We should have a Vote of No Confidence here.
Hey folks,
For more than just Man-Made Climate Change. Look at these headlines in the foreign Press. this is ALL since Valentine's Day. UK Guardian - Utah delivers vote of no confidence for 'climate alarmists', UK Times Online - World may not be warming, say scientists, UK Express - THE GREAT CLIMATE CHANGE RETREAT, MAIL Online - Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995. Even Reuters, Reuters - U.N. climate panel admits Dutch sea level flaw.
We need a Vote of No Confidence here. Seriously. I have been telling you for years that this is all a SCAM. In the last couple of years, more and more Scientists are coming out telling you this is all a Scam. Scientists that Al Gore quoted in his Sci Fi Movie, An Inconvenient Truth, came out after seeing it saying that they NEVER said anything like what Al Gore Displayed. We learn that the IPCC, the Inventive Panel on Coning Chumps, uh AKA, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has turned into, always have been really, nothing more than a Saturday Night Live Skit. NOW ladies and Gentlemen. Even some MAIN AUTHORS and Scientists involved are now coming out.
Lets look at just one of these latest Headlines, MAIL Online - Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995.
Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing There has been no global warming since 1995 Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes
The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.
Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.
Hey folks,
For more than just Man-Made Climate Change. Look at these headlines in the foreign Press. this is ALL since Valentine's Day. UK Guardian - Utah delivers vote of no confidence for 'climate alarmists', UK Times Online - World may not be warming, say scientists, UK Express - THE GREAT CLIMATE CHANGE RETREAT, MAIL Online - Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995. Even Reuters, Reuters - U.N. climate panel admits Dutch sea level flaw.We need a Vote of No Confidence here. Seriously. I have been telling you for years that this is all a SCAM. In the last couple of years, more and more Scientists are coming out telling you this is all a Scam. Scientists that Al Gore quoted in his Sci Fi Movie, An Inconvenient Truth, came out after seeing it saying that they NEVER said anything like what Al Gore Displayed. We learn that the IPCC, the Inventive Panel on Coning Chumps, uh AKA, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has turned into, always have been really, nothing more than a Saturday Night Live Skit. NOW ladies and Gentlemen. Even some MAIN AUTHORS and Scientists involved are now coming out.
Lets look at just one of these latest Headlines, MAIL Online - Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995.
Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing There has been no global warming since 1995 Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes
The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.
Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.
Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory.
Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.
And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.
He also, while attempting to explain that he LOST the data Global Warming is based on, admitted that the "Science is no settled." Really?
According to the UK Times Online - World may not be warming, say scientists
The United Nations climate panel faces a new challenge with scientists casting doubt on its claim that global temperatures are rising inexorably because of human pollution.
In its last assessment the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said the evidence that the world was warming was “unequivocal”.
It warned that greenhouse gases had already heated the world by 0.7C and that there could be 5C-6C more warming by 2100, with devastating impacts on humanity and wildlife. However, new research, including work by British scientists, is casting doubt on such claims. Some even suggest the world may not be warming much at all.
“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC.
The doubts of Christy and a number of other researchers focus on the thousands of weather stations around the world, which have been used to collect temperature data over the past 150 years.
These stations, they believe, have been seriously compromised by factors such as urbanisation, changes in land use and, in many cases, being moved from site to site.
There is even evidence that some of these measuring "sticks" have been tampered with. This is why I told you that this has now just become silly. Anytime I hear a News Story of Massive Floods, Dying Species, Those Poor Polar Bears, or anything that is Doom and Gloom thanks to Global Warming in OUR Media, I just sigh. Sad really. Our media simply report what they are told to. Mindlessly reporting the SCAM as fact to help our President further his agenda.Have you seen the fact that Professor Phil Jones admits we haven't warmed since now 95? Or that he admitted that we were most likely warmer in the Past? AFP had the story of the Netherlands over two weeks ago. Reuters JUST NOW started reporting on it. The truth is out there folks. GW is nothing more than BS. One day, when it can no longer be ignored, the US Press MAY start reporting on it.
So why am I harping on this again? I will continue to talk about this SCAM as long as there are people that use this SCAM to attempt to pass things like Cap and Tax. As long as there are people that attempt to use this SCAM to progress Socialism, and Tyranny in this Country.
Americas News Online - US Congress Left Stunned On What To Do On Cap And Trade Bill By Audrey Howard on February 15, 2010, 9:08 am is a perfect example of what I'm talking about.
Back in the summer, the road to cap and trade seemed all but certain. Passage was supposed to be easy. Democrats were comfortable in painting the energy lobby into a corner and making Republicans cave to mounting scientific pressure on the dangers of global warming. A series of missteps, scandals and Mother Nature herself has made Democratic leaders in both houses of Congress take a second look at the certainty of passage, and what they see have them in a quandary.
Seems Audrey Howard is upset about this. MANY on the Left are. Those stinking snow storms. {Smile} Truth is, it NOT the snow storms. It's REALITY. It's TRUTH. It's the fact that anyone with an IQ over 10, can now see that the "mounting" evidence is that this is nothing more than a SCAM.
You know folks, it really is just silly anymore. It's like me saying to you that there is a Purple Bunny in your back yard. You go out there, and you do not see it. People come in and do a thermal scan, dig up your entire yard looking for Rabbit holes. People camp out waiting to catch a glimpse. NOTHING. They come to you and say, NOTHING. Then I come back and say to you, "Bunny is gonna get ya." {Laughing}
The sad thing is this. There are people that would still stay locked in their homes because "What If?" What if the Bunny is real? I think I would rather be safe than sorry. {Sigh}
Folks, there is no threat. Those that attempted to further the notion that there is, are now even admitting that there is most likely not. There is no bases for Cap and Tax, or anything else that some in the Leadership of this country would like you to believe they need to do to save you from this SCAM. One day, I hope, the US media will wake up and start reporting the truth.
Peter
Sources:
UK Guardian - Utah delivers vote of no confidence for 'climate alarmists'
Reuters - U.N. climate panel admits Dutch sea level flaw
Times Online - World may not be warming, say scientists
UK Express - THE GREAT CLIMATE CHANGE RETREAT
MAIL Online - Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995
7 comments:
PART 1
Foes of global warming theory have energy ties
By JEFF NESMITH
COX NEWS SERVICE
WASHINGTON -- Non-profit organizations with ties to energy interests are promoting a controversial new study as proof that prevailing views of global warming are wrong.
The scientists who wrote the study contend that the global warming of recent decades is not without precedent during the past 1,000 years, as other scientists have claimed. In fact, they say the Earth was even warmer during what is known as the "medieval warm period" between A.D. 900 and 1300.
The paper has touched off a worldwide storm of e-mail among climate scientists, some of whom have proposed organizing a research boycott of two journals that published the study.
The links among authors of the new study, the non-profit groups and the energy interests illustrate a three-way intersection of money, science and policy. Energy interests underwrote the study and help finance the groups that are promoting it.
The study also illustrates a strategy adopted by some energy companies in the late 1980s to attack the credibility of climate science, said John Topping, president of the Climate Institute and a former Republican congressional staffer who founded the institute in 1986.
By relying on the news media's inclination to include both sides of a story, the industries were able to create the impression that scientists were deeply divided over climate change, Topping said. "It was all very shrewdly done," he said.
The institute, which takes the position that climate change threatens the global environment, promotes international cooperation to address the issue. Less than 1 percent of its funding has come from oil industry sources, Topping said, with the rest coming from foundations.
Most climate scientists think the rise in global climate -- largely stable until the late 1980s, they say -- results from the atmospheric buildup of heat-trapping "greenhouse gases," especially carbon dioxide released by the combustion of fossil fuels. Industry-backed groups claim their study challenges the validity of this view by presenting evidence of global warming when fossil fuels were not being burned in appreciable quantities.
PART 2
The study, "Reconstructing Climatic and Environmental Changes of the Past 1,000 Years: A Reappraisal," was published several weeks ago in a British scientific journal, Energy and Environment. The authors contend in the 65-page paper that their reanalysis of data from more than 200 climate studies provides evidence of global temperature shifts that are more dramatic than the current one.
The research was underwritten by the American Petroleum Institute, the trade association of the world's largest oil companies. Two of the five authors are scientists who have been linked to the coal industry and have received support from the ExxonMobil Foundation. Two others, who are affiliated with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, also have the title of "senior scientists" with a Washington-based organization supported by ExxonMobil Corp.
The organization, the George T. Marshall Institute, is headed by William O'Keefe, a former executive of the American Petroleum Institute. He also was at one time the president of the Global Climate Coalition, a now-defunct organization created by oil and coal interests to lobby against U.S. participation in climate treaties, such as the Kyoto Protocol.
"Statements made about the warming trend of the 20th century and the 1990s do not withstand close scrutiny," O'Keefe said at a luncheon for study author Willie Soon, a physicist and astronomer with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center, to present a summary of the new research.
Major news organizations did not publish a Harvard-Smithsonian Center news release that declared that the scientists "determined" that the warming trend is neither the hottest nor the most dramatic change in the past 1,000 years. But it was picked up by the Discovery Channel Online.
That article was copied and distributed by the staff of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, headed by Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., a climate-change skeptic.
The principal target of the paper was Michael Mann of the University of Virginia, whose compilation of thousands of proxy indicators led to the conclusion that the past two decades have been unusually warm.
Mann said the Soon study does not even attempt to reconstruct global average temperatures, but simply highlights anecdotal evidence of isolated trends. Soon acknowledged that his research does not provide a comprehensive picture.
The energy industry provides significant funding for groups that employ some of the authors or promote their new study. Soon's co-authors were Sallie Baliunas, also from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center; Sherwood Idso and his son, Craig Idso of Tempe, Ariz., who are the former president and the current president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change; and David Legates, a climate researcher at the University of Delaware.
The Idsos, who have been linked to Western coal interests, do not reveal financial sources. But IRS records filed by ExxonMobil Foundation show that it provided a grant of $15,000 to the center in 2000.
These records and others show that ExxonMobil Foundation and ExxonMobil Corp. also have contributed $160,000 to the George T. Marshall Institute in the past three years and more than $900,000 to the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
Soon declined to say how much he is paid to serve as a "senior scientist" with the Marshall Institute. Both he and Baliunas have that title.
Other board members include techno-suspense novelist Thomas Clancy Jr., newspaper columnist Charles Krauthammer, Dr. Bernadine Healy, former director of the National Institutes of Health, and Frederick Seitz of Rockefeller University.
Ross Gelbspan, a former Boston Globe reporter and editor whose 1997 book, "The Heat is On," details industry efforts to discredit climate change science, said conclusions that greenhouse gases are causing the planet to heat up are the result of the "most rigorously peer-reviewed scientific collaboration in history.
"The contradictory statements of a tiny handful of discredited scientists, funded by big coal and big oil, represent a deliberate -- and extremely reckless -- campaign of deception and disinformation."
AT A GLANCE
THE PREVAILING VIEW: Climate change threatens the global environment.
THE CONTROVERSY: Most climate scientists think the rise results from the atmospheric buildup of heat-trapping "greenhouse gases," especially carbon dioxide released by the combustion of fossil fuels such as coal and petroleum.
Industry-backed groups claim their study challenges the validity of this view by presenting evidence of global warming at a time when fossil fuels were not being burned in appreciable quantities.
THE JOURNALS REPORTING IT: British scientific journal, Energy and Environment; Discovery Channel Online
THE BACKERS:
# The research was underwritten by the American Petroleum Institute, the trade association of the world's largest oil companies.
# Two of the five authors are scientists who have been linked to the coal industry and have received support from the ExxonMobil Foundation.
# Two others, who are affiliated with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, also have the title of "senior scientists" with a Washington-based organization supported by conservative foundations and ExxonMobil Corp.
# The organization, the George T. Marshall Institute, is headed by William O'Keefe, a former executive of the American Petroleum Institute.
PRINCIPAL TARGET OF THE STUDY: Michael Mann of the University of Virginia, whose landmark compilation of thousands of "proxy" indicators led to the conclusion that the past two decades have been unusually warm.
http://www.seattlepi.com/national/124642_warming02.html
SCAM. This report was from 2003 and the lies in it are still being repeated. I have a hard time believing anything or anyone receiving funding from big oil. Oil's only concern is themselves. Propaganda is all part of their existence. You fit right into their scheme. Perfectly.
Hey Pete,
Ignorance is bliss my friend. THERE IS NO GLOBAL WARMING! Even the guy who started the whole thing, so to speak, Professor Phil Jones, who has no ties to the Oil Industry, just told us we haven't warmed since 95, and that it was was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.
Peter, the evidence is clear. But if you chose to live as if we are all going to die because we breath and cows fart, go ahead. Just leave me out of it. I like my light bulbs. {Smile}
Peter
I like my light bulbs. {Smile}
I don't. I hate light bulbs. Especially those new CFL things. fluorescent sucks. I like my candles. You can keep your bulbs.
ERRORS AND LIES THRIVE IN COLD WEATHER
New Scientist, 14 January 2010.
HERE’S the question to put to all those who confidently declare that the recent severe winter conditions prove that global warming is nonsense: “Next time there’s a heatwave in summer or an unusually mild spell in winter, will you publicly accept that the ‘warmists’ were right all along? If not, why not? If a cold snap means the climate is getting colder, surely a spell of hot weather proves it is getting warmer?”
The point, of course, is that a bout of extreme weather does not prove anything about climate change. Climate is the average weather over decades.
That said, it is perfectly reasonable to ask why, if the world is warming, have so many places in the northern hemisphere been experiencing record lows? The answer is that for the past few decades cold Arctic air has mostly stayed in the Arctic over winter, trapped by strong winds spinning around the pole. This winter the vortex has weakened and in many places cold air is spilling further south than usual.
The result has been freezing weather for places as far afield as Florida, China and the UK. However, the Arctic, Greenland, much of the Mediterranean and southern Asia have been warmer than usual. So overall the northern hemisphere winter may be no colder than in previous years, it’s just that the heat is distributed differently. Indeed, the average surface temperature of the entire planet during January may yet turn out to be one of the warmest on record.
The surface temperature of the planet in January may turn out to be one of the warmest on record
Most atmospheric scientists regard the recent weather as nothing more than the kind of extreme event that happens from time to time. Others are not so sure. Xiangdong Zhang of the International Arctic Research Center in Fairbanks, Alaska, has found that atmospheric circulation patterns in the Arctic are changing drastically as it warms. He says these changes might have contributed to the recent unusual weather.
Either way, some areas could have more cold weather in the future. That will not change the big picture: the world warmed over the 20th century and it is going to get warmer still. Anyone who tells you a cold spell proves otherwise is either intellectually challenged or plain dishonest.
Update 10 February: Accuweather reports that according to satellite measurements, this January was the warmest since records began in 1979.
C'mon. This guy's an idiot. He lost a bunch of his data over the last 13 years. He doesn't know which end is up. He now says there's been no warming in the last 15 years? HUH? The earth's average surface temp has increased. According to Accuweather, January was the warmest since since 1979 (when it started keeping records). The Earth is getting warmer. That is a FACT. The question is what's causing it (natural cycle or man)?
So this guy saying no warming is just crazy. Dr. Phil needs to see Dr. Phil.
Climate scientist at centre of leaked email row dismisses conspiracy claims
Professor Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia denies emails provide evidence of collusion by climatologists to fix data.
Professor Phil Jones Director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in Norwich says charges of conspiracy over climate change are ‘rubbish’. Photograph: University of East Anglia.
The climatologist at the centre of the leaked emails row said today that he “absolutely” stands by his research and that any suggestion that the emails provide evidence of a conspiracy to manipulate or hide data that do not support the theory of man-made climate change was “complete rubbish”.
Professor Phil Jones, director of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, said that the past week had been “the worst few days of my professional life”. He added that since the emails were leaked he had received personal threats which have now been passed on to the police to investigate.
In his first full interview since last week’s theft, which saw hundreds of emails and documents exchanged between some of the leading climatologists over the past 13 years stolen from the university’s servers, Jones defended himself against accusations by climate sceptics that the emails provide evidence of collusion by climatologists to fix data.
“That the world is warming is based on a range of sources: not only temperature records but other indicators such as sea level rise, glacier retreat and less Arctic sea ice,” he said. “Our global temperature series tallies with those of other, completely independent, groups of scientists working for Nasa and the National Climate Data Centre in the United States, among others. Even if you were to ignore our findings, theirs show the same results. The facts speak for themselves; there is no need for anyone to manipulate them.”
Jones accepted, though, that the contents of some of the emails were cause for embarrassment: “Some of the emails probably had poorly chosen words and were sent in the heat of the moment, when I was frustrated. I do regret sending some of them. We’ve not deleted any emails or data here at CRU. I would never manipulate the data one bit – I would categorically deny that.”
He confirmed that all of the leaked emails that had provoked heated debate – including the now infamous email from 1999 in which he discussed a “trick” to “hide the decline” in global temperatures – appeared to be genuine.
“The use of the term ‘hiding the decline’ was in an email written in haste,” he said. “CRU has not sought to hide the decline.” (The University of East Anglia has now posted a detailed explanation of why this phrase was used on its website)
Part2
Jones said the timing of the theft suggested it was intended to cause maximum embarrassment ahead of the Copenhagen climate talks next month: “One has to wonder if it is a coincidence that this email correspondence has been stolen and published at this time. This may be a concerted attempt to put a question mark over the science of climate change in the run-up to the Copenhagen talks.”
But he stressed that he has never wished to get drawn into the political debate about climate change, saying: “I’m a very apolitical person, I don’t want to get involved in the politics, I’m much happier doing the science and producing the papers. I’m a scientist, I let my science do the talking, along with all my scientific climate colleagues. It’s up to governments to decide and climate science is just one thing they have to take into account with the decisions they have to make.”
He added that he had long been under pressure from climate sceptics to further explain his research: “From about 2001/2002 I was getting emails from a number of people involved in the climate sceptic community. Initially at the beginning I did try to respond to them in the hope I might convince them but I soon realised it was a forlorn hope and broke off communication. Some of the emails I sent them subsequently appeared and were discussed on various sceptic websites.”
Trevor Davies, the University of East Anglia’s pro-vice-chancellor with responsibility for research, rejected calls – including from the Guardian commentator George Monbiot – for Jones to resign: “We see no reason for Professor Jones to resign and, indeed, we would not accept his resignation. He is a valued and important scientist.”
Davies said the university had now decided to conduct an independent review which will “address the issue of data security, an assessment of how we responded to a deluge of Freedom of Information requests, and any other relevant issues which the independent reviewer advises should be addressed”.
Yesterday, prominent members of both sides of the climate change debate, including the climate change sceptic Lord Lawson, had called for an independent review. Lawson said he believed this should be carried out by the Natural Environment Research Council, a government science funding body.
But a spokesperson for Nerc said it was not a matter for them. “Nerc believes this is a matter for the University of East Anglia – their Climatic Research Unit is not a Nerc unit – so it is for them to decide if they call for an enquiry and if so who should conduct it. Should there be an enquiry we would of course be happy to contribute, if asked.”
A spokesperson for the journal Nature said, “In line with our standard policy, if clear evidence were to arise that anything we’ve published is in question then we’ll look into any action that may need to be taken.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/24/climate-professor-leaked-emails-uea
Post a Comment