisbane, Australia indicates the serious problems with the "global warming is unequivocal" statement:
What can accurately be inferred from the chart is that Brisbane experienced "unequivocal global warming" only after climate scientists unequivocally adjusted up the original (RAW) temperatures of the late 20th century, and unequivocally adjusted down the temperatures in the early 20th century.
How much global warming has occurred in during the post-1970s? Based on this new evidence, it appears not very much. And most importantly, the claimed warming by alarmists is not "unequivocal," instead it's a fabrication.
Additional articles on subject of temperature adjustments/fabrication:
Last updated: August 2010
New Zealand, bogus temperature adjustments end up in court
Read Pt.1, here. As the global warming alarmist lies grew in breadth and scope in the years leading up to the Copenhagen climate conference, ever more individuals became less convinced. The unrelenting lies designed to convince the public of a looming climate catastrophic crisis had the opposite effect, causing a huge growth in public skepticism.
As skepticism grew, the Climategate scientists felt compelled to literally manufacture global warming evidence that portrayed modern warming as "unprecedented." The result was thetotallybogus hockey stick temperature chart that became the first clear indication that the climate science community had very seriously veered off the rails of objectivity and integrity.
Despite what can be best described as "hockey stick" malfeasance, the actual historical paleo information was not about to cede truth to the UN's IPCC climate charlatans. For example, below are temperature graphs from Antarctica and Greenland ice cores that clearly and unambiguously show that modern temperatures are not in any fashion "unprecedented." In addition, here are multiple charts from other peer-reviewed studies that belie the obvious attempt at temperature fraud that the hockey stick represented. Although Al Gore, Obama, Pelosi, Boxer, Waxman, Lindsey Graham and other big government, liberal-leftist politicians continue to claim modern temperatures are "unprecedented," all the real climate science evidence easily refutes that big lie. (click on images below to enlarge)
Now that the 2-week Copenhagen U.N. climate conference fiasco is over, much analysis will take place as to why the conference was such an abject failure. Although there are likely to be multiple valid reasons, few, if any liberal-leftist, will admit to the primary reason for the failure: that the global warming science was bogus and climate lies perpetuated the fraud.
Climategate exposed the really filthy linen of climate science, but that didn't keep the likes of Obama, Gore, Pachauri, Pelosi, Hugo Chavez, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, and thousands of others, from repeating the same global warming lies that were a result of bogus/fraudulent science. In the end, these same leaders knew that the catastrophic global warming scenarios were based on deceit and lies, thus there was no true, compelling, scientific reason to solve a fabricated climate crisis.
There are several lies that public officials, "scientists," and activists used over and over in an attempt to build support within the mainstream media and the public. One of the principal lies that was very effective with the press and leftist pundits, but not with the public, was that global temperatures are "accelerating" and will reach climate model tipping points in the very near future. As the U.S. climate agency data reveals below, "accelerated warming" is a flat-out lie. (click on image to enlarge)
Global temperatures have increased since 1880 (and a portion of that increase is likely due to CO2), but there is no way to interpret accurately that global temperatures are "accelerating." And, if the warming bias adjustments made by the climate research agencies are removed (see thin blue curve) then the actual temperature increase since 1880 has been very modest.
In addition, if one examines various regional temperature readings from the 1820's, it becomes evident that global temperatures in the early 19th century, for the world's northern hemisphere, were warmer than our modern, late 20th century temperatures. That suggests modern temperatures may actually be in a cooling phase, relative to our recent historical past, instead of "accelerated warming."
Read here. Many accuse the CO2-AGW skeptics of being anti-science, yet in the real world, it is the skeptics who embrace science with gusto and won't let go of it. The actual physical science of CO2 emissions, atmospheric CO2 levels, and subsequent influence on temperatures is very well known. To reduce it down to its simplest components, to keep global temperatures from rising a single degree Celsius means that 1.767 trillion tons of future CO2 emissions must be prevented (human CO2 mitigation) - that's the actual hard science.
The entire world of human activities produced only 32 billion tons of CO2 emissions in 2008. In order to eliminate 1.767 trillion tons of human CO2 emissions, which would prevent a 1 degree Celsius increase, the world (all of humanity) has to eliminate 100% of all CO2 emissions for 55+ years, based on 2008 figure of 32 billion tons. Yes, over 55 years of zero economic/industrial/government activity, to accomplish zero CO2 emissions, just to prevent a 1 degree increase, starting immediately.
The science is the science and there is no escaping the hard, scientific facts. There is no way to politically or economically to shut down the world's economic system for decades, let alone a couple of days, to meet an impossible, extremely dubious climate objective.
Or, in different words, CO2 mitigation will be unable to deliver practical, significant prevention of future temperature increases.
For the world's citizens, Copenhagen's sole focus on CO2 mitigation ('decarbonization') has been an exercise in galactic futility, and ostentatious waste, conducted by the hubris-challenged political elites and celebrity class, who are the antithesis of science, if not its most fervent enemies.
Read here and here. As more Climategate facts are being exposed about the temperature data fraud, the temperature scandal involving Russia appears to be a very serious case of malfeasance. Although the global warming alarmists continue to act out with blissful ignorance in Copenhagen, the whole world is watching this kabukian-styled fraud dance, and reading about what is really happening.
Read here and here. It has become fact that Obama, the leftists-liberals, and the Democrats believe they can just steal taxpayer dollars and give it to any person, company, group or country demanding a bailout. This will develop into another failedforeignaid project, chasing the trillions that were wasted in previous years. The majority of the "Copenhagen $100 billion" will end up in the corrupt despots' Swiss bank accounts or will be used to purchase military arms or wasted on other non-climatic endeavors. Very little of the $100 billion will ever be used for climate adaption purposes by the receiving countries.
Read here. Despite all the CO2 emissions emanating from Venezuela's oil industry, Medieval Warming period temperatures were over 1°C warmer than current temperatures. (click image to enlarge)
Copenhagen Speech, December 16, 2009: "President Chavez brought the house down. When he said the process in Copenhagen was “not democratic, it is not inclusive, but isn’t that the reality of our world, the world is really and imperial dictatorship…down with imperial dictatorships” he got a rousing round of applause. When he said there was a “silent and terrible ghost in the room” and that ghost was called capitalism, the applause was deafening. But then he wound up to his grand conclusion – 20 minutes after his 5 minute speaking time was supposed to have ended and after quoting everyone from Karl Marx to Jesus Christ - “our revolution seeks to help all people…socialism, the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room, that’s the way to save the planet, capitalism is the road to hell....let’s fight against capitalism and make it obey us.” He won a standing ovation."Another great moment in climate science history brought to you by the UN, the IPCC, and Climategate scientists.
At this point in the Copenhagen proceedings, there would
seem to be absolutely no benefit for China, India and Russia to continue to
kowtow to Europe or the U.S. any longer on the over-hyped climate change
issues. These three countries are....
Read here and here. Well, of course, Al Gore did not say that because he and IPCC head Pachauri would not profit from stating the truth, nor would thousands of political, NGO and business elites. But if he did, it would reflect reality: the world's official temperature records as presented to the public are fraudulent.
As Climategate has exposed, historical and modern temperatures have been excessively adjusted to literally "prove" that dangerous, non-natural global warming exists. But as more and more individuals start examining the actual original temperatures recorded, the "dangerous" warming disappears - it never existed until pro-warming, IPCC-related climate scientists got their hands on the temperature data. That's why Copenhagen COP15 is such a farce - it's not about climate or saving people's lives.
Read here. It's a corruption scandal story that won't die, which made it easier to deliver a blow that staggers the Copenhagen global governance, increased taxation, and financial profiteering desires of the political/business elite. No doubt about it, Climategate resonates with the public hugely, everywhere, as it has become more widely known that this is not about earth's climate and saving people's lives.
Read here. As Copenhagen climate alarmists always attempt to focus the debate on a short period of warming starting in the mid-1970's, it's always important to remind them that a major "global warming" has been happening since the end of the Little Ice Age, and it has absolutely no relationship to human CO2. It is natural warming that periodically asserts itself despite human wishes and actions.
Case in point, in the Lake Baikal area of Russia, evidence was found that actual major warming started as early as...
"1750 AD, with a shift from taxa that bloom during autumn overturn to
assemblages that exhibit net growth in spring (after ice break-up). The
data here mirror instrumental climate records from Fennoscandia for
example, which also show over the last 250 years positive temperature
trends and increasing early summer Siberian temperature
reconstructions. Warming in the Lake Baikal region commenced before
rapid increases in greenhouse gases, and at least initially, is
therefore a response to other forcing factors such as insolation
changes during this period of the most recent millennial cycle.”
Read here, here and here. The UN's IPCC political leaders, bureaucrats and the Climategate scientists have said for years that today's temperatures are "unprecedented." They also claim that all temperatures to the right of the black-dash line on the graph below are natural; and, all temperatures to the left of the black-dash line are unnatural, due to human CO2. The past visible history (as shown) of temperature records makes both these claims flat-out lies. The historical record also indicates that temperatures fluctuate up and down without any relationship to the CO2 level. (click on image to enlarge)
It could well be that for highly urbanized metropolitan areas of the world that temperatures are "unprecedented" but for the vast majority of global areas, they are not. As the latest Greenland ice core research finds (and other research), multiple historical and ancient periods were significantly warmer than current temperatures, despite lower atmospheric CO2 levels. The temperature history the ice cores record reveal are not only temperatures that are both substantially cooler and warmer than current ones, but that temperatures naturally have periods of "accelerating" movement over extended periods. Finally, the Greenland ice sheets that the ice cores came from obviously survived much higher temperatures without sliding into the sea, as global warming alarmists claim will happen by 2100.
Read here and here. Not a surprise, really, and Lord Monckton probably enjoyed the opportunity to expose the behavior of the Copenhagen COP15 thuggish "global warming" advocates. American leftists/liberals have a long history, and very welldocumented, of anti-democratic proclivities/techniques associated with fascism and otherleftist totalitarianism, which has now moved to the American and European environmental movements after the crushing death of communism.
Read here, here, here, here, here, and here. Ever more interested researchers are making the effort to closely analyze the original, unadjusted climate data. Why now? Climategate has revealed to the world the extensive collusion and conspiracy efforts to fraudulently change the actual climate data that is being presented to policymakers as "settled" science. This IPCC sanctioned....
Read here. It's been know that NASA's GISS unit has adjusted temperatures in the past that appear to make raw data look more like the "hockey-stick" favored by the Climategate scientists, IPCC bureaucrats and Copenhagen activists. To embellish their hockey-stick credentials for data fraud fabrication, the GISS people have just accomplished another round of adjustments that improves on their original hockey-stick attempts. Another example of scientists behaving badly, misleading both the public and policymakers. Go here to see another climate group's hockey-stick machinations.
Read here. Despite the embarrassment of the Climategate data fraud and conspiracy scandal, it has not stopped the politically motivated and financially hungry at Copenhagen from making every effort to lie and mislead the public about the actual global climate condition. As an example, a favorite lie is to claim that the islands of the Pacific are being inundated by the rising seas caused by global "warming." It's a whopper of a lie, which the mainstream press repeats reflexively, without checking an iota of data concerning the bogus claim. Below is a chart for two of those islands.
The facts: The seas fluctuate up/down over time, rarely exceeding a one-tenth meter change. The sea level changes are recorded by state-of-the-art equipment, installed and maintained by the Australian government. The chart is from the latest 2008 survey. Map included to locate islands. (click on images to enlarge)
Read here and here. Accurate temperature records are absolutely critical. Obviously, the fraud, corruption, collusion and assorted other evils being discovered via the Climategate expose has done immense and irreversible damage to the climate science community, and more significantly, to science overall.
Collateral damage, but equally as important, has been done to the world's temperature record databases. It now appears that the arrogant, self-righteous convictions of the climate alarmist scientists has led to all the major land/ocean temperature databases being significantly corrupted with the 'hockey-stick' type of manipulations. Almost on a daily basis, a new set of temperature records is beingfound with the hockey-stick signature due to a pattern of similar adjustments.The pattern that keeps showing up is one that has earlier period's warming temperatures adjusted down and later period cooling temperatures adjusted up, and voila, a hockey-stick resemblance emerges - note the red line with black markers on the chart below. That line represents the official global temperatures of the U.S. National Climate Data Center (NCDC).
Like other national climate centers, the NCDC feels compelled by the need for global warming research funding and peer-group pressure to produce temperature records that show "unprecedented," unequivocal," and "accelerating" global warming. And that's how the UN's IPCC gets its "scientific" proof that huge global warming is happening and we only have a few years (months, whatever) to fix it. Unfortunately, now that the temperature data corruption and IPCC political agenda have been fully exposed, it leaves any rational thinking person with a very non-warm feeling.
To counter that, we have taken the liberty to tweak the hockey-stick global temperature adjustments such that the 'hide the decline' and 'hide the rise' techniques are minimized. In order to carry out this minimization, we have adjusted some 80+ years of NCDC data (recall, NCDC adjusted 129 years to get their results). These are relatively minor adjustments designed to be cumulative over time, and designed to shift the slope (trend line) down, yet maintain the overall shape of the 129-year NCDC curve. (click on image to enlarge)
The end result of minimizing the "scientific" hockey-stick methodology is the green curve with the blue markers on the graph. Note how the green trend line (slope) with arrow tip (versus the red with arrow tip) has been significantly reduced when the hockey-stick adjustments have been minimized. Our secret Excel formula has returned the world's climate to its natural state; everyone at Copenhagen can go home as "Hope" (leave the "nagen" there) has been achieved; and, we're expecting to be nominated for the Nobel.
Putting aside the lame humor, the green curve and green trend line actually may better represent the real history of global temperatures since 1880 than the fabricated NCDC hockey-stick curve. Until political leaders decide that trillion dollar climate polices require audited and accurate temperature records, instead of fake hockey-sticks, the C3 global temperature record of modest, long-term global warming is what policymakers should think of considering before trillion dollar decisions are made. (click on image to enlarge)
Read here. New research confirms that there is a specific problem with land-based surface temperatures. Unlike satellites, the land surface temperature database appears to a have a linear bias towards warming. Based on the pre-Copenhagen Climategate revelations and new analysis since, the major climate research....
Read here. The global warming Copenhagen crisis-extravaganza is most certainly a modern example of the media created 'madness of crowds' and the embarrassingly, extreme "scientific" delusion of elites. How this is occurring in the 21st century is simply astounding, but there is definite precedents:
1. Population growth and famine (Malthus) 1798 2. Timber famine economic threat 1865 3. Uncontrolled reproduction and degeneration (Eugenics) 1883 4. Lead in petrol and brain and organ damage 1928 5. Soil erosion agricultural production threat 1934 6. Asbestos and lung disease 1939 7. Fluoride in drinking water health effects 1945 8. DDT and cancer 1962 9. Population growth and famine (Ehrlich) 1968 10. Global cooling; through to 1975 1970 11. Supersonic airliners, the ozone hole, and skin cancer, etc. 1970 12. Environmental tobacco smoke health effects 1971 13. Population growth and famine (Meadows) 1972 14. Industrial production and acid rain 1974 15. Organophosphate pesticide poisoning 1976 16. Electrical wiring and cancer, etc. 1979 17. CFCs, the ozone hole, and skin cancer, etc. 1985 18. Listeria in cheese 1985 19. Radon in homes and lung cancer 1985 20. Salmonella in eggs 1988 21. Environmental toxins and breast cancer 1990 22. Mad cow disease (BSE) 1996 23. Dioxin in Belgian poultry 1999 24. Mercury in fish effect on nervous system development 2004 25. Mercury in childhood inoculations and autism 2005 26. Cell phone towers and cancer, etc. 2008
Read here. Contrary to the IPCC global warming alarmist scientists' claims, multiple historical and ancient periods were significantly warmer than current temperatures that the Copenhagen COP15 climate change conference is obsessed with. These warmer periods occurred during low levels of atmospheric CO2 and the historical global 'warmings' did not cause any of the catastrophic calamities that the United Nations (UN) predicts for modern times. (click on image to enlarge)
Read here. As the Climategate emails and data files revealed, the IPCC climate "scientists" have a thing for corrupting temperature data. The infamous Harry_Read_Me.txt file indicated that the CRU was responsible for data
manipulation that would change temperatures to meet their political
agenda - greater global warming. And as more people start to dig into
the data fraud, it's becoming much more obvious that a group of climate
scientists worldwide have worked hard to corrupt the temperature
databases to better fit the IPCC climate change political agenda. A
week ago it was the largemanipulation of New Zealand data. Now, it's the temperature database of Australia that was also heavily adjusted (faked) to produce a significant global warming effect - read the entire post to get a sense of how bad the temperature corruption is. (click on image to enlarge)
Read here. "Alligators basking off Sweden"? Can you imagine being represented by such blithering idiots? Either the UK populace is incredibly dense, or it's a case of the UK leaders being so revenue starved they will say anything. As we revealed in a previous chart,
and again do so in the one below, UK modern temperatures are nothing
out of the ordinary. The CET (Central England Temperatures) represent a
compilation of temperatures from multiple weather stations. It should
be remembered that the 18th century was the time of the Little Ice Age
and the 20th century represents a period of rebound warming. From
Wilson Flood, the individual who did the century comparisons:
“Summers in the second half of the 20th century were warmer than those
in the first half [of 20th century] and it could be argued that this was a global warming
signal. However, the average CET summer temperature in the 18th century
was 15.46 degC while that for the 20th century was 15.35 degC. Far from
being warmer due to assumed global warming, comparison of actual
temperature data shows that UK summers in the 20th century were cooler
than those of two centuries previously.”
Read here. In the category of "dumber than a bag of rocks," University of Illinois climate scientist emails a threat to NYT's science reporter Andy Revkin. With the science scandal of the century playing out with great damage to the climate science community, it appears there are even more arrogant, ego-maniacs that need to be leashed. With that said, Revkin should go on a tear by reporting only the views of the global warming skeptics for next two weeks. Who do you think would come crawling back to Andy seeking forgiveness?
Honestly, how come climate science has so many "smart" people acting so freaking stupid?