UK Insanity Rolls On Unabated
Saturday 16 July, 2011 – 11:14 by Grant in Default
views (51)
We Aussies Lag Just A Little Behind This UK/EU Insanity.
Like our AUS Liberal Party, the UK Conservative Party have failed to oppose “The Science”.
The UK punter is really suffering and has nobody left (or Right!) to vote for.
GWPF British Families Face £1,000 Bill For Green Energy: Huge Annual Levy To Appease Climate Lobby Wednesday, 13 July 2011 20:49 Sean Poulter, Daily Mail http://www.thegwpf.org/uk-news/3435-british-families-face-p1000-bill-for-green-energy-huge-annual-levy-to-appease-climate-lobby.html
“Energy Secretary Chris Huhne yesterday outlined a new regime that will encourage firms to build thousands of wind turbines, tidal power stations and nuclear plants.
The scheme is part of a government plan to shift away from fossil fuels, particularly coal, and so dramatically cut carbon emissions to meet UK and EU targets.
There is a fierce dispute between the Government, green campaigners, academics and industry analysts over the true cost of the programme…. ”
” …The official customer body Consumer Focus described the Government’s claims of an increase in annual bills of £160 a year as ‘optimistic’.
Mike O’Connor, its chief executive, said: ‘We recognise the need for reform. However, consumers can’t be expected to write a blank cheque to decarbonise electricity generation.’ The Climate Change Act requires the UK to reduce its carbon emissions by 80 per cent by 2050, compared with 1990 levels.
The Government also has to meet EU targets, under which 15 per cent of the UK’s energy demand must be supplied from renewable sources by 2020.
The rise in bills will result in a dramatic increase in ‘fuel poverty’, which is when a household spends more than 10 per cent of its income on energy bills to stay comfortably warm.
It used to affect mainly pensioners and single parents, but official figures show 4.5million households are now in fuel poverty in the UK – compared with just 2million in 2004.
Consumer Focus says the true current figure is a shocking 6.3million households – equal to almost one in four – and could soon rise to 12million.
Critics say the expensive shift to green energy is based on a false premise of man-made global warming.
Dr Benny Peiser, of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, rejected the Coalition’s figure of a £160 rise in bills, saying: ‘This is fanciful, it has just been plucked out of the air.’…. ”
Permalink | Comments (0) | Leave a comment
The Acerbic James Dellingpole
Saturday 16 July, 2011 – 11:10 by Grant in Default
views (31)
UK TELEGRAPH Australia counts the cost of environmental lunacy – and plots its sweet revenge By James Delingpole Last updated: July 14th, 2011 http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100096578/australia-counts-the-cost-of-environmental-lunacy-and-plots-its-sweet-revenge/
” …After all, by the time I arrive in Oz sometime in November to promote the Aussie edition of Watermelons (Connor Court), the Australians will have had a good three months to reflect on the disasters which have been inflicted on their economy in the name of “combating climate change.” They’ll have noticed the $25 billion shaved off the share markets in a spectacular vote of investor confidence in Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s new carbon tax; they’ll have started to feel the effects of the blackouts caused by the needless (and uncosted) closure of 2000 mega watts worth of “dirty” brown coal power stations; and above all, they’ll have done their calculations – as the mighty Andrew Bolt has done – and come to a robust Aussie conclusion:
$24.5 billion is too bloody much, too bloody much by far, for Australia to pay for the privilege of reducing the world’s temperature, by 2020, by 1/4000th of a degree…. ”
Aussie Carbon Tax Joke
Tuesday 12 July, 2011 – 06:06 by Grant in Default
views (224)
Well here’s a surprise – Australians do not want to be compensated for a tax that they don’t want, don’t need, doesn’t achieve anything and they were specifically told they wouldn’t get – like – er – DURH!
The understatement of the new millenium – “this will be a tough sell”.
The Queensland ALP also cynically planned on wearing down the resistance to council amalgamations – that didn’t work either. They’re still gone at the next election (and Anna has gone very quiet on “Climate” too!).
THE HERALD SUN Carbon tax: Heat rises as voters reject Julia Gillard’s plan Shannon Deery, July 11, 201112:00AM http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/carbon-tax-heat-rises-as-voters-reject-julia-gillards-plan/story-fn7x8me2-1226091834581
“ANGRY Australians have vowed to vote Julia Gillard from office at the next election after yesterday’s controversial carbon tax announcement.
Scores of voters rejected the plan soon after details of the $24.5 billion package to tackle climate change were revealed, with more than 80 per cent who voted in a national News Limited online poll saying Australia shouldn’t have a carbon tax.
Almost 100,000 people voted across four polls in the national plebiscite by 5pm yesterday, with 87.1 per cent saying they planned to change their vote at the next election in light of the tax…. ”
Andrew Bolt On The AUS Carbon Tax
Tuesday 12 July, 2011 – 05:59 by Grant in Default
views (238)
More about the Australian Government’s Suicide Sunday Posted on July 10, 2011 by Editor http://junksciencesidebar.com/2011/07/10/more-about-the-australian-governments-suicide-sunday/
You are paying a high price for a government con http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/you-are-paying-a-high-price-for-a-government-con/story–
Andrew Bolt
JULIA Gillard’s carbon dioxide tax is the most brazen fraud to be perpetrated by an Australian government.
Warming believers should be outraged that the tax is so useless.
Sceptics should be outraged it’s so pointless. (Herald Sun)
Actually Bolta’s had a few things to say:
Labor to kill another industry for the planet http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/labor_to_kill_another_industry_for_the_planet/
Believe nothing http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/julia_in_wonderland/
The waste will be spectacular http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_waste_will_be_spectacular/
Column – A fraud on the Australian people http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/column_a_fraud_on_the_australian_people/
Treat them like adults, PM http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/treat_them_like_adults_pm/
Selling out his voters, to make an utterly useless sacrifice http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/selling_out_his_voters_to_make_an_utterly_useless_sacrifice/
From The Bolt Report http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/from_the_bolt_report/
Not the cut they promised http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/not_the_cut_they_promised/
Unsettled Science.
Tuesday 12 July, 2011 – 05:52 by Grant in Default
views (70)
It is very unhealthy to go to your doctor and demand a certain diagnosis and treatment.
SYDNEY MORNING HERALD The science is not settled July 3, 2011 . http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/the-science-is-not-settled-20110702-1gvy6.html
“Last week Australia’s new Chief Scientist, Professor Ian Chubb, argued that the available science on climate change should compel the community to act. This week the geologist Bob Carter responds.
IAN CHUBB says the climate change debate is not about politics but science. Would that it were so…. ”
” …The unvalidated computer models that now dominate the public face of climate ”science” are a jungle of complexities, and represent speculative thought experiments not empirically tested science.
In support of these methods, the former director of the British Meteorological Office, Professor John Mitchell, has said that ”people underestimate the power of models. Observational evidence is not very useful … Our approach is not entirely empirical”.
The last part of this statement is only too true, and leads to the discomfit expressed by those such as the British engineering professor John Brignell: ”The ease with which a glib algorithm can be implemented with a few lines of computer code, and the difficulty of understanding its implications, can pave the path to cloud-cuckoo land.”… ”
Big Opposition To “The Science” In The USA
Tuesday 12 July, 2011 – 05:49 by Grant in Default
views (161)
NEW YORK TIMES Scientists Tout Climate Skepticism at Heartland Conference Kickoff By JEAN CHEMNICK of Greenwire Published: June 30, 2011 http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/06/30/30greenwire-scientists-tout-climate-skepticism-at-heartlan-70831.html
“…”Today the mood in Washington is significantly different,” said Inhofe, who has famously called climate change a hoax.
“Everyone readily admits that cap-and-trade legislation is dead on Capitol Hill — even our good friend, Senator Boxer,” he said, referring to Senate Environment and Public Works Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who shepherded a climate change bill through her committee last Congress that never reached the Senate floor.
Inhofe has proposed his own legislation this Congress that would strip U.S. EPA of its ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, but a test vote earlier this year revealed that it is 10 votes short of the support it needs to clear the Senate. Still, Inhofe expressed optimism that Congress would act to head off EPA’s current and proposed greenhouse gas rules…. ”
Aussie Carbon Tax Announced
Monday 11 July, 2011 – 09:17 by Grant in Default
views (163)
After many decades of political stability from a two party system, the two major political parties for some bizarre reason gave their preferences to the radical Greens instead of to each other. The Greens got elected to a balance of power in the Senate.
Stupidly, this was taken as a real sign that the voter wanted to be punished for being rich, well off and polluting the planet.
Like in the UK, and unlike in the USA, where the science is disputed, the AUS conservatives have let us down very badly.
The Liberal Party have their own Not-quite-so-big “Tax-on-everything” and are still not disputing “The Science”.
The Labor/Green coalition plan is to bring in a Carbon Tax as the thin edge of the wedge, wear down the opposition, and increase it as the politics permit.
The aussie leader of the opposition is fighting with one hand tied behind his back due to the leftist former leader staying on and adopting a spoiling stance on climate alarmism.
While both parties are poll driven these days, ideology does take over sometimes and the facts that the Globe is not warming and that most people simply do not believe in Climate Change alarm anymore has become bizarrely irrelevant.
The great unwashed public will not get a say until the next election where they will be waiting for the middle class trendy intellectuals with baseball bats.
Sunday Summary
Sunday 10 July, 2011 – 08:43 by Grant in Default
views (232)
Only 2 items this week
UK Wind Power – FAIL
Wind energy is now a demonstrated failure as an “alternative”.
It has to have fossil fuelled power stations idling in the background ready to immediately take up the slack and avoid blackouts when the wind suddenly drops.
That actually uses more fossil fuel that generating all the power from fossil fuel itself and not having the wind turbines at all.
FAIL.
THIS IS MONEY Energy giants want billions for back-up to windfarms By Tom Mcghie 26th June http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/article-2008055/Energy-giants-want-billions-windfarms.html#ixzz1ReAGeF5Y
” …The Energy Department has been warned that without this massive back-up for the new generation of heavily subsidised giant wind farms, the lights could go out when the wind dies down. Sam Laidlaw, chief executive of Centrica, said renewables, such as large-scale wind energy, were intermittent and required back-up generation, a role gas was uniquely qualified to fill.
But as power stations that operate only intermittently would not be financially viable, Laidlaw said: #39;The building of new gas-fired capacity must be incentivised so that gas can fulfil its role as a bridging fuel.#39; To that end, energy companies are asking the Government for #39;capacity payments#39;. This ensures firms are paid a fee all year round for keeping a plant on standby.
As in previous subsidies, homeowners would be asked to pay for them through yet another levy on their fuel bills, which are already expected to soar by up to 20 per cent this year alone. The Department is considering the request from energy companies and an answer is expected in a new energy White Paper due later this year.
Industry sources insist the Government has no alternative but to agree to the #39;capacity payments#39; for standby generation if it wants wind power, which also receives huge subsidies, to provide one-third of Britain#39;s energy needs. In winter, when the most intense cold period coincides with a high pressure front, most wind turbines do not work…. ”
UK TELEGRAPH Saturday 09 July 2011 Proof that the Government is tilting at windmills The policy on which our national energy strategy is now centred is a ludicrously expensive, self-defeating joke, says Christopher Booker. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8612716/Proof-that-the-Government-is-tilting-at-windmills.html
” …Two things make this even more absurd. One, as the energy companies pointed out to DECC, is that it will be amazingly costly and wildly uneconomical, since the dedicated power plants will often have to run at a low rate of efficiency, burning gas but not producing electricity. This will add billions more to our fuel bills for no practical purpose.
The other absurdity, as recent detailed studies have confirmed, is that gas-fired power stations running on “spinning reserve” chuck out much more CO2 than when they are running at full efficiency ndash; thus negating any savings in CO2 emissions supposedly achieved by the windmills themselves.
Is there no longer anyone around at DECC who is familiar with these very basic practical points? The policy on which our national energy strategy is now centred is a ludicrously expensive, self-defeating joke, which will achieve no benefits whatever ndash; even if you are among the diminishing number of people who still believe that man-made CO2 is causing catastrophic climate change.
Unfortunately, among those still in the grip of these fantasies are David Cameron, Chris Huhne and the EU, who between them are now responsible for Britain#39;s energy policy. I#39;m afraid we are in the hands of very dangerous children, upon whose deranged wishful thinking a large part of our country#39;s future depends.”
Coldest Aussie Autumn Since 1950!
1950 was when human fossil fuel burning really took off and has been almost exponential ever since.
One more for The-planet-itself-is-mocking-them Department!
BUREAU OF METEROLOGY
SPECIAL CLIMATE STATEMENT 33
Coldest autumn for Australia since at least 1950.
Issued 1st June 2011
National Climate Centre
Bureau of Meteorology
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/statements/scs33.pdf
” …The daytime temperature averaged over Australia during autumn was 27.0ordm;C which is significantly cooler than average (by 1.4ordm;C) and ranked as the second coldest autumn on record for maximum temperatures since 1950. Parts of Australia were up to 4ordm;C below average with most of Australia recording maximum temperatures at least 1ordm;C below average and ranked in the coldest 10% of records (figures 3 and 4). Parts of the east Kimberley and the Northern Territory (equating to 8.4% of Australiarsquo;s total area) experienced their coldest autumn maximum temperatures on record with the Northern Territory as a whole experiencing its coldest autumn on record. SA recorded its second coldest autumn on record with Victoria recording its fourth coldest. Some sites recorded their coldest autumn for average maximum temperatures (table 2)…. ”
Yes dear reader, I see you asking the bleeding obvious, if we are burning more fuel than ever yet we have the coldest autumn since 1950 – why exactly are we panicking and doubling our power bills?
BTW I thought “Climate Change is here and now” – where did it go and why is it so urgent?
UK Solar Power – FAIL.
Saturday 09 July, 2011 – 07:33 by Grant in Default
views (118)
There is no solar power available in the UK. It is a mid to high lattitude climate characterized by a lot of cloud and fog.
Despite this, people have been conned into installing tens of thousands of pounds of solar panels which take 228 years to pay for themselves (£16,000 divided by £70 a year!).
Durh!!
Not funny of you’ve just opened your power bill which subsidizes that kind of insanity – sorry!
UK DAILY MAIL Solar panel myth: Experts slash estimates for how much panels will save you By Lauren Thompson 7th July 2011 http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/article-2011540/Energy-experts-slash-estimates-household-savings-using-solar-panels.html#ixzz1RYAZgIpO
Yes We Can-NOT
Saturday 09 July, 2011 – 07:29 by Grant in Default
views (44)
Whoopsie. Their first-black-kenyan president seems hellbent on doubling their “gas” price for – well, nothing really – I mean it’s not even nice to be green anymore. He, like the rest of “The Left” are stuck in an ideological time warp as the real world situation leaves them far, far behind. FAIL.
AMERICAN THINKER July 8, 2011 Obama’s Plan for $10 Gas By Jeffrey Folks http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/obamas_plan_for_10_gas.html
“American drivers are angry at having to pay $4 a gallon ($A1.06 p. Litre) for gas, and understandably so. Their anger is often directed at the oil companies that supply the gas. It should be directed at Barack Obama instead.
From the beginning of his appearance on the national stage, Obama has focused on the goal of driving up energy prices with the idea of “weaning” America off fossil fuels. He has succeeded in driving up prices, all right, but not in reducing dependence on fossil fuels. According to “The Outlook for Energy 2011,” fossil fuels now supply 80% of global demand. That percentage will remain unchanged through 2030 despite hundreds of billions in subsidies squandered on wind and solar…. ”
Monckton Downunder Follies.
Friday 08 July, 2011 – 07:44 by Grant in Default
views (163)
As one comment notes, perhaps if we had had Monckton at the press club a few years ago we wouldn’t be suffering the Climate Tax announcement on Sunday.
THE AUSTRALIAN Controversial climate sceptic Lord Monckton set to speak at National Press Club. EXCLUSIVE James Massola and Rebecca Puddy, July 06, 20115:20PM http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/capital-circle/controversial-climate-sceptic-lord-monckton-set-to-speak-at-national-press-club/story-fn59nqgy-1226088881113
“CLIMATE sceptic Christopher Monckton has been offered a prime speaking slot at the National Press Club in Canberra on July 19, despite a spate of cancelled public appearances.
Lord Monckton – who recently accused Julia Gillard’s climate adviser Ross Garnaut of “fascist” views – is set to debate the Australia’s Institute’s executive director, economist Richard Denniss…. ”
It is mildly amusing to me now to watch as all these so-called journalists try to manipulate their audience with tired old tricks as if they still had some kind of power over the public.
They’ve lost them.
“The Left” have become the conservative reactionaries that we cast aside back in the anti-Vietnam days.
This, following, blatant, attack on Christopher Monckton is an absolute disgrace from the National Broadcaster, but it is amusing because it is so blatant that it is really very counterproductive.
Why are they so afraid of what he has to say?
It is guaranteed to send the audience to Google what Monckton has to say. To find out what they are being protected from for their own good. It’s like telling a 14yr old boy never to look at any pictures of naked ladies.
Monckton easily bats away the attack and then counterpunches and the ABC presenter actually hangs up on him and is forced to bring him back – FAIL.
HERALD SUN Lord Monckton hung up on in heated interview with ABC Radio. From: AAP. July 07, 20119:26AM http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/lord-monckton-hung-up-on-in-heated-interview-with-abc-radio/story-e6frf7kf-1226089614992
“ABC radio presenter Adam Spencer has been told to “shut up” and stop being childish during a heated on-air exchange with climate change sceptic Lord Christopher Monckton.
“In what was more a debate than an interview, Spencer hung up on his guest before calling back to resume the interview.
The tension began when Spencer asked Lord Monckton about his claims that he is a Nobel Laureate…. ”
As corporal Jones in Dad’s Army says – “they don’t like it up ’em”.
What is Adam Spencer afraid of? The Truth? Or perhaps it is his own irrelevance as the planet itself mocks him with another freezing cold year with abundant rain?
It went very mainstream here –
NINE NEWS Carbon pricing means bye-bye Oz: sceptic. 23:44 AEST Thu Jul 7 2011 http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/8270032/monckton-clashes-with-abc-on-air.
” …Lord Monckton said he had come back to Australia to give his “right of reply” to former prime minister Kevin Rudd, who he said “made some very rude remarks about me”.
“But Rudd, baby, you’re gone,” he said.
And Ms Gillard – who Lord Monckton said has also made some rude remarks – should watch her step.
“Julia, darling, I’d be very careful before you do that again. Look what happened to the former prime minister.
“It may happen to you.”
Lord Monckton declined to devote much attention to climate change adviser Professor Ross Garnaut, “bless his cotton socks”, but he derided the $180,000 salary Tim Flannery is receiving as chairman of the government’s new Climate Commission.
Nor did the ABC escape Lord Monckton’s scorn after his stormy interview with Sydney radio presenter Adam Spencer on Thursday morning.
Referring to the ABC as a “high-heeled woolly, weirdy, beardy set” that is largely funded by the taxpayer, Lord Monckton told the audience: “I think you ought to stop paying.”… ”
When you’re hot, you’re hot, Christopher!
Memo To PM – Global Warming Has Stopped – Official.
Wednesday 06 July, 2011 – 07:22 by Grant in Default
views (133)
On monday our PM claimed she accepted the word of our “own CSIRO” that our “climate is changing”.
Well, she may own the CSIRO and our climate may be changing – the drought did end and it is getting cooler – but globally it isn’t.
Global warming has, quite simply, stopped. Peer reviewed. That’s halted, stalled, ceased to rise, no longer warming. Like, over ten years ago!
Ah, SPIN PLEASE!
BBC NEWS SCIENCE & ENVIRONMENT (that oxymoron again!) 5 July 2011 Global warming lull down to China’s coal growth. By Richard Black, Environment correspondent, BBC News. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14002264
” …”The masking of CO2-induced global warming by short term sulphur emissions is well known – it’s believed that the flattening off of global mean temperatures in the 1950s was due to European and US coal burning, and just such a mechanism could be operating today from Chinese coal,” he told BBC News.
“Other natural fluctuations in the Sun’s output, volcanoes and water vapour have also been proposed for causing the non-warming ‘noughties’, and may have contributed to a degree.
“It needs to be emphasised that any masking is short-lived, and the increased CO2 from the same coal will remain in the atmosphere for many decades and dominate the long-term warming over the next decades.”… ”
Spot the deliberate mistake again?!
Yes, you guessed it, what makes them think it is “short term masking”?!
They just keep making it up as they go along don’t they”
If “short term masking”, the sun, and volcanos, can all stop Global Warming in the face of an almost exponential rise in the human CO2 output then why are we panicing and doubling our electricity prices?
They keep making predictions and they keep having to modify them when they are proven WRONG.
They have been dismissing “natural forcings” and sulphur emissions and claiming that the 1990s was all man-made Climate Change and despite this latest Spin they were were simply WRONG.
Despite the Spin these articles are an admission of ongoing TOTAL FAILURE.
UK INDEPENDENT China’s power stations generate ‘future spike’ in global warming. By Steve Connor, Science Editor Tuesday, 5 July 2011 http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/chinarsquos-power-stations-generate-lsquofuture-spikersquo-in-global-warming-2306976.html
WUWT Breaking: A peer reviewed admission that “global surface temperatures did not rise between 1998 and 2008″ – Dr David Whitehouse on the PNAS paper Kaufmann et al. (2011) Posted on July 4, 2011 by Anthony Watts http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/07/04/a-peer-reviewed-admission-that-global-surface-temperatures-did-not-rise-dr-david-whitehouse-on-the-pnas-paper-kaufmann-et-al-2011/
FIND THE PDF FILE HERE –
Reconciling anthropogenic climate change with observed temperature 1998–2008
Robert K. Kaufmanna,1, Heikki Kauppib, Michael L. Manna, and James H. Stock ca Department of Geography and Environment, Center for Energy and Environmental Studies, Boston University, 675 Commonwealth Avenue (Room 457), Boston, MA 02215; b Department of Economics, University of Turku, FI-20014, Turku, Finland; and c Department of Economics, Harvard University, 1805 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, MA 02138 Edited by Robert E. Dickinson, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, and approved June 2, 2011 (received for review February 16, 2011) http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/pnas-201102467.pdf
Spot The Deliberate Mistakes.
Tuesday 05 July, 2011 – 02:18 by Grant in Default
views (189)
YouTube – Julia Gillard Press Conference Price on Carbon – Facts, Figures Science.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjLDyCbhDE8
” …We accept the science from our own CSIRO… “. The CSIRO is not an independent scientific organisation – they do exactly what their political masters tell them to do and say.
” …That data shows that carbon dioxide is at its highest level for more than a million years… “. What? So carbon dioxide has been at this level before, due to natural variation, and the world did not end?!
” …With that carbon dioxide generated overwhelmingly by human activity… “. While it is plausable that the huge amount of carbon dioxide emitted by humans has caused an increase in its concentration in air, This is not proven. Fossil fuel carbon isotope ratios just prove that humans have emitted a very large amount of it, not that it is acumulating in air. The ice core data clearly shows that carbon dioxide levels in air closely follow global temperature as it rises and falls due to the gas dissolving in the ocean when it cools. The gas is of course only a very trivial GHG. You require a very esoteric and ambitious computer program to amplify its effect into any signifigance at all.
” …Carbon dioxide is 387 parts per million… ” 387 parts per million is still very, very, trivial. Water vapour is more powerful than carbon dioxide as a GHG and is on average about 10,000 parts per million in air. Climate Change theory relies on an unproven assumption that a very small rise in the trivial GHG CO2 is going to magically cause a permanent rise in global humidity and thus be amplified into a warming catastrophe. This is just not happening. “emmisions” are at an all time high and we just do not see any signifigant warming – none. So far the predictions are simply wrong.
” …Having accepted the word of our scientists, their research, that our climate is changing, and it is caused by carbon pollution generated by human beings… ” It is fatuous to claim that “our climate is changing”. Climate always changes – the only thing certain about climate is that it always changes.
Carbon dioxide cannot, by itself, cause anymore than 2 degrees of warming, even if it was increased ten fold.
There is no difference between human “carbon pollution” and the wonderfull trace gas carbon dioxide which essential for all life on this planet they are one and the same. The biosphere is hungry for carbon dioxide and flourishes with it. It is not pollution.
” …Average temperatures COULD increase by…. ” There “could” be fairies at the bottom of my garden too.
” …It means that the number of extreme heat days in Australia will increase… ” There is absolutely no science for this – they just made it up as they went along.
” …by POSSIBLY up to to a meter by the end of this century…. ” There are “possibly” fairies at the bottom of my garden too.
Sunday Summary Of The Blogs Week
Sunday 03 July, 2011 – 12:10 by Grant in Default
views (64)
ANDREW BOLT BLOG Latest research: no, the Reef isn’t being killed by warming Wednesday, June 29, 2011 at 03:42pm http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/latest_research_no_the_reef_isnt_being_killed_by_warming/
” …the latest research by Townsville’s Australian Institute of Marine Science: Monitoring data collected annually from fixed sites at 47 reefs across 1300 km of the GBR indicate that overall regional coral cover was stable (averaging 29% and ranging from 23% to 33% cover across years) with no net decline between 1995 and 2009…. ”
————————————————————–
FORBES MAGAZINE NASA-Funded Group Doctors Sea Level Data, May. 11 2011 – 1:02 pm. James Taylor. http://blogs.forbes.com/jamestaylor/2011/05/11/nasa-funded-group-doctors-sea-level-data/
” …Satellite measurements, however, show global sea level rose merely 0.83 inches during the first decade of the 21st century (a pace of just 8 inches for the entire century), and has barely risen at all since 2006. This puts alarmists in the embarrassing position of defending predictions that are not coming true in the real world.
The University of Colorado Sea Level Research Group is coming to their rescue. The NASA-funded group claims glacial melt is removing weight that had been pressing down on land masses, which in turn is causing land mass to rise. This welcome news mitigates sea-level rise from melting glacial ice, meaning sea level will rise less than previously thought. However, it is very inconvenient for alarmist sea level predictions. Therefore, instead of reporting the amount by which sea level is rising in the real world, the Sea Level Research Group has begun adding 0.3 millimeters per year of fictitious sea level rise to “compensate” for rising land mass.
The extra 0.3 millimeters of fictitious sea level rise will add up to 1.2 inches over the course of the 21st century. While this is not monumental in and of itself, it will allow alarmists to paint a dramatically different picture of sea level rise than is occurring in the real world. For example… ”
————————————————————
THE SCOTISH SCEPTIC The dilemma of a warmist Posted on June 14, 2011 http://scottishsceptic.wordpress.com/2011/06/14/the-dilemma-of-a-warmist/
” …If natural variation is so small that it cannot have been responsible for the 20th century, then it is too small to have stopped the “warming”. If natural variation is big enough to cause sufficient cooling to cancel out the warming, then it is clearly big enough (when working in the opposite way i.e. to warm) to explain all the apparent warming in the 20th century.
The reason we got this doomsday cult, is because they managed to argue from a small and scientific warming of around 1C due to CO2 doubling up to as much as 6C due to what I can only say are entirely mythical “feedback effects”. Feedback effects, with no scientific proof, but which “conveniently” multiply the real science by whatever number they needed to “prove” that all the (apparent) 20th century warming was due to CO2. They did this by saying: “it has to be CO2 that caused the 2oth century warming because nothing else can explain the change, therefore the relationship between CO2 and temperature is whatever number we need to make the increase in CO2 cause the (apparent) increase in global temperature.”
It’s not science, but it certainly fooled a lot of people into believing it was “science”. They managed to justify this nonsense scaling up of the known effects to suit their political agenda with what I call the Sherlock Holmes defence: “when you have eliminated all possible causes, what remains, however illogical, must be the cause”.
————————————————————
I’ll see your 700 peer reviewed papers and raise you 200.
POPULAR TECHNOLOGY Wednesday, April 13, 2011. 900+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism of “Man-Made” Global Warming (AGW) Alarm. http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html
All are fully documented too!
———————————————————–
Why it is preposterous to model climate, even on a Cray Supercomputer – An excellent summary of all the “natural forcings” that the UN IPCC blandly dismisses as irrelevent.
WUWT Earth’s Climate System Is Ridiculously Complex – With Draft Link. Tutorial Posted on June 30, 2011 by justthefacts. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/30/earths-climate-system-is-ridiculously-complex-with-draft-link-tutorial/
“1. Earth’s Rotational Energy;…
2. Earth’s Orbital Energy, Elliptical Orbit around the Sun (Eccentricity), Tilt (Obliquity) and Wobble (Axial precession):….
3. Gravitation:…
4. Solar Energy;…
5. Geothermal Energy;…
6. Outer Space/Cosmic/Galactic Influences;
7. Magnetic Forces;…
8. Atmospheric Composition…
9. Albedo….
10. Biology…
11. Chemical Reactions…. ”
Big Guns Firing.
Saturday 02 July, 2011 – 04:31 by Grant in Default
views (166)
It’s all falling apart for the rainbow alliance downunder in the land of OZ.
SYDNEY MORNING HERALD Industry push to wipe out carbon price. Phillip Coorey. July 1, 2011. http://www.smh.com.au/environment/industry-push-to-wipe-out-carbon-price-20110630-1gtae.html#ixzz1QsVDQUb7
“AN ALLIANCE of some of the nation’s biggest industry organisations is preparing to spend millions of dollars on a campaign to destroy the Gillard government’s plans to put a price on carbon.
The group, which has called itself the Australian Trade and Industry Alliance, is prepared to spend at least $10 million on its campaign, which will mimic that which was run against the mining tax a year ago…. ”
” …The organisations involved include the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Minerals Council of Australia, the Australian Food and Grocery Council, the Australian Coal Association, the Plastics and Chemical Industries Association and the Australian Logistics Council, which is a loose collection of freight and transport companies…. ”
Little Glimmers Of Light From The UK
Saturday 02 July, 2011 – 04:28 by Grant in Default
views (162)
The outlook for the UK is still very bleak with nobody to oppose the leftist green activists there. The people have no voice.
GWPF Lord Reay: The Climate Change Act Should Be Repealed Thursday, 30 June 2011 10:03 Lord Reay, House of Lords http://www.thegwpf.org/opinion-pros-a-cons/3342-lord-reay-the-climate-change-act-should-be-repealed.html
” …Our Government state, sadly, that they are strongly supportive of the international carbon credit system, notwithstanding the similarity that it seems to bear to the pre-Reformation church, when indulgencies could be bought from Rome to permit sinning at home with a clear conscience. Kyoto is the new Vatican.
The Climate Change Act should be repealed, its panoply of carbon budgets abandoned, all the agencies such as the climate change committee which drips its advice into the Government’s ear sent packing, and a chance given to our economy to resurrect itself. Otherwise we have a grim and, very likely, a dim future.
Lord Reay, House of Lords 28 June 2011″
Monckton Downunder
Saturday 02 July, 2011 – 04:22 by Grant in Default
views (83)
What gets me about Monckton downunder is that there is now obviously a case against “Climate” just as there is a case for a flat Earth or against the moon landing or the holocaust being real.
Why can we not read, hear and accept or reject the arguments for ourselves?
Are we to stupid?
Why do “the media” refuse to let us know?
Why do we not get the information?
Why have we NEVER got the information?
Why do we STILL not get Monckton’s and the other climate skeptic’s information?
JUNKSCIENCE Early Monckton coverage from down-under Posted on June 30, 2011 http://junksciencesidebar.com/2011/06/30/early-monckton-coverage-from-down-under/
Monckton blasts Australia over climate change ‘scam’ http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/monckton-blasts-australia-over-climate-change-scam/story-fn59niix-1226084943326 Andrew Burrell
BRITISH climate change sceptic Christopher Monckton has lashed out at the Australian media, governments and climate scientists for failing to question the ”scam” of global warming, claiming Julia Gillard’s proposed carbon tax will push Australia into economic oblivion. (The Australian)
——————————————————————————————————-
Australia headed for disaster: Monckton http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/australia-headed-for-disaster-monckton-20110630-1gslb.html AAP
Controversial climate change sceptic Lord Christopher Monckton says Australia will be tossed into the Third World if it succumbs to what he calls the federal government’s socialist agenda.
Lord Monckton lashed out at both the “hypocrisy” of the Australian media and the federal government’s “socialism” after speaking at a mining conference in Perth. (Sydney Morning Herald)
AUS ALP/Green Government – FAIL
Wednesday 29 June, 2011 – 03:28 by Grant in Default
views (144)
So what happens when a powerful, childless, feminist with a hairdresser husband, gets into bed with an activist homosexual?
Yes, you guessed it, absolutely nothing!
A flacid flop!
It may be a cliche’ but it seems very apropos now – You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.
Bob Carter in the AGE. Now I’ve seen it all!
THE AGE An inconvenient fallacy Bob Carter June 27, 2011. http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/an-inconvenient-fallacy-20110626-1glmu.html#ixzz1Qae6WcM9
“It is certainly true that voters need to understand better the most important facts relevant to allegedly dangerous, human-related global warming. So let us list the five most salient facts the minister might try to communicate in his advertisements.
Fact 1. A mild warming of about 0.5 degrees Celsius (well within previous natural temperature variations) occurred between 1979 and 1998, and has been followed by slight global cooling over the past 10 years. Ergo, dangerous global warming is not occurring.
Fact 2. Between 2001 and 2010 global average temperature decreased by 0.05 degrees, over the same time that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels increased by 5 per cent. Ergo, carbon dioxide emissions are not driving dangerous warming.
Fact 3. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is beneficial. In increasing quantity it causes mild though diminishing warming (useful at a time of a quiet sun and likely near-future planetary cooling) and acts as a valuable plant fertiliser. Extra carbon dioxide helps to shrink the Sahara Desert, green the planet and feed the world. Ergo, carbon dioxide is neither a pollutant nor dangerous, but an environmental benefit.
Fact 4. Closing down the whole Australian industrial economy might result in the prevention of about 0.02 degrees
THE AUSTRALIAN A lethal blow for government scheme. Greg Sheridan. From:The Australian June 27, 2011 12:00AM http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/a-lethal-blow-for-government-scheme/story-fn59niix-1226082376158
” …( sic – Congressman) Sensenbrenner has held a series of key congressional committee chairmanships and has been a central figure in the politics of climate change.
He believes that any attempt to price carbon in the US is now dead.
The state-based initiatives for carbon pricing in the US are either collapsing or cover only a small section of the economy, with little impact.
Sensenbrenner believes there is no prospect of carbon pricing coming back in the US.
In this critical judgment he is borne out by Democratic strategists who believe neither Barack Obama nor congressional Democrats will campaign for a cap and trade scheme at the next election next year.
Dozens of pro-cap and trade Democrats lost their seats at the Republican slaughter of 2010…. ”
AUS DAILY TELEGRAPH TENSE AND NERVOUS AND THEY CAN’T RELAX Tim Blair Blog. Tim Blair. Monday, June 27, 2011 at 05:54am http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/tense_and_nervous_and_they_cant_relax/
” …So how are Ross and Ian coping? Not all that well, evidently. Garnaut particularly seems to be in a state of – what’s the word? – denial.
Speaking to the ABC, the ANU arts graduate said that “there is no reason why carbon pricing should be a matter of partisan political division in Australia and it wasn’t only a few years ago … I haven’t changed my position from the one that was supported by both political parties four years ago.”
Garnaut is referring to the general agreement on climate change issues held by former Labor and Liberal leaders Kevin Rudd and Malcolm Turnbull. This, to him, demonstrated an era of general political unity. Everybody was hand in hand, happily marching towards carbon tax land.
To claim this as evidence of harmony is ridiculous. Turnbull’s stance masked resentment towards carbon taxing among people who don’t figure much in Garnaut’s calculations – that is to say, people…. ”
Going out LIVE
Tuesday 28 June, 2011 – 06:05 by Grant in Default
views (186)
Watch The Story(s) The Mainstream Media Is Protecting You From.
The Hearland Conference 2011 June 30th
http://climateconference.heartland.org/watch-live/
I calculate that’s 10.30pm AEST on our 1st July – correct me if I’m wrong.
Now Look What You’ve Done.
Tuesday 28 June, 2011 – 06:01 by Grant in Default
views (65)
Too late the politicians have discovered that fixing “Climate” is politically untennable, meanwhile they have created a monster.
Unlike the NBN, which is useful, this monster produces nothing and swallows gigantic amounts of public funds for zero result, and there is no, oops, slips, we made a mistake, can we go back and use all that money for something useful while you are inventing the miracle cure? For a non-existant disease.
JO NOVA BLOG Clean energy “investments” just a tiny $243 Billion in 2010 . Posted on June 25th, 2011 http://joannenova.com.au/2011/06/clean-energy-investments-just-a-tiny-243-billion-in-2010/
” ….Imagine if a less-than-scrupulous agent got into these green-fields of money, and frolicked in the vast acreage of subsidies, schemes, and easy loans? Where would we be? The public would think the people and the industry were here to save us, the industry could prod levers of government to encourage more subsidies and pro-renewable energy legislation. The “cottage” industry could also pay for and help write reports that the government then used in order to convince the people to put more of their goods and chattels in the public-trough. In variations on the circular theme, the industry could apply for grants from the government to help pay for the reports it wrote for the government to help it earn even more subsidies, or to cripple it’s competitors. (eg. See here).
Thus deadly positive feedback would spiral out of control.
Then imagine it wasn’t just less-then-scrupulous renewable energy fans, but if money-hungry-profiteers from large well financed houses were set loose in a global trough?
Ponder that it doesn’t take a less-than-scrupulous operator to fund an army of full time emissaries-of-green as PR agents and lobbyists. Any honest businessman would do it, and no one would fault that. It’s just advertising and networking.
Even a small percentage of $243 billion worldwide buys quite a lot of lobbying. It’s time the world woke up and realized that renewables are no longer a small time struggling industry. They might not produce more than a tiny percentage of the goods and services, but they’re a large multinational conglomerate force…. ”
This is why the AUS Liberal Party cannot come out and oppose “The Science” – to many lost votes.
That’s “Billions” with a “B”!!!!!
US Supreme Court Backpedals On Climate
Tuesday 28 June, 2011 – 05:56 by Grant in Default
views (176)
WALL STREET JOURNAL. REVIEW & OUTLOOK JUNE 21, 2011. . . . And the Climate Tort Cashiered. Justice Ginsburg’s finest hour. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303936704576397673915105838.html
Yesterday’s other important Supreme Court decision (see above) came in a case that joined the green lobby and the trial bar, if that isn’t redundant. The Court unanimously struck down one of the legal left’s most destructive theories, and not a moment too soon.
In American Electric Power v. Connecticut, eight states and various other environmental activists sued a group of utilities, claiming that their carbon emissions were a “nuisance” under federal common law and that therefore the courts should set U.S. global warming policy. Yet this is a fundamentally political question, one the Constitution reserves to Congress and the executive, as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote for the 8-0 majority.
The Court “remains mindful that it does not have creative power akin to that vested in Congress,” Justice Ginsburg observed, in an all-too-rare vindication of legal restraint. “It is altogether fitting that Congress designated an expert agency, here, EPA, as best suited to serve as primary regulator of greenhouse gas emissions. The expert agency is surely better equipped to do the job than individual district judges issuing ad hoc, case-by-case injunctions. Federal judges lack the scientific, economic, and technological resources an agency can utilize in coping with issues of this order.”
We’d go further and point out that Congress never granted the Environmental Protection Agency the power to regulate CO2. The EPA has merely asserted that power with an assist from the pure policy invention of the Court itself in 2006’s 5-4 Mass. v. EPA ruling. Still, the fact that every Justice rejected the new climate tort theory, and that the opinion was delivered by the most liberal Justice, shows how abusive it really was.
The Court dismissed the case under the “political question doctrine,” but we wish it had resolved the technical issue of Article III standing, which determines when a plaintiff has a right to sue. The Justices were split four to four, and thus did not rule; Justice Sonia Sotomayor recused herself because she heard the case on the Second Circuit. Yet standing is one of the few restraints on the power of the federal courts, and the litigants didn’t have it by a mile here.
Under the traditional legal reading of standing, plaintiffs have to show that the defendants caused their injuries and that the courts can meaningfully redress those injuries. But climate change is a world-wide phenomenon for which the group of utilities barely contributed even under the most aggressive global warmist theories. And even if the courts shut down those plants tomorrow, it would have no effect whatsoever on atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
The climate tort is nonetheless finished, and the Court’s decision should make it impossible to advance the same claims in state courts. Anyone who cares about the economy and the Constitutional balance of power can breathe a little easier.
Also here…
GLOBAL WARMING DOT ORG That Footnote in Yesterday’s Global Warming Ruling. by Sam Kazman on June 21, 2011 in Blog,Features. http://www.globalwarming.org/2011/06/21/that-footnote-in-yesterday%E2%80%99s-global-warming-ruling/
” …Yesterday’s ruling does mention hurricanes and heat-related deaths and melting ice-caps, but only in characterizing EPA’s view of global warming, not the Court’s. And the Court quickly distances itself from EPA’s views with an interesting footnote:
“For views opposing EPA’s, see, e.g., Dawidoff, The Civil Heretic, N. Y. Times Magazine 32 (March 29, 2009). The Court, we caution, endorses no particular view of the complicated issues related to carbon dioxide emissions and climate change.”
The second line of that footnote would have sufficed all by itself to make clear that this ruling was not about global warming science. But the Court went beyond that to cite a 2009 N.Y. Times Magazine cover story about award-winning physicist Freeman Dyson and his skepticism about anthropogenic warming. Alarmists had been up in arms when that story was published, arguing that it would give the skeptics unwarranted respectability…. ”
And from Steve Milloy (Junkscience dot com) in the Washington Times.
MILLOY: Supremes retreat from climate panic Ruling returns environmental rules to politicians, not courts. By Steve Milloy. The Washington Times 7:33 p.m., Tuesday, June 21, 2011 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/21/supremes-retreat-from-climate-panic/
” …Even alarmist science believer and GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney knows that it’s called “global warming,” not “America warming.”
The startling part of the decision, however, is that the court quietly but clearly backed away from alarmist climate “science.”… ”
Nearly 1 million hits.
Monday 27 June, 2011 – 06:11 by Grant in Default
views (101)
I’m surprised to learn that there has been nearly 1,000,000 hits on this humble website!
Thanks Lonz for pointing it out.
Thankyou all for noticing me!
Concerned Scientists – My Asss
Sunday 26 June, 2011 – 11:57 by Grant in Default
views (111)
If the newspapers and the ALP want to know why they are failing here is a very good example.
The propoganda campaign for the Carbon Dioxide Tax is a real insult to our intelligence
This trite little piece of pap went out completely unchallenged in the MSM.
Scientists put out call for respect Phillip Coorey, June 20, 2011., http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/scientists-put-out-call-for-respect-20110619-1ga9q.html#ixzz1QL9N6VBB
“AUSTRALIA’S scientific community will launch a campaign tonight aimed at redressing what it says is the damage to science which is being caused by climate change denial.
At its annual gathering in Canberra today, the Federation of Australian Science and Technological Societies will tell politicians that the campaign being run against scientific evidence of man-made climate change ”is undermining the national building work of all scientists”.
Its own campaign, respect the science, will seek to broaden the understanding of how science works… “”
Q. And who is “Federation of Australian Science and Technological Societies”?
A. Nobody.
Q. And who is the federation’s chief executive officer, Anna-Maria Arabia?
A. Why, she’s a former infrastructure advisor to Infrastructure Minister Anthony Albanese!
Q. And how much of a scientist is she?
A. She hasn’t done any science since she left uni. She’s been a paid apparatchik for the ALP most of her career.
Read all about it here….
A stain on all scientists Andrew Bolt Blog, Andrew Bolt, Monday, June 20, 2011 at 11:16am http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/a_stain_on_all_scientists/
CO2 Levels In Parts Per Million.
Sunday 26 June, 2011 – 11:50 by Grant in Default
views (61)
Optimum levels of CO2 are 1200 to 1500 ppma. Higher levels do work better. Some commercial Greenhouses have levels in the low 2000’s.
Levels can be 1200 to about 3500 for maximum growth of flora and other photosynthesis life (algea, stromatolites etc.)
For 599 million of the last 600 million years, the average mean level was 1200 ppma.
The planet is actually CO2 starved. We should be emitting more, not sequestering it or minimizing the emission rate.
150 ppm – the minimum concentration below which many plants may face problems to run photosynthesis and stop growing
180 ppm – the concentration during ice ages
280 ppm – the concentration during interglacials, i.e. also the pre-industrial concentration around 1750
391 ppm – the concentration today
500 ppm – the concentration around 2060-2070 (unlikely that before 2050 as they claim)
560 ppm – the concentration around 2080-2110 (the “doubled CO2” relatively to the pre-industrial values) relevant for the calculations of climate sensitivity); a concentration routinely found outdoors today
700 ppm – the concentration in an average living room
900 ppm – concentration in an average kitchen
1,270 ppm – the concentration used to double the growth of Cowpea in a famous video
1,700 ppm – the average concentration in the Cretaceous 145-65 million years ago (early mammals came, plus figs, magnolias, birds, modern sharks)
4,500 ppm – the concentration 444-416 million years ago (the Silurian dominated by corals and mosses); see other values in geological epochs
10,000 ppm – sensitive people start to feel weaker
40,000 ppm – the concentration of CO2 in the air we breath out
50,000 ppm – toxic levels at which the animals like us get weaker in hours; the value is 5 percent of the volume
180,000 ppm – the concentration of CO2 in exhausts of a healthy motor; that’s 18 percent
1,000,000 ppm – pure CO2, just to make you sure what the units are
Kind of puts it in perspective.
OOPs – I Knew It Was Too Good.
Saturday 25 June, 2011 – 06:37 by Grant in Default
views (264)
The previous post that is.
One man’s offensive remark is another man’s saving-the-planet!
James I’m-being-supressed-by-deniers Hansen, Al gore adviser, and darling of the Green Left made the following extremely offensive analogy of coal trains to Auscwitz trains and NOBODY HEARD ABOUT IT. Especially on our AUS ABC.
Hansen stands by coal train/death train analogy By Joe Romm on Nov 26, 2007 at 6:38 pm http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2007/11/26/202133/hansen-stands-by-coal-traindeath-train-analogy/
NASA’s James Hansen used a very provocative metaphor about the trains that deliver coal:
“If we cannot stop the building of more coal-fired power plants, those coal trains will be death trains — no less gruesome than if they were boxcars headed to crematoria, loaded with uncountable irreplaceable species.”
The President and CEO of the National Mining Association wrote Hansen a letter (posted here by Hansen with his response) complaining:
“The suggestion that coal utilization for electricity generation can be equated with the systematic extermination of European Jewry is both repellent and preposterous…. I believe you owe the hard-working men and women of the coal mining and railroad industries an apology and respectfully request that you refrain from making such comments in the future.”
Yet the infortunate claim by Christopher Monckton that the unquestioning devotion to the Global Warming Climate Change doctrine was akin to facsicm – which it is – was viciously attacked by Lateline in it’s assumed role of propogandist for the huge government Green tax and Green movement. AGAIN.
LATELINE
Climate sceptic’s Nazi jibe ‘offensive’ Australian Broadcasting Corporation Broadcast: 23/06/2011 Reporter: Hamish Fitzsimmons http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2011/s3252161.htm
How about this nasty little ad hominem jibe – “His biography also claims he has cures for other diseases and viruses, including multiple sclerosis, influenza, and herpes simplex 6. They’re conditions for which medical science has no known cures.”
The Jewish man in this report notes that the use of the the term “denier” is even more offensive.
“COLIN RUBENSTEIN: For example, the deliberate and provocative use of the term denial, holocaust denial for the alleged critics or sceptics is also entirely inappropriate. It clouds what should be a serious debate about the implications of climate change.”
The very last thing that the AUS ABC want you to hear is what Monckton has to say, of course. For your own good, of course.
You are too stupid to make up your own mind on the issue. I mean, we’re savin’ the planet here. Their biggest fear is doubt.
To late. The Planet itself is mocking them!
AMAZING – AUS ABC Publicises Climate Sceptic!
Thursday 23 June, 2011 – 08:46 by Grant in Default
views (182)
Monkcton back in AUS – Lateline and now News24.
Oh, so the “The Science” isn’t quite settled after all – thank you Alan Jones et. al.
Time to follow the head Red Kerry Obrien into retirement, Mr Robyn Williams?
Perhaps there is a new generation at the ABC doing real journalism at last?
Monckton labels climate change adviser ‘fascist’ Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Broadcast: 22/06/2011. Reporter: Tom Iggulden http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2011/s3251010.htm
“Outspoken sceptic Christopher Monckton has said Professor Garnaut’s call to accept the reality of climate change is ‘fascist’.”
Actually, he said Professor Garnaut’s call to accept the reality of climate change with obedience and without question is fascist – but let us not quibble.
Make up your own mind on “Climate Change”
Monckton is a very entertaining and erudite speaker – you will not be bored!
BOOK YOUR MONCKTON TICKETS HERE
TICKETEK
Lord Monckton Tour 2011 http://premier.ticketek.com.au/shows/show.aspx?sh=LORDMONC11
Lord Monckton Tour 2011. The carbon tax will bankrupt Australia. The science does not justify it. Lord Monckton, Dr David Evans and Jo Nova will explain why.
Lord Monckton is widely consulted by governments on climate issues. For instance, he has discussed the subject with President Vaclav Klaus of the Czech Republic, who is on public record as an admirer of his many publications on climate, has participated in climate conferences with him in New York and in Washington DC, and accepted his invitation to participate in a climate conference at Cambridge University in May 2011. He has twice spoken before representatives of the Chinese Government, one of whom asked for copies of his papers on climate sensitivity for forwarding to Peking, saying that his research conclusions had major implications for China. He has also prepared a brief on the climate for Canada’s Prime Minister.
APPEARANCE DATES*:
Wed 6 Jul – The Starlight Room. Wests New Lambton
Thu 7 Jul – The Wesley Theatre. Pitt St Sydney CBD
Fri 8 Jul – North Sydney Leagues Club. Cammeray
Wed 13 Jul – Broncos Leagues Club. Red Hill**
Wed 20 Jul – German Club, Dandenong Road, Windsor**
*Ticketek is selling for the above venues only.
** Lord Monckton the only speaker.
Venue Information
Broncos Leagues Club, QLD
German Club, VIC
North Sydney Leagues Club, NSW
Wesley Conference Centre, NSW
Western Suburbs Leagues Club, NSW
More here…
http://landshape.org/news/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/LORD-MONCKTON-TOUR_white_background3.pdf
The Gravy Train Derails
Thursday 23 June, 2011 – 08:37 by Grant in Default
views (108)
Questions on how NASA’s James Hansen, an Al Gore adviser, makes over $1.2 Million as Director of GISS.
FOX NEWS NASA Scientist Accused of Using Celeb Status Among Environmental Groups to Enrich Himself By William Lajeunesse Published June 22, 2011 FoxNews.com http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/22/nasa-scientist-accused-using-celeb-status-among-environmental-groups-to-enrich/#ixzz1Q2oGfsmD
“The NASA scientist who once claimed the Bush administration tried to “silence” his global warming claims is now accused of receiving more than $1.2 million from the very environmental organizations whose agenda he advocated.
In a lawsuit filed Tuesday in Washington, D.C., a group claims NASA is withholding documents that show James Hansen failed to comply with ethics rules and financial disclosures regarding substantial compensation he earned outside his $180,000 taxpayer-paid position as director of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
“Hansen’s office appears to be somewhat of a rogue operation. It’s clearly a taxpayer-funded global warming advocacy organization,” said Chris Horner, a co-founder of The American Tradition Institute, which filed the lawsuit. “The real issue here is, has Hansen been asking NASA in writing, in advance, for permission for these outside activities? We have reason to believe that has not been occurring.”
More detail here…
ATI Law Center Asks Court to Force NASA to Produce Ethics and Outside Employment Records of Dr. James Hansen June 21st, 2011 | Author: ATI http://www.atinstitute.org/ati-law-center-asks-court-to-force-nasa-to-produce-ethics-and-outside-employment-records-of-dr-james-hansen/
The Professor Bites Back
Thursday 23 June, 2011 – 08:31 by Grant in Default
views (62)
AMERICAN THINKER
June 21, 2011
Science and Smear Merchants
By S. Fred Singer
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/06/science_and_smear_merchants.html
“Professor Naomi Oreskes, of the University of California in San Diego, claims to be a science historian. One can readily demonstrate that she is neither a credible scientist nor a credible historian; the best evidence is right there in her recent book, “Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming,” coauthored with Eric Conway. Her science is faulty; her historical procedures are thoroughly unprofessional. She is, however, an accomplished polemicist, who has found time for world lecture tours, promoting her book and her ideological views, while being paid by the citizens of California. Her book tries to smear four senior physicists — of whom I am the only surviving one. I view it as my obligation to defend the reputations of my late colleagues and good friends against her libelous charges…. ”
This Is How Global W./Climate C. Took Hold.
Thursday 23 June, 2011 – 08:28 by Grant in Default
views (56)
Dozens of spurious little anecdotal tibits which go completely unchallenged in the media until everybody starts believing it.
Everybody believes in Climate Change because everybody believes in Climate Change. Baaah!
What p*sses me off is that it is dressed up as science – we need science – real science, that can be challenged, debated and changed.
This BBC report looks very plausable…
BBC NEWS SCIENCE & ENVIRONMENT (sic an oxymoron!) 20 June 2011 Last updated at 12:24 GMT, By Richard Black, Environment correspondent, BBC News. Coral reefs are subject to “multiple stressors” that could destroy many within a human generation. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13796479
“The oceans are in a worse state than previously suspected, according to an expert panel of scientists.
In a new report, they warn that ocean life is “at high risk of entering a phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history”.
They conclude that issues such as over-fishing, pollution and climate change are acting together in ways that have not previously been recognised.
The impacts, they say, are already affecting humanity.
The panel was convened by the International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO), and brought together experts from different disciplines, including coral reef ecologists, toxicologists, and fisheries scientists
Its report will be formally released later this week…. ”
Nobody looks at the report, nobody challenges anything, no contrary opinion of any kind is mentioned – it just goes straight through to the public – the conventional wisdom reinforces the conventional wisdom.
Well, sometimes it does get challenged. It’s all there on the internet (thank the deity for the internet!) – this is an excellent detailed expose’ of the so called “experts” in the “scientists say” report above.
CLIMATE RESISTANCE BLOG The Fishy, Wishy-Washy IPSO Report. posted by Ben Pile on Tuesday, June 21, 2011 http://www.climate-resistance.org/2011/06/the-fishy-wishy-washy-ipso-report.html
“The list of the 26 contributors to the IPSO panel of expert scientists is on page 10 of the report of the three day conference. The previous posts here seem to have attracted a lot of interest, so I thought I’d have a yet deeper look at this panel for those following the story.
Let’s get the easy bit over with. Of the 26 contributors, we can immediately exclude half of them as non-experts:
Kelly Rigg is Executive Director of the Global Campaign for Climate Action.
Charlotte Smith is a Senior Accounts Director at Communications INC.
Mirella Von Lindenfels is Director of the The International Programme on the State of the Ocean, but alslo works at Communications INC, alongside Charlotte Smith…. ”
” …Score: 13-3
Which brings us to Ove Hoeghk-Guldberg, a professor and director of the Global Change Institute, University of Queensland.
Unfortunately for Prof. Hoeghk-Guldberg, he’s let his reputation get spoiled by his ownblurring of science and activism during Anthony Watts tour of Australia:… ”
” …Score: 14-3
Then there’s Alex Rogers, the organiser of the IPSO thing… whatever it is. Is he a scientist, or an activist? As Alex Cull pointed out in the comments on the previous post, sadly, Dr Roger’s also blurs the lines between science and activism:
IPSO’s scientific director is Alex Rogers, Professor of Conservation Biology at Oxford University. According to his web page at Oxford University’s Dept of Zoology, he has also worked for Greenpeace and WWF, and in addition, currently holds a position with GLOBE International. http://www.zoo.ox.ac.uk/staff/academics/rogers_ad.htm … ”
” …FINAL SCORE: 18-8.
But wait a minute. Haven’t all the members of this panel — never mind the 8 who don’t seem so confused about the difference between activism and science — merely been invited to this event simply because they have emphasised things like ‘sustainability’ and ‘ocean acidification’, and ‘climate change’? And isn’t that why they have been invited? Isn’t the point of IPSO simply to ask researchers of a similar mind to take part, and then present their ‘findings’ as the result of a scientific enquiry?
I could do the same thing tomorrow. I could email my academic friends — the ones I know to be broadly sceptical of climate change politics, if not the science — and invite them to my house for coffee. ‘Are you really worried about the end of the World’, I could ask. ‘Not really’, they would say. I could write up their non-concern in an expensive brochure. I could then pitch it to the world as convincing evidence that ‘things are not as bad as previously thought’. And the BBC, the Guardian, the Independent, the Times, the Telegraph, and the Daily Mail would report the findings, verbatim, without questioning it, wouldn’t they? Just as they have done here:… ”
And the BBC, the Guardian, the Independent, the Times, the Telegraph, and the Daily Mail are probably still wondering why they are loosing the public!
Poor Didums – Kitchen Getting To Hot?
Tuesday 21 June, 2011 – 07:35 by Grant in Default
views (75)
Well, you took the King’s shilling.
Real science is able to be debated, discussed and changed. “Climate” will brook no denial. Ergo it is NOT science.
The scientific establishment have long been forced to play the sensationalist media game to get funding and “Climate” is the mother of all sensations.
The best, most effective, sometimes the only, way to get funding is to sound an an alarm.
If you get into politics, people, you can expect to get abuse.
A real scientist is prepared to listen, takes criticism, and is prepared to accept it. Time to get back to that basic principle, people.
HERALD SUN Climate change deniers damaging us – scientists From: AAP June 20, 20117:47AM http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/climate-change-deniers-damaging-us-scientists/story-e6frf7jx-1226078247113
SYDNEY MORNING HERALD Scientists put out call for respect Phillip Coorey June 20, 2011. http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/scientists-put-out-call-for-respect-20110619-1ga9q.html#ixzz1Pqdlc5Bl
So, we are asked to believe that it is just co-incidence that these pure, innocent, victimised, “scientists say” people, just happened to pop up in the nation’s capital in the midst of a raging Carbon Tax debate. Yeah, right! Pull the other one!
EXTRAPOLATE! EXTRAPOLATE!
Tuesday 21 June, 2011 – 07:26 by Grant in Default
views (114)
When James The-end-is-nigh-I-made-a-model-of-it Hansen testified to Congress in 1988, someone turned the aircon down to heat up the room.
They’ve been doing it ever since.
Went OK for awhile, then the Globe stopped warming and now it’s cooling and Hansen/GISS is NASA’s all-time biggest embarassment as he blatantly props up his data.
Our AUS Climate Commission cited him to “prove” “the science”. Ah, yeah… OK.
REAL SCIENCE BLOG
GISS Extrapolations Are Crap
Posted on June 17, 2011 by stevengoddard
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/06/17/giss-extrapolations-are-crap/
GISS extrapolated that the entire region north of 80N was more than 2C above the 1958-2002 average in May, despite the fact that they have essentially no data there.
DMI actually has data north of 80N, and they showed May as below the 1958-2002 average.
GISS fabricates big numbers in the Arctic, which has the effect of disproportionately dragging the global temperature upwards. Even so, they still can’t get temperatures up to scenario C.”
POSTSCRIPT In case you’re dubious that they actually turned up the thermostat at that hearing here’s proof from their own mouths.
Bring it, Mr. Wirth – a challenge Posted on June 25, 2011 by Anthony Watts http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/25/bring-it-mr-wirth-a-challenge/#more-42203
Need More Detail On Sunspots?
Tuesday 21 June, 2011 – 07:21 by Grant in Default
views (146)
WUWT
Easterbrook on the potential demise of sunspots
Posted on June 17, 2011 by Anthony Watts
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/17/easterbrook-on-the-potential-demise-of-sunspots/
” …The last time sunspots vanished from the sun for decades was during the Maunder Minimum from 1645 to 1700 AD was marked by drastic cooling of the climate and the maximum cold of the Little Ice Age.
What happened the last time sunspots disappeared?
Abundant physical evidence from the geologic past provides a record of former periods of global cooling. Geologic records provide clear evidence of past global cooling so we can use them to project global climate into the future—the past is the key to the future. So what can we learn from past sunspot history and climate change?
Galileo’s perfection of the telescope in 1609 allowed scientists to… ”
UK – Stop – It’s All Gone To Far
Monday 20 June, 2011 – 06:20 by Grant in Default
views (174)
It’s nice to be Green but they really shouldn’t be taken seriously.
The UK conservatives have failed to recognise Climate Change as a pie-in-the-sky leftist, activist, plot which really needs to be opposed, not pandered to.
It really does threaten a real, actual, unfolding disaster for the hapless UK punter who has no alternative to vote for.
UK faces job losses as businesses threaten to flee abroad to escape green energy levies
British industry’s ability to compete with companies overseas is under threat from punitive green energy costs, the new president of the CBI has told The Sunday Telegraph.
Robert Mendick, Edward Malnick and Andrew Cave
7:45AM BST 12 Jun 2011
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/8570141/UK-faces-job-losses-as-businesses-threaten-to-flee-abroad-to-escape-green-energy-levies.html
” …It is estimated that an average of £200 is added on to the current household energy bills to help pay for the switch to renewable energy sources such as wind farms. That cost is expected to rise as more and more wind farms come into existence.
In the strongest signal so far of the effect of carbon reduction costs, Tata, the Indian-owned steel manufacturer, announced it was cutting 1,500 UK jobs, claiming “EU Carbon legislation threatens to impose huge additional costs on the steel industry”… ”
Alarmists Furiously Spinning Over Sunspots.
Monday 20 June, 2011 – 06:08 by Grant in Default
views (53)
You can argue about what is “gunna” happen until the cows come home.
It is much harder to argue about what has actually happened and it is almost impossible to argue against the simple statistical fact that when sunspots are few we have a cool Earth and when sunspots are many we have a warmer Earth. We have been counting sunspots since we invented the telescope hundreds of years ago.
The other notable thing about this sunspots spin is that Alarmists, defending the infamous UN IPCC “hockeystick graph”, have always dismissed the “Little Ice Age” and Medieval Warm as non-Global, these articles are forced to admit them and thus confirn that the UN IPCC “hockeystick” was wrong. What else have they been getting wrong? Stay tuned!
WIRED SCIENCE Sunspot Drop Won’t Cause Global Cooling By Brandon Keim June 15, 2011 http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/06/solar-minimum-climate/
” …Most Little Ice Age cooling appears to have been the result of coincidentally high volcanic activity that cloaked Earth in sunlight-blocking soot. As for the sun, a study published in 2001 in Science found that reduced solar activity produced a cooling effect of about 0.5 degrees Fahrenheit. In other estimates, the cooling is even more insignificant…. ”
NEW YORK TIMES. DOT EARTH. June 15, 2011, 11:36 am Would Solar Lull Snuff Climate Action? By ANDREW C. REVKIN
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/would-solar-lull-snuff-climate-action/?emc=eta1
” …[5:14 p.m. | Updated As Stefan Rahmstorf, a German climate scientist, explained in an e-mail late today, that’s very much an open question, with his modeling studies showing any cooling swamped by greenhouse-driven warming.]
The last long lull in solar activity of this sort, the Maunder Minimum from 1645 to 1715, was accompanied (cause and effect are still not well understood) by a substantial and sustained chill (particularly in winter) that led, among other things to the “frost fairs” on the frozen Thames River in London: … ”
And sarcasm is the lowest form of wit…
UK DAILY MAIL The Ice Age is coming… don’t panic! By Richard Littlejohn Last updated at 10:50 AM on 17th June 2011 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2004463/Cooler-Earth-The-Ice-Age-coming–dont-panic.html#ixzz1Pkd1HKBc
” …Although the findings from the National Solar Observatory in New Mexico are bad news for the global warming industry, they are not necessarily good news for the rest of us. Politicians are bound to exploit the new evidence for their own purposes?.?.?.
Britain will lead the world in tackling global cooling, the Prime Minister announced today. Unless we act now, he warned, the planet could soon freeze over.
He was speaking after the emergency United Nations climate change summit at the exclusive Cool Runnings ski resort in Jamaica. A new Global Cooling Bill will be brought before the next session of Parliament, aimed at increasing carbon emissions by 60 per cent.
The Energy Secretary has given the green light to a modern generation of peat-fired power stations and ordered an increase in drilling for North Sea Oil. Fossil fuels are believed to hold the key to reversing the drop in temperatures…. ”
Very Droll.
TWTW Is Good This Week
Monday 20 June, 2011 – 05:43 by Grant in Default
views (69)
THIS WEEK:
By Ken Haapala, Executive Vice President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)
http://go.madmimi.com/redirects/73e7ce6e980e8b017896e5e36c17a2d0?pa=4106253348
“A number of events occurred this week that increases the turmoil surrounding climate science.
American Meteorological Society: Noted hurricane expert and a member of the American Meteorological Society (AMS) for over 50 years, Bill Gray, blasted the current, ideologically driven leadership of the AMS for embracing the human-caused global warming (AGW) hypothesis espoused by the UN Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change. According to Gray, the leadership did so without considering the views of many expert members of the society who do not embrace that view. The AMS failed its responsibilities to facilitate the scientific debate. Instead, the leadership adopted one side of a scientific issue without regard for its traditions of fostering scientific inquiry. As such, the effectiveness of the AMS has been greatly compromised.
Gray states two specific failings of the IPCC and its models which the AMS has embraced. One is that the upper troposphere water vapor feedback loop is grossly wrong. The models fail to handle the rainfall process correctly and project greater warming than justifiable. [This is illustrated in the missing fingerprint in weather balloon and satellite observations of the atmosphere centered over the tropics at about 10 km as shown in NIPCC 2008.]
The second failing Gray cites is the failure to comprehend the fundamental role of the deep ocean circulation, the Meridional Overturning Circulation (MOC). [The MOC is a more rigorous concept than the more popularly known Thermohaline Circulation.] To Gray, the MOC significantly influences rainfall, wind, and surface temperature changes independent of greenhouse gases and radiation.
The displeasure Gray expresses is similar to the displeasure numerous members of other physical societies have expressed towards the leadership of their organizations, which have issued political statements regarding AGW without fully consulting the views of the membership. We are witnessing a decline in scientific rigor and discipline in scientific debates. The damage being done to the societies is significant as is damage to the American science as a whole. Please see Article # 1.
******************
On Monday, at the annual meeting of the solar physics division of the American Astronomical Society, three separate groups announced the findings of their research -solar activity appears to be diminishing. The three studies examined three different components of activity, 1) the jet stream in the solar interior, 2) diminishing sunspots on the visible surface and 3) changes in the corona and near the poles. All three research efforts pointed to the same direction – a pronounced decline in solar activity including sun spots and solar magnetism.
Immediate responses range from it means little or nothing, the orthodoxy, to an alarmist future Little Ice Age. The quote above from Michael Mann reflects the orthodox view that solar changes have little influence on global warming and the climate.
The orthodoxy totally ignores the solar-cosmic ray hypothesis that solar activity, namely solar wind and magnetism, influences the number of high energy cosmic rays hitting the earth’s atmosphere, which, in turn, influences the formation of low level clouds which reflect sunlight, thus have a cooling effect. A dormant sun results in more cosmic rays and more clouds and cooler temperatures. A small change in cloud cover can result in significant temperature changes.
The quote above from Henrik Svensmark reflects the solar-cosmic ray hypothesis. At this time, one cannot confirm if the sun’s activity will continue to diminish, as the new research suggests. Nor can one confirm that sunspot activity is clearly related to solar wind and magnetism. (The effects of changes in solar wind and magnetism on cosmic rays have been long established.) If solar wind and magnetism diminishes, and clouds increase, then these events become a physical test of the solar-cosmic ray hypothesis.
At this time, the extent of the possible cooling, if any, cannot be determined. Don Easterbrook posted on Anthony Watt’s web site an excellent analysis of possible alternative cooling scenarios. The result may be a shallow cooling similar to 1945 to 1977, a more severe cooling similar to 1880-1915, a much more severe cooling similar to the Dalton Minimum of 1790 to 1820, or a return to a Little Ice Age. (Please see articles referenced under “Is the Sun Rising?” and under “Defenders of the Orthodoxy.”
Of course, several British satirists have seized upon these projections and wrote articles on what actions their government would take to prevent global cooling. Please see articles referenced under “Below the Bottom Line.”
******************
Climategate and similar IPCC shenanigans are upon us once again. One of the favorite marketing ploys of the IPCC is to make press releases and issue a Summary for Policymakers (SPM) with exciting claims with details to follow. It did so in the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), in which the SPM was released months before the main report. The main report poorly supported, or failed to support, many of the claims in the SPM. Further, many of the claims were supported by gray literature written by operatives from environmental groups.
On May 9, the IPCC released a summary report claiming that close to 80% of the world’s energy needs can be supplied from renewable energy sources by 2050. According to IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri, the report was based on the best information available and was a sound basis for policymakers to meet the challenges of global warming. It did not pass the sniff test.
On June 14, the IPCC released the main report. Steve McIntyre of Climate Audit examined it and discovered the lead author of the critical chapter arriving to 80% of the world’s energy needs was a Greenpeace activist, Sven Teske, appointed to the IPCC by the German government. Even more interesting, the IPCC claim was based on a report by Greenpeace and the European Renewable Energy Council (EREC), with the lead author none other than Sven Teske. Thickening the plot, the preface to the Greenpeace report was written by none other than IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri. This is the best IPCC can do for objective, scientific reports!
As the dubious science of the IPCC was unraveling, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), under which IPCC festivities take place is asking member nations for donations to increase its roughly $25 Million budget by 15% because it has taken on new responsibilities, including gearing up to dispense $100 Billion per year by 2020 in payments from developed nations to developing nations as compensation for global warming.
Perhaps it’s time for UNFCCC and IPCC to demand payments from the multibillion dollar environmental industry, which raises great sums playing to the false fears the IPCC creates. This would relieve the taxpayers of Western nations from the obligation of supporting an organization that is dedicated to lessening their standards of living. Further, it would remove the last shrouds covering the claim that the IPCC is an objective, scientific organization and identify it for what it has become- an organization for promotion of the environmental industry. Please see articles referenced under “Climategate Continued” and “Defenders of the Orthodoxy.”
****************** … ”
UN IPCC Boobs Again.
Sunday 19 June, 2011 – 04:50 by Grant in Default
views (105)
The Intergovernmental Panel of Communist Cronies run out of real facts and real science and resort to quoting activists.
Have you been taking these people seriously?
WUWT
A blunder of staggering proportions by the IPCC
Posted on June 16, 2011 by Anthony Watts
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/16/a-blunder-of-staggering-proportions-by-the-ipcc/
“Steve McIntyre has uncovered a blunder on the part of Pachauri and the IPCC that is causing waves of doubt and calls for retooling on both sides of the debate. In a nutshell,
the IPCC made yet another inflated claim that:
…80 percent of the world‘s energy supply could be met by renewables by mid-century…
Unfortunately, it has been revealed that this claim is similar to the Himalayan glacier melt by 2035 fiasco, with nothing independent to back it up. Worse, it isn’t the opinion of
the IPCC per se, but rather that of Greenpeace. It gets worse.
Steve McIntyre discovered the issue and writes this conclusion:
It is totally unacceptable that IPCC should have had a Greenpeace employee as a Lead Author of the critical Chapter 10, that the Greenpeace employee, as an IPCC Lead Author, should (like Michael Mann and Keith Briffa in comparable situations) have been responsible for assessing his own work and that, with such inadequate and non-independent ‘due diligence’, IPCC should have featured the Greenpeace scenario in its press release on renewables…. ”
Newspoll Out – Punters Not Buying It.
Thursday 16 June, 2011 – 05:15 by Grant in Default
views (274)
The idea is to cynically embarrass The Leader and shove through a big new tax and let the furore subside in time for the next election.
It doesn’t always work, as Labor discovered here in QLD over the Council amalgamations.
Just look at the body language – very negative – Bob Brown looks like he’s going to have a stroke!
HERALD SUN
Voters desert Prime Minister Julia Gillard over carbon tax By Phillip Hudson
From: Herald Sun
June 15, 2011 1:30AM
http://www.news.com.au/national/labors-fortunes-slide-further-newspoll-reveals/story-e6frfkvr-1226075300365#ixzz1PN4VtrxC
” …Ms Gillard’s satisfaction rating has dived five points in the past fortnight to a record low 30 per cent, well below Mr Rudd’s low of 36 per cent in his final days as PM.
Her approval was a record high 50 per cent before she announced the carbon tax plan, a decision that has crushed her personal stocks and support for Labor.
The ALP’s primary vote dropped three points in the past fortnight. The high under Ms Gillard was 42 per cent in the days after she took the leadership. It was 38 per cent on election day and hit a record low of 30 per cent in March, immediately after the carbon tax was announced.
Today’s Newspoll shows the Greens fell three points to 11 per cent.
The Coalition’s primary vote bounced back two points to 46 per cent. Under Tony Abbott’s leadership it is at the highest level since May 2005, before John Howard announced WorkChoices.
In two-party terms,… ”
WARNING WARNING WARNING
Wednesday 15 June, 2011 – 08:04 by Grant in Default
views (198)
If you’ve noticed a lot of record cold weather lately here is why.
Argument and debate aside, it is a simple, statistical fact that humans have been counting sunspots for hundreds of years, since the telescope was invented, and when sunspots are few the Earth is colder and when sunspots are many the Earth is warmer.
Let me tell you, our children could well be praying for some Global Warming and fervently wishing that the Greenies had been correct back in the 1990s about humans causing Global Warming, as freezing cold sets in for another hundred years. Brrr…
Chilling.
The results of the new studies were announced today (June 14) at the annual meeting of the solar physics division of the American Astronomical Society, which is being held this week at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces.
WUWT
BREAKING – major AAS solar announcement: Sun’s Fading Spots Signal Big Drop in Solar Activity
Posted on June 14, 2011 by Anthony Watts
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/14/the-major-aas-solar-announcement-suns-fading-spots-signal-big-drop-in-solar-activity/
“If we are right, this could be the last solar maximum we’ll see for a few decades,” Hill said. “That would affect everything from space exploration to Earth’s climate.”
” …Currently, the sun is in the midst of the period designated as Cycle 24 and is ramping up toward the cycle’s period of maximum activity. However, the recent findings indicate that the activity in the next 11-year solar cycle, Cycle 25, could be greatly reduced. In fact, some scientists are questioning whether this drop in activity could lead to a second Maunder Minimum, which was a 70-year period from 1645 to 1715 when the sun showed virtually no sunspots…. ”
SPACE DOT COM
Sun’s Fading Spots Signal Big Drop in Solar Activity
by Denise Chow, SPACE.com Staff Writer
Date: 14 June 2011 Time: 01:01 PM ET
http://www.space.com/11960-fading-sunspots-slower-solar-activity-solar-cycle.html
UK Conservatives FAIL – Continued
Wednesday 15 June, 2011 – 07:52 by Grant in Default
views (101)
Truth really is stranger than fiction – the once mighty United Kingdom self-destructs – amazing to watch!
Do we really need to follow?
I mean, can’t we just wait for the suggested coming G.Warming/C.Change to actually look like it will become a serious problem before we try to fix it?!
FRONT PAGE MAG
Cap and Trade Catastrophe
Posted by Arnold Ahlert on Jun 13th, 2011
http://frontpagemag.com/2011/06/13/cap-and-trade-catastrophe/
” …Mr. Jack then said something that should sound distressingly familiar to Americans. “The rising burden of non-energy costs faced by Britain’s energy suppliers–including the cost of meeting government environmental and social programs and the cost of distributing electricity on the national grid–has also placed further upward pressure on energy bills.”
What Mr. Jack is referring to is government regulations which essentially decide who the “winners” and “losers” are in the energy game. These regulations are designed to intentionally drive up prices, and then give the extra money to the owners of renewable power generators. One of these regulations is called a Feed-in-Tariff (FIT) in which an inflated price is paid to the owners of massive wind farms or those who put rooftop solar panels on their houses. This cost is then added onto everyone’s electric bills. Since those who can afford wind farms or solar panels tend to be people who are better off economically, the net result is that poorer Brits are subsidizing the power consumption of those who are better off.
Another of these regulations is the Renewables Obligation, where… ”
Oh Timmy, Timmy, How Could You?
Tuesday 14 June, 2011 – 03:10 by Grant in Default
views (145)
Tim Flannery – I called him the Rasputin in the Court of the AUS ABC – made a lot fame and fortune out of “Climate” but, as this new book clearly shows, it is all just a plausable lie.
The Weather Makers Re-examined:
D Weston Allen
* 400 pages *100 plus illustrations *300 plus peer-reviewed references * well indexed
http://www.irenicpublications.com.au/html/excerptsWMR.html
The Weather Makers Re-examined is the first comprehensive review and critique of
The Weather Makers – the 2005 best seller that propelled Tim Flannery to become the Australian of the Year (2007) and now the Climate Change Commissioner for the Gillard Government.
” …Dr. Allen puts every chapter of Tim’ Flannery’s thesis on global warming alarmism under the spotlight of the most up-to-date scientific realism – in climate sensitivity to carbon dioxide, the reliability of the temperature records, sea levels, glaciers, the true state of the Arctic, Antarctic, Greenland, the Great Barrier Reef, extreme weather events, acidification of the oceans, oscillating Atlantic and Pacific currents and much more.
The Weather Makers is shown to contain 23 misinterpretations, 28 contradictory statements, 31 untraceable or suspect sources, 45 failures to reflect uncertainty, 66 over-simplications or factual errors, 78 exaggerations and over a hundred unsupported dogmatic statements, many of them quite outlandish.
Always a scholar and a gentleman, Wes Allen never uses ad hominem arguments, but treats Tim Flannery with courtesy and respect. His predilection for cautious understatement, however, makes for some humorous one-liners. For example, he says that after Flannery has diagnosed his beloved Gaia as suffering from a raging fever, he has nothing more to offer her than some feeble “homeopathic remedies.”
With CC Commissioner Flannery now leading the charge for a government carbon tax to mitigate Gaia’s raging fever, the timing for the publication of The Weather Makers Re-examined could not be better. There are few things more powerful than a quality book whose time has come. The Weather Makers Re-examined is such a book.”
$39.60 posted free anywhere in Australia. Irenic Publications, 57 Duranbah Road, Duranbah NSW 2487. www.irenicpublications.com.au
Factories Are Closing
Monday 13 June, 2011 – 02:55 by Grant in Default
views (301)
EUROPEAN ENERGY REVIEW
Europe’s Green Suicide: ‘Factories Are Closing’
Tuesday, 07 June 2011 08:15 Karel Beckman,
http://www.thegwpf.org/international-news/3159-europes-green-suicide-factories-are-closing.html
” …To make matters worse, European electricity prices are then further pushed up by the EU’s climate policies, particularly the EU Emission Trading Scheme (ETS). The electricity producers that have to reduce their CO2 emissions under this scheme, pass on their costs to their customers, including the industry. As a result, says Jeekel, energy costs for the EU’s non-ferrous metal producers are now roughly twice as high as those of their main international competitors. ‘The world average power price expected by aluminium smelters in 2011 is $43.10 per MWh (Megawatt-hour) or about $645 per tonne of aluminium. By comparison, German smelters paid $79.60 per MWh, or about $1195 per tonne aluminium, based on the average 2011 spot price at the German power exchange EEX.’
High electricity prices would not in itself be a problem, if the extra costs could be passed on to the buyers. But that, says Jeekel, is not possible in the non-ferrous metal market. ‘Our sector works with global prices that are set at the London Metals Exchange. There is a world price for aluminium, zinc, copper, as there is for oil, and it is basically set by demand from China. These international commodity markets are the universal reference for the selling prices of our products worldwide. They prevent us from passing on any locally incurred operational costs. Our customers will not pay more than the market price.’ …”
“…Standstill
The upshot of all this , says Jeekel, is that most European smelters now find themselves in a critical situation, and investments have come to a standstill . ‘Smelters in Poland, Wales, Hungary, France, Italy and Germany have already closed. Germany’s biggest aluminium smelter has curtailed its production. Most of the remaining smelters urgently need the financial compensation which the ETS law was to provide them.’”
Greenhouse Bullcrap 
Leave a comment