|
Susan Joy Rennison's Website  
Financial System Black Swan - Imminent! 30th January 2024
|
|
Implications for Earth and Humankind With Mel Fabregas Veritas Radio May 2013 Part I Part II - members only 
Recommended!
Joyfire Space Weather “Facts” Slideshow April 2013 
Henrik Palmgren, at Red Ice Radio Global Energy Leap 20th December 2012 Part I Part II - members only
Recommended!
9th October 2012 
8th July 2012 
New E-book! 31st May 2012
New E-book! 27th April 2012
New E-book! 2nd April 2012
What is Space Weather E-book 21st November 2011
4th July 2012
11th August 2011 
The White House Report Revised 5th June 2011 
18th April 2011 
2nd March 2011 
7th April 2011 Updated 24th April 2011! 
A New Cosmic Age Dominated By Space Weather Evolutionary Change 15th October 2010 
24th June 2010
Joyfire
Interviews 
Journalist in Australia 2hr 14min Podcast! July 2011 Transcript here 
Whitley Strieber 15th April 2011 Available! Subscribers only 
at Red Ice Radio July 2010
Recommended!
Video, Podcast & Internet Radio Show Listing 
UAP video Index 21st October 2009 Latest Update 23rd May 2010 
The First Scientific Field Study of the UFO Phenomena. Book info & old newspaper articles 18th May 2010 
12th March 2010 
28th November 2009 
28th October 2009 
27th September 2009 
Planet Under Reconstruction! May 2009 
29th April 2009 MP3 Interview Update
17th April 2009 
Truth, Lies, Fiction & Peer Review 4th March 2009 
Ancient Knowledge 29th December 2008 
Major Milestones Triumph! 
Intelligence 13th September 2007 
Revealing the Mysteries Da Vinci Style! 22nd July 2007 
May 2007 
Updated July 2005 
Towards a New Paradigm §Part 1 
Research Highlights 
Dark Plasma – Articles 
Don Scott's www.electric-cosmos.org Don Scott's Website & book The Electric Sky 
Anthony Peratt's Plasma Universe 
Tom Bearden 
This website is best viewed with the FireFox browser, you can download it here  click icon
|
Abandon Ship: UN climate chief Yvo de Boer quits (But IPCC chief Pachauri has not yet resigned) Climate Depot, 18th February 2010 
A selection of headlines:
Climategate: Viscount Monckton Takes a Victory Lap Per a Phil Jones interview with the BBC, confirmation that the temperature record of the CRU is little better than a fabrication. Pajamas Media, 14th February 2010 
For several months, the “Monthly CO2 Reports,” compiled by me at www.scienceandpublicpolicy.org, have been pointing out that there has been no statistically significant “global warming” for 15 years. Regular attacks on my calculations and graphs have appeared on blogs by the usual suspects – Gavin Schmidt of NASA being, as usual, the most venomously ad hominem and the least scientifically plausible. Then came Climategate. [...]
Now, Professor Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia has admitted publicly, and – as far as I know – for the first time, that there has been no statistically significant “global warming” for 15 years. He has also admitted that his Climatic Research Unit has lost much of the data behind the “hockey-stick” graph, via which Michael Mann and other Climategate conspirators had falsely attempted to demonstrate that the Medieval Warm Period was not warmer than the present. Comment: Viscount Monckton is a great man who will go down in world history, as his role has been pivotal in pointing out the truth and highlighting the lies about global temperatures and climate change. He deserves to take his lap of honour. Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995 Daily Mail, 14th February 2010 
* 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’. Comment: It looks like Phil Jones has decided to come clean and confess the truth. Maybe this was the best thing he could have done. Actually, his confession of slopiness reminds me of a UK police officer who had such a pile of papers on his desk, that mice had decided to make it a home. See Mice Nest Found in Cop's paperwork Phil Jones momentous Q&A with BBC reopens the “science is settled” issues Watts Up With That, 14th February 2010 "Professor Phil Jones unwittingly(?) reveals that the global warming emperor is, if not naked, scantily clad, vindicating key skeptic arguments" This Q&A has provoked quite a large response so it is linked here. Top British scientist says UN panel is losing credibility The Times, 7th February 2010 
A LEADING British government scientist has warned the United Nations’ climate panel to tackle its blunders or lose all credibility.
Robert Watson, chief scientist at Defra, the environment ministry, who chaired the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) from 1997 to 2002, was speaking after more potential inaccuracies emerged in the IPCC’s 2007 benchmark report on global warming.
The most important is a claim that global warming could cut rain-fed north African crop production by up to 50% by 2020, a remarkably short time for such a dramatic change. The claim has been quoted in speeches by Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman, and by Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general. This weekend Professor Chris Field, the new lead author of the IPCC’s climate impacts team, told The Sunday Times that he could find nothing in the report to support the claim. The revelation follows the IPCC’s retraction of a claim that the Himalayan glaciers might all melt by 2035. Comment: I think the headline has got to be an understatement, there are so many holes in the IPCC ship, it has all but sunk ... Others are a little bit more forceful in their opinions, see below: IPCC: International Pack of Climate Crooks American Thinker, 4th February 2010 Is Global Warming a "Crock of S*%t?" Business Week, 28th January 2010 PRINCE CHARLES ON CLIMATE CHANGE: GLOBAL WARMING SCEPTICS ARE ALL LIARS Daily Express, 4th February January 2010 Sorry, I could not resist.... LOL!! Just in case you have never seen this priceless photo Nobel Peace Prize Laureates Al Gore (left) and R. K. Pachauri [2007] I thought of killing myself, says climate scandal professor Phil Jones Times Online, 7th February 2010 
THE scientist at the centre of the “climategate” email scandal has revealed that he was so traumatised by the global backlash against him that he contemplated suicide.
Professor Phil Jones said in an exclusive interview with The Sunday Times that he had thought about killing himself “several times”. [...] In emails that were hacked into and seized upon by global-warming sceptics before the Copenhagen climate summit in December, Jones appeared to call upon his colleagues to destroy scientific data rather than release it to people intent on discrediting their work monitoring climate change. Jones, 57, said he was unprepared for the scandal: “I am just a scientist. I have no training in PR or dealing with crises.” Comment: Was this man living in a dream world? The information from the CRU was being used to create government policy and 'entrepreneurs' like Al Gore, had created the next big financial bubble based on carbon trading, to fleece the public through scam companies and the government would get their pay-off in taxation. Now, that his connivance has been brought to light, he is whinging about death threats. If Jones had remained a true scientist, he would not have this problem now. At least I am not the only one that has worked this out, see YouTube videos, The Story of Cap and Trade If you're going to do good science, release the computer code too Programs do more and more scientific work - but you need to be able to check them as well as the original data, as the recent row over climate change documentation shows The Guardian News, 5th February 2010 
One of the spinoffs from the emails and documents that were leaked from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia is the light that was shone on the role of program code in climate research. There is a particularly revealing set of "README" documents that were produced by a programmer at UEA apparently known as "Harry".
The documents indicate someone struggling with undocumented, baroque code and missing data – this, in something which forms part of one of the three major climate databases used by researchers throughout the world. Many climate scientists have refused to publish their computer programs. I suggest is that this is both unscientific behaviour and, equally importantly, ignores a major problem: that scientific software has got a poor reputation for error. Comment: The mainstream are only following on from the sentiment in the blogosphere but it can't be emphasised enough. This notion is of particular interest to me because as a researcher as I have found that it's not always a good idea to rely on other's work. In some cases, when I have done the analysis based on the same data I have been able to completely dismiss ideas that have become established on extremely faulty reasoning and focus on more important knowledge that opens the way for a revelation. India to 'pull out of IPCC' The Telegraph, 4th February 2010 
India has threatened to pull out of the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and set up its on climate change body because it "cannot rely" on the group headed by its own Nobel Prize-winning scientist Dr R K Pachauri.
The Indian government's move is a snub to both the IPCC and Dr Pachauri as he battles to defend his reputation following the revelation that his most recent climate change report included false claims that most of the Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035. [...] Dr Pachauri had dismissed the government's claims as "voodoo science", but last night Mr Ramesh effectively marginalised the IPCC chairman even further. He announced that the Indian government will establish a separate National Institute of Himalayan Glaciology to monitor the effects of climate change on the world's "third ice cap", and an "Indian IPCC" to use "climate science" to assess the impact of global warming throughout the country. "There is a fine line between climate science and climate evangelism. I am for climate science. I think people misused [the] IPCC report ... [the] IPCC doesn't do the original research which is one of the weaknesses ... they just take published literature and then they derive assessments, so we had goof-ups on Amazon forest, glaciers, snow peaks. Comment: The crisis deepens... See Greenpeace director tells IPCC boss Rajendra Pachauri to stand down over glacier claim The Telegraph, 4th February 2010 Climate Scientist Foretells 'Big Changes' at U.N. Global Warming Agency Heartland Institute, February 2010 "Heartland Senior Fellow James M. Taylor, managing editor of Environment & Climate News, also attended the event, and during the Q&A following Sprigg's presentation asked the scientist what he thinks the future holds for the IPCC. Sprigg nodded as Taylor referred to "mounting scandals" at the IPCC and then responded, "There will be some reform. I think there's going to be big changes in the peer review process for the IPCC. There will be--there are--calls for the head of [IPCC Chairman Raj] Pachauri. Some of my colleagues have written letters saying that he needs to be taken off the job ..." The knives are out.... Detectives question climate change scientist over email leaks University of East Anglia scientist Paul Dennis denies leaking material, but links to climate change sceptics in US drew him to attention of the investigators The Guardian, 4th February 2010 
A scientist at the University of East Anglia has been questioned by detectives –investigating how controversial emails were leaked from the campus's climate research unit.
Norfolk police have interviewed and taken a formal statement from Paul Dennis, 54, another climate researcher who heads an adjacent laboratory.
The leaked emails from the head of the unit, Professor Phil Jones, surfaced just before the Copenhagen conference in December and caused a furore because they suggested that data which did not support theories of global warming was being deliberately withheld. Dennis denies leaking the material. But it is understood that his links with climate change sceptic bloggers in North America drew him to the attention of the investigating team, and have exposed rifts within the university's environmental science faculty. Comment: Have they found the hero? Quite frankly, the piece written by James Delingpole with an explantion from Paul Dennis about his connection with climate sceptics McIntyre, Watts and the website 'The Air Vent', fills me with more intrigue lot less... surely this is the stuff of Sherlock Holmes? See Climategate leaker finally revealed? The global warming guerrillas Spectator.co.uk, 3rd February 2010 
Matt Ridley salutes the bloggers who changed the climate debate. While most of Fleet Street kowtowed to the green lobby, online amateurs uncovered the spin and deception that finally cracked the consensus.
Journalists are wont to moan that the slow death of newspapers will mean a disastrous loss of investigative reporting. The web is all very well, they say, but who will pay for the tenacious sniffing newshounds to flush out the real story? ‘Climategate’ proves the opposite to be true. It was amateur bloggers who scented the exaggerations, distortions and corruptions in the climate establishment; whereas newspaper reporters, even after the scandal broke, played poodle to their sources. Comment: This is something that I have thought hard about myself, and it has forced me to consider how one can define "spiritual intelligence". Climate bloggers could see through the lies and were empowered enough to make a difference with no budget and lots of negativity against them, but they prevailed and have changed our future. Meanwhile, I am educating myself as to why so many people are asleep or have voluntarily closed down, whilst our world is experiencing the greatest transition in the history of mankind. BBC asks WUWT for help Watts Up with That, 3rd February 2010 
I received this email this morning from Roger Harribin, the BBC’s environmental analyst. It’s interesting because I received an email from the Guardian yesterday asking if I’d like to write a 200 word guest piece. Unfortunately it somehow ended up in my spam filter (which I found this morning) so I missed the 3 PM GMT deadline today.
If you know of a skeptical scientist in the UK that may be interested, please advise them of this. Thanks to all for your consideration. – Anthony Comment: Wow! Please note the comments on this blog, some do not trust the BBC and as others have revealed, scientists do have to worry about their career prospects if they are seen to step out of line. That is because, as every man and his dog now knows, what scientists are allowed to study, is highly controlled. Hence, many scientists wait until nearing retirement before they get off the gravy train and/or decide to upset the apple cart... sorry about the mixed metaphors...Climategate Consequences: The Mann Report Pajamas Media, 3rd February 2010 
When the Climategate story first broke, a lot of adherents of the skeptical view of anthropogenic climate change were mightily excited – proclaiming it the “end of the global warming hoax.” They have been disappointed because the breaking story wasn’t immediately followed by the resignation of everyone involved, the termination of all U.S. action on cap and trade, and tar and feathers for Al Gore.
This was a little unrealistic. There are a lot of vested interests involved, a lot of money that depends on the CO2-driven AGW narrative, a lot of people with wealth and reputations on the line. That’s a lot of inertia, and the narrative won’t change course quickly. That doesn’t mean nothing is happening, however. [...] Today’s breaking news is that the initial report on Mann’s conduct has been released. The report itself isn’t very exciting. If not a whitewash, it’s at least a bit of a graywash, as they very carefully restricted the topics and questions they considered. But it’s not a complete vindication for Mann, either (no matter what the Huffington Post says). The report concluded that Mann should be subject to further investigation, saying there was a real question whether Mann’s conduct “may be undermining confidence in his findings as a scientist,” or “may be undermining public trust in science in general and climate science specifically.” In effect, the committee says there is evidence that Mann violated the social contract of science. The report announces the formation of a university committee to investigate this further, and frankly, Mann could be in some trouble on this. Comment: It looks like some good news. No matter how the AGW folk want to spin this, Mann is continually being embroiled in scientific scandal and he is fundamentally linked to what has been called the biggest scientific hoax in history. Before, his biggest fraud was the 'Hockey Stick' graph used by the IPCC and Al Gore, but this proven scientific fraud was not so well known, but after Climategate, he is now highly exposed. Therefore, it's impossible to let Mann get away with bringing this kind of negative press to a university that will do whatever it takes to maintain a good reputation. I think this is the best short analysis I have seen on the Mann situation so far. The now world famous climate sceptic Steve McIntyre, the climate auditor that put the fear back into the hearts of dishonest scientists, has stated his views, see: The Mann Report Climategate scientist 'hid flaws in data', say sceptics Professor in leaked email scandal tried to hide fact that numbers he used were wrong The Independent, 2nd February 2010
The "climategate" controversy intensified last night when the senior British scientist at its centre, Professor Phil Jones, faced fresh accusations that he attempted to withhold data that could cast doubt on evidence for rising world temperatures.
The charges follow an analysis of the emails hacked from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, of which Professor Jones is the director.
Comment: I am so proud of Anthony Watts, Stephen McIntyre, Lord Monckton and all the other climate realists that banded together and changed the destiny of our world! This is a comment on WUWT, BernieL (20:30:17) : Now let me take this in: This is Fred Pearce (of New Scientist anti-deniers fame) taking a journalistic lead with an investigative piece in the Guardian that drawing into question the station data that is the basis of the very first question of the whole dispute, vis: Is the world really warming? And in doing so he is vindicating what the vilified sceptics were saying all along. Wow, folks, have I got that right?See, Climategate intensifies: Jones and Wang apparently hid Chinese station data issues The Gate-du-Jour has become totally ridiculous and shows that the UN's IPCC had completely and utterly lost respect for the normal process of peer review and upholding normal scientific standards, see Gate Du Jour: IPCC AR4 references NYT story Gate Du Jour: IPCC gets the boot (cleaned) Gate du Jour – Now it’s Greenpeace reports in the IPCC AR4 Watts Up With That, 29th January 2010 
Donna Laframboise, who gave us the list of World Wildlife Fund non peer reviewed studies cited in the IPCC AR4 continues to make lists. Here’s her latest list. Those calm, rational, thoughtful folks at Greenpeace seem to have had a significant hand in the IPCC climate bible. She writes:
Considered the climate Bible by governments around the world, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report is meant to be a scientific analysis of the most authoritative research. Instead, it references literature generated by Greenpeace – an organization known more for headline-grabbing publicity stunts than sober-minded analysis. (Eight IPCC-cited Greenpeace publications are listed at the bottom of this post.) In one section of this Nobel-winning report, climate change is linked to coral reef degradation. The sole source for this claim? A Greenpeace report titled “Pacific in Peril” (see Hoegh-Guldberg below). Here the report relies on a Greenpeace document to establish the lower-end of an estimate involving solar power plants (Aringhoff). Read more at her blog here. Comment: This is going to make some scientists' blood boil! What this means is that good science that did not support the agenda enough was ignored by the IPCC in favour of a totally unscientific political organisation with a panache for headline grabbing news. Whoa! IPCC Gate Du Jour: UN climate change panel based claims on student dissertation and magazine article Watts Up With That, 30th January 2010 "But some researchers have expressed exasperation at the IPCC’s use of unsubstantiated claims and sources outside of the scientific literature." I imagine many more are in complete shock, this is a complete meltdown of the global warming hoax... Video: Obama Laughed at When Referring to The Overwhelming Scientific Evidence on Climate Change YouTube [0:13] I think people were laughing because the US is experiencing extreme weather with floods, ice storms and heavy snowfalls, but maybe the audience were those who are more informed and are aware of Climategate and the ongoing falllout. Whatever, the fact that even Biden and Pelosi were laughing too, really makes you think... Scientists in stolen e-mail scandal hid climate data Times Online, 28th January 2010
The university at the centre of the climate change row over stolen e-mails broke the law by refusing to hand over its raw data for public scrutiny.
The University of East Anglia breached the Freedom of Information Act by refusing to comply with requests for data concerning claims by its scientists that man-made emissions were causing global warming. The Information Commissioner’s Office decided that UEA failed in its duties under the Act but said that it could not prosecute those involved because the complaint was made too late, The Times has learnt. The ICO is now seeking to change the law to allow prosecutions if a complaint is made more than six months after a breach. Comment: This is a bold headline for the most reputable mainstream newspaper in the UK. Over at WUWT, most people have been very pessimistic about the loop-hole of “too much time has passed since the laws were broken”, but what kind of law is that? See, CRU inquiry prompts sought after changes in UK law, citing failure of CRU’s FOIA officer Well at the end of the day, as I have stated before, Climategate has sullied the whole scientific community and the offenders will be dealt with internally. People are already starting to jump ship from the IPCC and as politicians rely on scientists to support their taxation aspirations, they had better watch out. The IPCC frauds have proven that most scientists were not corrupt enough and this must be considerd as some consolation within the wider scientific community. More: Why Pachauri MUST stay as chairman of the IPCC More satire from James Delingpole and some classic quotes here, as the climate 'realist' fraternity, rejoice at the collapse of the biggest hoax in scientific history. "We are witnessing the Berlin Wall moment in the global warming regime." Climategate Professor Phil Jones could face ten years on fraud charges Climategate.com, 28th January 2010 "From a full examination of excerpts from leaked CRU emails cited below, it is readily demonstrable that the police and Crown Prosecution Service currently possess sufficient evidence to charge Phil Jones under both sections 2 & 3 of the Fraud Act (2006)." Others have commented that the CRU email fallout will make news for years and I agree! Horrifying examples of deliberate tampering Jo Nova Blog, 27th January 2010 
Just when you thought it couldn’t get worse for the cult of the carbon scare.
Now we need to ask if the world has even warmed? I’ve always said, “global warming is real”, but the recent exposés of shocking corruption in science have made me start to wonder whether even that is true.
Today a study by Joe D’Aleo and Anthony Watts, was announced by the Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI). From their media release: An extensive survey of the literature and data regarding ground and sea surface temperature records uncovers deception through data manipulation, reports the Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI). Comment: Jo Nova provides a brief summary of this 100 page report, the announcement at WUWT can be found here New Compendium Paper on Surface Temperature Records. For those who are new to 'News of the Imbalance', please note that I have consistently reported the opposition to the notion of Global Warming from credible scientists who had access to the same data and methodology that others were using to make wild and inaccurate claims. We now now that all the effort was to scare the general public into paying carbon taxes and imposing a new political world system, where Al Gore would be “president of the planet”. The latest revelations seem to imply that scientists were not dishonest enough, so that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] were forced to use non-scientific sources to manufacture their agenda. In a way, this is an antidote for the negativity surrounding Climategate and the misuse of the scientific method. Whatever, the real issue is WHY all the lies? The evidence shows that our planet is under s serious bombardment of cosmic and galactic energies, extreme Space Weather. There are plenty of websites reporting about weather extremes and Earth changes but my effort is to highlight the concept of Space Weather driving evolutionary change and hence the discussion of DNA and mutations etc. However, as I try to keep the focus on Space Weather, the level of deceit that is now being uncovered in the world of climate science, shows that there has been a serious world wide conspiracy to keep people in the dark about what's really happening. By the way, I am in complete admiration for climate 'realists' and bloggers who have supported each other to help change the world for the better. The Four ‘Gates’ of the IPCC JoNova Blog, 27th January 2010
[...] All Gates lead to humiliation and embarrassment for the followers of the great cult of the carbonistas.
And we haven’t yet got even close to the scandal of the faulty assumptions that led to the faulty models and alarmist predictions in the first place, or the even bigger scandal of how the observational evidence that proves the assumptions false is and was ignored by the [IPCC].
Comment: It's interesting that Jo Nova is now calling this a "cult of the carbonistas". So we are now moving away from a religion, a belief system with associated practices to something that is more comparable to using distinct techniques to promote adherence to a particular set of beliefs, practices and behaviours, whilst discouraging rational thought. Hmmm... More below: Science chief John Beddington calls for honesty on climate change Times Online, 27th January 2010 Climate agency going up in flames: Exit of Canada's expert a sure sign IPCC in trouble National Post, 27th January 2010 I like this quote: "It is Mr. Weaver, for example, who said the IPCC's 2007 science report -- the one now subject to some scrutiny -- "isn't a smoking gun; climate is a battalion of intergalactic smoking missiles." The IPCC is finished. After Climategate, Pachaurigate and Glaciergate: Amazongate Telegraph Delingpole Blog, 25th January 2010
AGW theory is toast. So’s Dr Rajendra Pachauri. So’s the Stern Review. So’s the credibility of the IPCC. But if you think I’m cheered by this you’re very much mistaken. I’m trying to write a Climategate book but the way things are going by the time I’m finished there won’t be anything left to say: the battle will already have been won and the only people left who still believe in Man Made Global Warming will be the eco-loon equivalents of those wartime Japanese soldiers left abandoned and forgotten on remote Pacific atolls.
Here’s the latest development, courtesy of Dr Richard North – and it’s a cracker. It seems that, not content with having lied to us about shrinking glaciers, increasing hurricanes, and rising sea levels, the IPCC’s latest assessment report also told us a complete load of porkies about the danger posed by climate change to the Amazon rainforest. Comment: Apparently, Climategate has spawned another monster, Amazongate... So, climate science has become a can of worms, there is not a shred of credibility left and the IPCC needs to be disbanded. Pachauri's resignation is not enough despite all the calls. He basically supervised a massive lie that the glaciers of the Himalayas could disappear by 2035. The Himalayas-Hindu Kush, is a region on which nearly 40% of the world's population depends for water as these glaciers feed all the major river systems of Asia. The date 2035 is fictional, plucked out of the air, but that is beside the point, there is absolute rage in India because they were lied to about something that actually matters. This concoction of lies, also makes the Nobel Prize committee look like a bunch of idiots too. See Pachauri: the real story behind the Glaciergate scandal The Telegraph, 23 Jan 2010 The real Himalayan scandal: What's really shocking about research into the glaciers of the Himalayas is how little there has been The Guardian, 20 January 2010 Glacier scientist: I knew data hadn't been verified Daily Mail, 24th January 2010
The scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning UN report that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 last night admitted it was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.
Dr Murari Lal also said he was well aware the statement, in the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research. In an interview with The Mail on Sunday, Dr Lal, the co-ordinating lead author of the report’s chapter on Asia, said: ‘It related to several countries in this region and their water sources. We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy-makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action. ‘It had importance for the region, so we thought we should put it in.’ [...] Dr Lal said: ‘We knew the WWF report with the 2035 date was “grey literature” [material not published in a peer-reviewed journal]. But it was never picked up by any of the authors in our working group, nor by any of the more than 500 external reviewers, by the governments to which it was sent, or by the final IPCC review editors.’ In fact, the 2035 melting date seems to have been plucked from thin air. Comment: The IPCC has now lost all credibility and the Nobel Prize committee are now left in a position where they will be forced to rescind the prize, there is no other option, because this is simply fraud. More: UN climate panel blunders again over Himalayan glaciers The Times, January 24, 2010 Wow! UK parliamentary investigation into Climategate may not be a whitewash Telegraph Blog Delingpole, 22nd January 2010
The Commons Science and Technology Committee has launched an inquiry into “the unauthorised publication of data, emails and documents relating to the work of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA)” – ie Climategate. Comment: I agree with you James. As I keep stating, I was am in utter amazement about what is now happening, it is so clear, there has been a massive shift in consciousness. On the lighter side, the British are famous for 'small talk' and talking about the weather, so maybe they want to get their facts right.... LOL!! Lorne Gunter: First Climategate, now Glaciergate National Post, 20th January 2010
Hot on the heels of Climategate – the leaking of thousands of emails and computer files that show many of the world’s leading climate scientists fudging the results of their global warming research and contriving to keep skeptics from being published in academic journals – comes what could be called Glaciergate.
anuary 24, 2010
Prominent among the claims of impending environmental disaster in the UN’s fourth report on climate change, published in 2007, was the prediction that all of the 15,000 glaciers in the Himalayas could melt away by 2035. That’s just 25 years away. Now the Times of London has discovered that this claim was not based on scientific enquiry, but rather on speculation. And old speculation at that. [...]
anuary 24, 2010
This is the report that helped secure the IPCC its Nobel Prize.
Comment: Er... I was not going to give this a separate listing until I read the bit about this research got Gore & the IPCC the Nobel prize. No wonder the gloves are coming off.... Expect some serious trouble! See other entries below: Nobel Prize-Winning Panel Apologizes 2007 Global Warming Report Was Marred by Five Errors in Single Paragraph CBS News, 20th January 2010 "Five glaring errors were discovered in one paragraph of the world's most authoritative report on global warming, forcing the Nobel Prize-winning panel of climate scientists who wrote it to apologize and promise to be more careful." It's a new world, it's a new day.... I can't believe what's happening.... Angry Pachauri threatens to sue UK daily Times Now, 20th January 2010 "It is an all-out war of words between IPCC chief RK Pachauri and UK newspaper The Sunday Telegraph. A day after the newspaper published a stinging article calling Pachauri a hypocrite, the TERI chairman has hit right back. Pachauri, who is the chief of the UN panel on climate change, has accused Telegraph of carrying out "a sustained vendetta" against him." Lord Monckton must be delirious with joy!! Brookhaven National Laboratory: Why Hasn’t Earth Warmed as Much as Expected? WUWT, 19th January 2010 
Planet Earth has warmed much less than expected during the industrial era based on current best estimates of Earth’s “climate sensitivity”–the amount of global temperature increase expected in response to a given rise in atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2). [...]
According to current best estimates of climate sensitivity, the amount of CO2 and other heat-trapping gases added to Earth’s atmosphere since humanity began burning fossil fuels on a significant scale during the industrial period would be expected to result in a mean global temperature rise of 3.8°F–well more than the 1.4°F increase that has been observed for this time span. Schwartz’s analysis attributes the reasons for this discrepancy to a possible mix of two major factors: 1) Earth’s climate may be less sensitive to rising greenhouse gases than currently assumed and/or 2) reflection of sunlight by haze particles in the atmosphere may be offsetting some of the expected warming. #147;Because of present uncertainties in climate sensitivity and the enhanced reflectivity of haze particles,” said Schwartz, “it is impossible to accurately assign weights to the relative contributions of these two factors. This has major implications for understanding of Earth’s climate and how the world will meet its future energy needs.” A third possible reason for the lower-than-expected increase of Earth’s temperature over the industrial period is [3)] the slow response of temperature to the warming influence of heat-trapping gases. Comment: The graphic showing the models produced by the IPCC with 90% confidence is classic... I agree with these posters,
World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown Times Online, 17th January 2010 
A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it.
Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world's glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035. In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC's 2007 report. [...] Some scientists have questioned how the IPCC could have allowed such a mistake into print. Perhaps the most likely reason was lack of expertise. Comment: The many headed climategate monster strikes again! It's amazing how fast global warming lies are being torn down after it seemed that for a time, AGW proponents could make up erroneous disaster claims by twisting climate science and data and get away with almost anything... Quite frankly, after monitoring the news intensively for over three years now, I am utterly amazed that this is happening.... THE NEW CLIMATE CHANGE SCANDAL The Express, 18th January 2010 "The International Panel on Climate Change was forced to admit its key claim that Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 was lifted from a 1999 magazine article. The report was based on an interview with a little-known Indian scientist who has since said his views were “speculation” and not backed up by research. It was also revealed that the IPCC’s controversial chairman, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, described as “the world’s top climate scientist”, is a former railway engineer with a PhD in economics and no formal climate science qualifications." Please note the nerve of this man: "Before the weakness in the IPCC’s research was exposed, Dr Pachauri dismissed the Indian government report as “voodoo science”." LOL!! I have been kind here, because this Pachauri character has had a lot of focus in the last week or so on his dubious financial dealings, which I considered to be off-topic, but he is now toast. Syed Hasnain, RK Pachauri and the mystery of the non-disappearing glaciers The Telegraph Delingpole Blog, 18th January 2010 More background, a synopsis. Sifting climate facts from speculation New Scientist, 13th January 2010 Apparently it is 10 years since these claims were first made and now New Scientist wants to extricalate itself from the pure speculation.... Really, New Scientist is being dragged through the mud by Climategate exposures, what's more there is serious damage to it's credibility, some folk are now calling it, New Scientologist... LOL!! Stranger and Stranger Roger Pielke's Blog, 18 January 2010 "The fallout from the IPCC Himalayan glacier situation gets stranger and stranger. Now an IPCC lead author has stepped forward claiming that the error has been known by the IPCC all along." If this keeps up, people's "faith" in climate science is going to be completely shattered... Climategate goes American: NOAA, GISS and the mystery of the vanishing weather stations Telegraph Delingpole Blog, 16th January 2010
For those who haven’t seen it, here’s a link to US weatherman John Coleman’s magisterial demolition of the Great AGW Scam. I particularly recommend part 4 because that’s the one with all the meat. It shows how temperature readings have been manipulated at the two key climate data centres in the United States – the NASA Goddard Science and Space Institute at Columbia University in New York and the NOAA National Climate Data Center in Ashville, North Carolina. (Hat tip: Platosays)
This is a scandal to rank with Climategate. Comment: "This is a scandal to rank with Climategate. I believe that Climategate is a many headed monster, therefore, this is all part of the same breathtaking corruption of science, as we already know that there was a coordinated international effort between a cabal of about 43 scientists (identified by Canadian Professor Timothy Ball). It's interesting that this has been exposed by a computer programmer. Despite the negative press in the media about programmers being nerdy, I am more interested in his demonstration of higher consciousness. Anyway, I think we can repeat the observation already made on this blog about world climate data; #147;Non gradus anus rodentum!” NASA Caught in Climate Data Manipulation; New Revelations Headlined on KUSI-TV Climate Special Spaceref.com, 14th January 2010 
Climate researchers have discovered that NASA researchers improperly manipulated data in order to claim 2005 as "THE WARMEST YEAR ON RECORD." KUSI-TV meteorologist, Weather Channel founder, and iconic weatherman John Coleman will present these findings in a one-hour special airing on KUSI-TV on Jan.14 at 9 p.m. A related report will be made available on the Internet at 6 p.m. EST on January 14th at www.kusi.com.
In a new report, computer expert E. Michael Smith and Certified Consulting Meteorologist Joseph D'Aleo discovered extensive manipulation of the temperature data by the U.S. Government's two primary climate centers: the National Climate Data Center (NCDC) in Ashville, North Carolina and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) at Columbia University in New York City. Smith and D'Aleo accuse these centers of manipulating temperature data to give the appearance of warmer temperatures than actually occurred by trimming the number and location of weather observation stations. The report is available online at http://icecap.us/images/uploads/NOAAroleinclimategate.pdf. Comment: I was surprised with the headline and even more surprised that it came from the spaceref.com website... not known for being the domain of climate sceptics.... it looks like they got a scoop. Details of TV special, Global Warming: The Other Side "KUSI meteorologist, John Coleman, has an amazing story to tell of science gone bad, and new revelations as the “climategate” scandal comes to the United States. Join us on Thursday, January 14th, at 9pm, Pacific Time, for the special report that will explode the global warming myth!" Update 1 More on John Coleman’s Special tonight – KUSI press release says NASA improperly manipulated data Quote: James K (19:33:34) :Update 2 John Coleman’s hourlong news special “Global Warming – The Other Side” now online, all five parts here If you don't have time, then segment 4 is the most informative, link here. Update 3 Rebuttal from NASA: NASA has issued the following statement in response to the KUSI Special Report. This statement is from Dr. James Hansen, Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City:I imagine that well known offenders are now really sweating and hoping that this story does not run. Also, don't forget, NASA have been caught out TWICE by Steve McIntyre in recent years for inaccurate press releases based on their poor quality datasets. See below: Nasa climate change error spotted by blogger The Telegraph, 14th August 2007 "The corrected data shows 1934 to be the hottest year in the US since records began A US blogger has caused a stir in the climate debate by forcing Nasa scientists to admit errors in some of their data showing increases in global warming." & Warmest October Claim Was Wrong, NASA Admits The Heartland Institute, January 2009 "NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies–known as GISS–was forced to admit it committed an egregious error when it publicly claimed October 2008 was the warmest October in history." How the UAH Global Temperatures Are Produced by Dr. Roy Spencer, PhD. Watts Up with That, 12th January 2010 
I am still receiving questions about the method by which the satellite microwave measurements are calibrated to get atmospheric temperatures. The confusion seems to have arisen because Christopher Monckton has claimed that our satellite data must be tied to the surface thermometer data, and after Climategate (as well all know) those traditional measurements have become suspect. So, time for a little tutorial.
Comment: WUWT is a great website if you want to know the FACTS and spin which they regularly debunk, concerning climate science. However, every now and then, tutorials are provided and here is one on how satellite temperatures are produced and measured. Warning: technical. Q: What's the difference between 'weather' and 'climate'? Telegraph Blog Delingpole, 5th January 2010 
A: Climate is when it’s warming and weather is when it’s not.
Thanks, Beachmaster, over at Watts Up With That for explaining the difference. Otherwise, we scientific ignoramuses might have gone on asking silly, awkward questions like: “How come, when I went to urinate on my compost heap just now – as per official Government planet-saving, AGW-avoiding, eco-regulations – my willy turned black and dropped off?” and “Why in the name of Beelzebub and his hellish spawn has the man in charge of the ineffably useless Met Office just been given a 25 per cent pay rise?” Comment: See also, UK gas supply dwindles as country experiences sub-zero weather electric.co.uk, January 5th, 2010 Pensioners burn books for warmth [UK] Metro.co.uk, 5th January, 2010 Met Office chief receives 25 pc pay rise Update Video: Chief defends Met Office record BBC Daily Politics, 6 January 2010 LOL!! Lord Monckton calls out Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd Climategate News, 5th January 2010 
The Prime Minister of Australia, Kevin Rudd, shortly before Copenhagen, gave a speech (Part I video above, Part II here) where he said the “Denialists”, “Climate Change Deniers”, and “Skeptics” were entirely funded by special interests, and are now so dangerous that they’re putting our the planet, and our kids’ future in jeopardy. Rudd has a particular dislike for Lord Christopher Monckton. In fact, he derided Monckton six times by name in that speech.
Lord Monckton has penned a reply to the Prime Minister, and you can read it at the Science and Public Policy Institute website. Comment: Lord Monckton will go down in history for his part in doing enough to wake people up to the fact that the Copenhagen Treaty was proposing a world government. Apparently, this was supposed to be have been run by the UN, but I have my doubts, as they could not even organise the Copenhagen conference properly as they registered 40,000 delegates for a conference centre that could only hold 15,000 people. For any who are not sure what this means, I would describe that as complete incompetence. It has a gigantic supercomputer, 1,500 staff and a £170m-a-year budget. So why does the Met Office get it so wrong? Daily Mail, 3rd January 2010 
Its supercomputer makes 1,000 billion calculations a second - then tells us to expect a mild winter. But what would you expect from a 'scientific' organisation that for 20 years has been dominated by climate change zealots, and whose current chairman is the former boss of the World Wildlife Fund?
'Cold of a variety not seen in over 25 years in a large scale is about to engulf the major energy-consuming areas of the northern hemisphere. The first 15 days of the opening of the New Year will be the coldest, population weighted, north of 30 [degrees] north worldwide in over 25 years.' That is the chilling (quite literally) verdict of Joe Bastardi, a weather forecaster on the American TV channel AccuWeather. Comment: Briefly, the Met Office like all the others around the world do not understand how the weather works. All they can do is look at all the factors that they can identify and then try to apply that to what they think might happen in the fiuture, hence the need for a BIG supercomputer to do the number crunching. Now, our planet is being hammered by exotic energies from deep space and most of our climate scientists, never mind the lowly meteorologists, are in the paradigm of a "closed" system and do not even think of the possibility that we can be effected by cosmic forces in an "open" system, despite the increasing evidence like cloud formation being controlled by galactic cosmic rays and even tree ring growth, etc.... Btw, the climate skeptics are really enjoying this.... It's not all bad, see Pictured: The amazing wall of ice that makes Britain look more like Narnia Kevin Rudd: deniers are dangerous Reference Frame, 6th November 2009 
Armchair climate scientist Kevin Rudd whose somewhat reduced ability to perceive the reality around him hasn't stopped him from becoming the Australian prime minister has decided that climate deniers are dangerous.
"It's time to remove any polite veneer from this debate," Rudd also said in a lengthy address to Sydney's Lowy Institute on Friday. "The stakes are that high." [...] It's interesting that Rudd exactly agrees with Moonbat. Both Gentlemen think that the climate change hysteria began to die two years ago. Comment: This level of rhetoric only makes sense if certain priviledge persons, like the Australian Prime Minister, are really scared about something that is incomprehensible to the vast majority of people. Now, as this article highlights, environmentalists have seen through the useless and bogus money making carbon schemes so even people who actually really care about the planet, are not aware of the real fear that our planet is facing massive changes being driven by cosmic factors. Our future is unpredictable and controllers hate not being in control. This article has lots of useful links. French Revolution! Carbon tax ruled unconstitutional just two days before taking effect WUWT, 29th December 2009 
This new French carbon tax was scheduled to go into law on Jan1, 2010. The tax was steep: 17 euros per ton of carbon dioxide (USD $24.40). In a stunning move, and surely a blow to warmists everywhere, the tax has been found unconstitutional and thrown out.
Comment: It seems that as new consciousness takes hold, humans are not permiting the lie of anthropogenic (man-made) global warming and climate change to remain rooted and it is being thrown out. The last 7 weeks or so have been absolutely incredible, we have taken great strides. 2009's Review of Hysterical Cartoons about Climate Hysteria Climate Change Fraud, 28th December 2009
To all the very talented cartoonists out there who made 2009 a very funny time to be a climate skeptic: Thank you!
[Words written by Gary Varvel/ The Indianapolis Star source]
Our leaders, who art in Copenhagen,
Alarmists be thy name. Thy climate change come, Cap and trade will be done, As we give a pass to developing countries Give us this day our carbon offsets and forgive us our carbon footprint as we forgive those who hacked our e-mails And lead us not unto global warming but deliver us from CO2 For thine is the Kyoto Protocol And the power to control our Economy for ever . . . Amen Comment: LOL!! Click on the cartoons to get large sizes, the Copenhangen Summit prayer is on no.3. The Unbearable Complexity of Climate WUWT, 27th December 2009 
I keep reading statements in various places about how it is indisputable “simple physics” that if we increase amount of atmospheric CO2, it will inevitably warm the planet. [...]
Unfortunately, while the physics is simple, the climate is far from simple. It is one of the more complex systems that we have ever studied. The climate is a tera-watt scale planetary sized heat engine. It is driven by both terrestrial and extra-terrestrial forcings, a number of which are unknown, and many of which are poorly understood and/or difficult to measure. It is inherently chaotic and turbulent, two conditions for which we have few mathematical tools. Comment: Please do not be mislead, this is a very straight forward article that provides a very clear explanation as to why increases in CO2 does not lead to the inevitable conclusion of planetary warming. In fact, this article has provoked such a huge response, I have decided to link it here because as usual, this informed audience can always offer good comments. German Physicists Trash Global Warming “Theory” Climategate, 26th December 2009 
[...] In a recently revised and re-published paper, Dr Gerlich debunks AGW and shows that the IPCC “consensus” atmospheric physics model tying CO2 to global warming is not only unverifiable, but actually violates basic laws of physics, i.e. the First and Second Law of Thermodynamics. The latest version of this momentous scientific paper appears in the March 2009 edition of the International Journal of Modern Physics.
The central claims of Dr. Gerlich and his colleague, Dr. Ralf Tscheuschner, include, but are not limited to: 1) The mechanism of warming in an actual greenhouse is different than the mechanism of warming in the atmosphere, therefore it is not a “greenhouse” effect and should be called something else. 2) The climate models that predict catastrophic global warming also result in a net heat flow from atmospheric greenhouse gasses to the warmer ground, which is in violation of the second law of thermodynamics. Essentially, any machine which transfers heat from a low temperature reservoir to a high temperature reservoir without external work applied cannot exist. If it did it would be a “perpetual motion machine” – the realm of pure sci-fi. Comment: So we have scientists pointing out the obvious that the planet works as an “open” system and the theory of a "greenhouse" planet operates as a “closed” system. This is highly relevant when we consider that our planet is being blasted by electromagnetic energies at unprecedented levels to the extent that scientists are prepared to admit that some blasts are so violent that they are even capable of causing the evolution of spacetime. Of course, scientists also don't, really understand spacetime, even though some realise that everything in this dimension is reliant on the quantum electromagnetic background that Einstein called spacetime to disguise it from the more metaphysical concept of the aether. Study shows CFCs, cosmic rays major culprits for global warming In Sciences Org, 21st December 2009 
Cosmic rays and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), both already implicated in depleting the Earth's ozone layer, are also responsible for changes in the global climate, a University of Waterloo scientist reports in a new peer-reviewed paper.
In his paper, Qing-Bin Lu, a professor of physics and astronomy, shows how CFCs - compounds once widely used as refrigerants - and cosmic rays - energy particles originating in outer space - are mostly to blame for climate change, rather than carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. His paper, derived from observations of satellite, ground-based and balloon measurements as well as an innovative use of an established mechanism, was published online in the prestigious journal Physics Reports. "My findings do not agree with the climate models that conventionally thought that greenhouse gases, mainly CO2, are the major culprits for the global warming seen in the late 20th century," Lu said. "Instead, the observed data show that CFCs conspiring with cosmic rays most likely caused both the Antarctic ozone hole and global warming. These findings are totally unexpected and striking, as I was focused on studying the mechanism for the formation of the ozone hole, rather than global warming." [...] In his latest paper, Lu further proves the cosmic-ray-driven ozone depletion theory by showing a large number of data from laboratory and satellite observations. One reviewer wrote: "These are very strong facts and it appears that they have largely been ignored in the past when modelling the Antarctic ozone loss." Comment: Hmmm.... I have been following the cosmic ray/ozone hole puzzle and this scientist's research ever since it was pointed out to me that despite the pristine conditions at the north and south poles ie no industrialisation produing CFCS, this is where the ozone holes occur. The destruction of the ozone layer is held in check by the horizontal component of the Earth's magnetic field which is strongest at the equator and this explains why the ozone hole is over the polar regions (70% Antarctica, 30% Artic). Yet according to theory, ozone destroying man-made chemicals, chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) compounds and ozone depleting substances (ODS) would dictate that the mid-latitude northern hemisphere, the location of the most industrialised and polluted parts of the world, should be the location of ozone holes... Anyway, this research is sure to come under fire because we must now assume that removing CO2 from the atmosphere is not just about dealing with any hypothetical global warming.... The joke over at WUWT was, maybe Al Gore should start trading CFC Credits instead of Carbon Credits.... A Climatology Conspiracy? American Thinker, 20th December 2009
The CRU e-mails have revealed how the normal conventions of the peer review process appear to have been compromised by a team* of global warming scientists, with the willing cooperation of the editor of the International Journal of Climatology (IJC), Glenn McGregor. [...]
We will let the reader judge whether this team effort, revealed in dozens of e-mails and taking nearly a year, involves inappropriate behavior, including (a) unusual cooperation between authors and editor, (b) misstatement of known facts, (c) character assassination, (d) avoidance of traditional scientific give-and-take, (e) using confidential information, (f) misrepresentation (or misunderstanding) of the scientific question posed by DCPS, (g) withholding data, and more. Comment: This article is to document the effort to suppress those who saw that the data did not support the global warming hypothesis. This is especially needed to help those who made the link between environmentalism and the so-called scientific concensus, which we now know was bogus. The truth is needed to help those who are now angry and confused. The Fabulous Four at Copenhagen Parturient montes: nascetur ridiculus mus SPPI Blog, 19th December 2009 
[...] Thanks to hundreds of thousands of US citizens who contacted their elected representatives to protest about the unelected, communistic world government with near-infinite powers of taxation, regulation and intervention that was proposed in early drafts of the Copenhagen Treaty, there is no Copenhagen Treaty. There is not even a Copenhagen Agreement. There is a “Copenhagen Accord”.
[...]
Copenhagen was the last-chance saloon not for the planet, which does not need saving, but for the UN’s world-government wannabes. They blew it, big-time, by believing their own overspun propaganda about planetary peril and thinking they had “world leaders” where they wanted them. They overreached themselves, and have paid the price. Comment: I took the liberty of changing the title, I love Viscount Monckton but this latin is too much. I will let hin off though, especially after he got beaten up by the Danish police in Copenhagen. See, Video :: Lord Monckton Interview 17th Dec - Danish Cops Assault P2 The Fabulous Four are China, India, Brazil, and South Africa, who established a negotiating bloc and made various demands and got exactly what they asked for: as follows: I believe that this is better than any of the nays could have expected or believed and Christopher Monckton will go down in history as a worthy intellectual, libertarian and hero. Low targets, goals dropped: Copenhagen ends in failure The Guardian, 19th December 2009
The UN climate summit reached a weak outline of a global agreement in Copenhagen tonight, falling far short of what Britain and many poor countries were seeking and leaving months of tough negotiations to come.
After eight draft texts and all-day talks between 115 world leaders, it was left to Barack Obama and Wen Jiabao, the Chinese premier, to broker a political agreement. The so-called Copenhagen accord "recognises" the scientific case for keeping temperature rises to no more than 2C but does not contain commitments to emissions reductions to achieve that goal.
Comment: Time to Celebrate: Let's Dance, YouTube Video: Where the Hell is Matt? (2008) Copenhagen climate summit: 'most important paper in the world' is a glorified UN press release Telegraph, Gerald Warner, 18th December 2009
When your attempt at recreating the Congress of Vienna with a third-rate cast of extras turns into a shambles, when the data with which you have tried to terrify the world is daily exposed as ever more phoney, when the blatant greed and self-interest of the participants has become obvious to all beholders, when those pesky polar bears just keep increasing and multiplying – what do you do? [...]
This week has been truly historic. It has marked the beginning of the landslide that is collapsing the whole AGW imposture. The pseudo-science of global warming is a global laughing stock and Copenhagen is a farce. In the warmist camp the Main Man is a railway engineer with huge investments in the carbon industry. That says it all. The world’s boiler being heroically damped down by the Fat Controller. Al Gore, occupant of the only private house that can be seen from space, so huge is its energy consumption, wanted to charge punters $1,200 to be photographed with him at Copenhagen. There is a man who is really worried about the planet’s future. Comment: It's really difficult to understand how this conference could have been a success... commentators all over the blogosphere are giving us the details of this desperate excuse for future tyranny, but all the leaks and incompetence of the UN and the secret agendas are just too evident. Anyway, here we find out about Al Gore's house, this can't be true? Is it? Climategate goes SERIAL: Now the Russians confirm that UK climate scientists manipulated data to exaggerate global warming The Telegraph - Delingpole, 16th December 2009
Climategate just got much, much bigger. And all thanks to the Russians who, with perfect timing, dropped this bombshell just as the world’s leaders are gathering in Copenhagen to discuss ways of carbon-taxing us all back to the dark ages.
Feast your eyes on this news release from Rionovosta, via the Ria Novosti agency, posted on Icecap. Comment: Reading through the comments at Watts Up With That, see Russian IEA claims CRU tampered with climate data – cherrypicked warmest stations, there is a great deal of caution with this document, but one comment that rang true for me is that the Russians are annoyed that Russian data was 'abused' by the CRU. Yet, at the same time, it does seem political that they are making a fuss now when they must have had ample opportunity to complain when Russian data was corrupted and used for CRU output and then this corrupted Russian data was again incorporatred by other reports. You can read the English Google Translation of the Moscow based Institute of Economic Analysis, this is the original Russian IEA report and this is a v. short basic commentary from WUWT. vboring (12:51:15) : I just got through the google translated document. The crux of the argument is that the CRU cherry picked data following the same methods that have been done everywhere else. They ignored data covering 40% of Russia and chose data that showed a warming trend over statistically preferable alternatives when available. They ignored completeness of data, preferred urban data, strongly preferred data from stations that relocated, ignored length of data set.Also, What the Russian papers say Copenhagen climate conference: Arnold Schwarzenegger calls for ‘planetary transformation’ Arnold Schwarzenegger has called for a “planetary transformation” to save the world from climate change. The Telegraph, 15th December 2009 
The Governor of California said an international agreement at Copenhagen will usher in a new era of renewable energy and economic growth through manufacturing green technology.
Even if a deal cannot be done between nation states, he said cities and regions such as California are moving forward in transforming their industries and individual lifestyles. Comment: Yes, Arnie we are getting the "planetary transformation", but I am not sure you will like it... Tide is turning on climate change Suddenly the doomsayers aren't having it all their own way, as people stubbornly refuse to be terrified, says Eilis O'Hanlon Irish Independent, 13th December 2009 
[...] These misanthropic Luddites have been predicting doom and gloom for humanity since the invention of the wheel -- and, reassuringly, they've always been wrong. Far from wrecking the world, human beings have generally made life progressively better for one another, but the miserablists still can't find a good word to say about their fellow man. Instead, they declare grumpily that Armaggedon has been postponed, not cancelled.
They're certainly going to have to work harder than this to convince people that slowing down their economies is the answer to whatever future problems face the climate, especially when a decelerating economy hasn't exactly been a terrific experience for most of us in Ireland over the past couple of years. Even at our most graspingly capitalistic during the Celtic Tiger years, we were responsible for only 0.2 per cent of the world's greenhouse gases. And for this we should face higher energy costs, even more unemployment, limits on growth, and, of course, lots of shiny new taxes to make us mend our sinful ways? No wonder increasing numbers of people find themselves attracted to the alternatives. Tony Abbott, Australia's new opposition leader, summed it up best: "I don't say there aren't problems, but I refuse to be terrified of the future. The world has been significantly hotter and significantly colder than it is today. We've coped." We've coped: now there's a narrative to inspire rather than depress. But then optimism will always trump pessimism, because optimism is about hope, and that's integral to human nature, too. As is not wanting to be landed with an estimated €36trn bill to prevent something that might not happen anyway. Comment: There are many many reports that relate to Climategate but I am really interested in how this relates to changing consciousness. The above paragraphs are from the end of this shortish article and I want to emphasis that more people do not want to live their lives dominated by fear and that represents a MAJOR shift in global consciousness as higher consciousness has a disproportionate effect on the whole. It is well known that controllers consider fear as a tried and tested means to manipulate the masses, so they are losing a major tool in their efforts to maintain their version of reality. Climategate: Sad Revelation of Corruption in Climate Science Right Side News, 13th December 2009
The exposure of thousands of emails, computer code, and other documents from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia last month demonstrates widespread corruption among leading climate alarmist scientists around the world.
The documents show that these scientists have been fabricating, cherry-picking, fudging, hiding, destroying, and otherwise abusing data; intimidating dissenting scientists and journal editors who might publish their work; filtering out dissenting research from the information reviewed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and by climate change agencies of national and state or provincial governments around the world; and violating Freedom of Information laws and scientific journal policies about data sharing and transparency-hallmarks of proper scientific method. The interdependence of CRU with the other three major surface temperature data institutions (the Global Historical Climate Network of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies) necessarily brings the credibility of their data into question as well. Google searches just now brought me over 31 million hits on "climategate" and just over 10 million on "global warming." (The cat's out of the bag and won't be put back in.) Comment: There are many articles at the moment discussing the corruption of science and I have try to avoid articles that are obviously written for political purposes. However, I don't have to worry, because it is obvious from the skeptical response to those kind of articles, that many people just don't believe the spin and are actually quite angry with politicians and media personalities like Al Gore. Climategate and the other major leak at Copenhagen are now taking their toll. See following BBC report and more: Copenhagen climate summit negotiations 'suspended' Negotiations at the UN climate summit have been suspended after developing countries withdrew their co-operation. Climategate: the ailing 'mainstream' media are committing suicide by ignoring the scoop of the century Climategate is a global household name. No cat has ever emancipated itself more completely from the bag. It is a world-wide scandal – thanks to the internet. The Myth of Global Warming A good question for today would be whether a fraud on the scale of the one being consummated at the Copenhagen "Earth summit" has even been attempted before in human history. DOE sends a “litigation hold notice” regarding CRU to employees – asking to “preserve documents” This was a scoop over at Watts Up With That Inconvenient truth for Al Gore as his North Pole sums don't add up The Times: "There are many kinds of truth. Al Gore was poleaxed by an inconvenient one yesterday." Al Gore has been getting a lot of stick at the moment, even The times decided to report his habit of poetic licence.... YouTube Video [2:53]: Hockey Stick over Time - Narrated Short and sweet Climategate: the lawyers move in – those scientists are toast! Delingpole: God bless America and – can I really be saying this? – God bless the legal profession! The Emperor Strikes Back Satire Portrait of a local climate skeptic Retired mining analyst Stephen McIntyre isn't a warming denier. He's merely a stickler The Star, 12th December 2009 
During the 12-day climate summit underway in Copenhagen, countries are trying to forge consensus on how best to protect the planet from global warming. An international all-star roster of academics is providing critical scientific data as the evidentiary backbone for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which hopes to prod perceived green slackers like Canada into more aggressive environmental reforms.
So why is a retired mining analyst living near Broadview and Danforth Aves. – a squash-playing grandfather who prompted a U.S. congressional hearing by crunching global warming research on his home computer – not invited to the party? Because Stephen McIntyre is an enemy of climate change believers, a man who, essentially, double-checks the math behind research accepted as green gospel. Though his painstaking "hobby" has exposed flawed data supporting studies like the "hockey stick" graph – it claimed the 1990s was the millennium's hottest decade – he's considered a denier by those who fear the planet is burning up. But the Toronto native won't stop asking the tough questions. Comment: Sometimes, it's nice to appreciate where other people are on the spiral. Stephen McIntyre took on the unpaid and unsung role of climate auditor and he managed to strike fear into the hearts of those who had lost their love for the scientific method. This gentleman, along with Anthony Watts are leading modern day heroes amongst the climate 'realist' community. Deprogramming Children After Global Warming Scam Mensnewsdaily.com, 11th December 2009 
The opening film at the Copenhagen “climate meeting” was an apt reminder of the long-term damage done by global warming propagandists. A little girl has nightmares about being alone in a desert where her life is threatened by floods and hurricanes.
Al Gore’s sci-fi horror fantasy in documentary style – An Inconvenient Truth – has been shown to school children, as young as 4 years old, around the world for years. Lesson plans aimed to convince children that the threat was real and that anyone doubting the message was wrong. They intentionally frightened children into emotional and psychological trauma. Closing the Copenhagen film, many children repeated the phrase; “Please help save the world.” Now parents and teachers are faced with the sticky question of how that should be done. How can we deprogram millions of children the world over without allowing the experience to leave permanent psychological scars? Comment: I was deadly serious when I said I was waiting for someone to write something sensible about 'cult' deprogramming, it's taken a few weeks, but here we are. I believe it will become quite obvious soon that this is required, alongside the de-programming required for all the fear and false ideas associated with 2012. See American Thinker article, Get Global Warming Out of Our Schools Climategate’s Harry_Read_Me.txt: We All Really Should [Read] The comprehensive collection of excerpts from the appalling CRU text file. A must read. Pajama Media, 11th December 2009 
One of the most damning pieces of evidence in Climategate (so far) is a text file called HARRY_READ_ME.txt.
This file is supposedly written by Ian “Harry” Harris, a researcher at the University of East Anglia’s CRU (Climatic Research Unit). In it he details the trials and tribulations of being tasked with creating a new climate information database from previous publications and databases. According to Harry’s documented struggle, he is confronted with missing, manipulated, and undocumented data that he has to use to try to piece together the newer TS 3.0 database. Here are the brow-raising excerpts: Comment: I use to work in a large computer department and worked with programmers, software specialists, analysts and project managers. I have been there when massive projects failed because of conflicts between business needs and computer department directives or people failing to communicate properly and deliver what was actually asked for. I think there was one failure caused by a young flighty-type Project Manager that mismanaged a project where she thought that a new replacement online system could be delivered on time, but the actual database could be converted two weeks later.... she was demoted immediately. From what I have read, there is real sympathy for poor Harry! Skeptics challenge Copenhagen global warming summit RT News, 7th December 2009 
On the second day of the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen, a group of skeptics is meeting in the Danish capital to counterbalance the main event.
The group has laid down the gauntlet to the intergovernmental panel on climate change, saying that: if is the world is warming because of manmade factors, if the glaciers are melting and the sea level is going to rise – then prove it using the science you have come up with and we will counter it with our science. Comment: There is a video here of Professor Cliff Ollier, a Professor of Geology from the University of Western Australia who focuses on ice caps and glaciers. He explains why warmists are using theories that date back to 1779, which is quite incredible and why what they are are saying is a pure fabrication. I was quite amazed, another eyeopener... It seems that this very English sounding Russian news service, is offering to support the skeptical view, hmmmm... The great climate change swindle: global warming is not manmade Russia Today, 7th December 2009 
Climate change has always existed and humankind does not have the power to affect it insists a critic of global warming theory, Lord Christopher Monckton, on the eve of the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen.
#147;It is yet another attempt of the governing class of the world to take advantage of the ‘little guy’ to conspire against the governed, to have another excuse for exaggerated levels of taxation, regulation and interference,” blames Monckton. Comment: Another excellent presentation by Vicount Christopher Monckton. Video [11:52] copy 'Climategate' at centre stage as Copenhagen opens The Times, 7th December 2009 
The "Climategate" row took centre stage on the opening day of the Copenhagen climate summit today as the world's leading oil exporter intervened to question the scientific consensus on man-made global warming.
As 15,000 delegates from 192 nations began what was billed as the "last, best chance" to avert a catastrophic rise in sea and air temperatures, Saudi Arabia's chief climate negotiator, Mohammed al-Sabban, spoke from the floor to say that e-mails hacked from a UK research centre had shaken trust in the work of scientists. He was not the first to mention the Climategate scandal. In his opening address to the conference, Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Nobel prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said the hackers had been trying to undermine the work of his organisation. [...] The Saudi negotiator rejected Dr Pachauri's defence of the IPCC's integrity as "general statements". "In light of recent information ... the scientific scandal has assumed huge proportion," he said. "We think it is definitely going to affect the nature of what can be trusted in the negotiations." The summit is being held in a vast congress centre on the edge of Copenhagen, powered by wind turbines – although organisers admit that it will have a significant carbon footprint. Comment: Well, I am sure you have heard all about the excess at Copenhagen with the super rich not having to to worry about their carbon footprints see Copenhagen climate summit: 1,200 limos, 140 private planes and caviar wedges, it reminds me of early General Councils of the Church where history records the excess and licentious behaviour of the Bishops. Anyway, everybody now knows that the basic premise that global temperatures are at the warmest for the last 1000 years is a complete lie and comes down to statistical fraud based one "cherry picked" tree ring. Hence, the "science" of AGW is now been discredited beyond any doubt. However, what makes it so obvious is the CRU emails that reveal the paranoid reaction to the thought of independent climate "auditors" having a look at the books. You can only compare this to independent auditors (ie can't be paid off) looking at Enron's books and realising it was one of the biggest scams of all time. Well, the gig is now up.... The media is slowly turning against the warmists... Copenhagen climate summit in disarray after 'Danish text' leak Another major leak?.... this is starting to look orchestrated... The climate-change travesty The Washington Post, comments re: Climate Research Unit (CRU), "Never in peacetime history has the government-media-academic complex been in such sustained propagandistic lockstep about any subject. Public trust in climate science hit by 'Climategate' Irish Times: "You can fool all of the people some of the time, and you can fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time." One of my favourite sayings, because it so true.... [Video 2:48] Man-made climate change atheists: COP15 is political church, not scientific Understanding Climategate's Hidden Decline American Thinker, 6th December 2009
Close followers of the Climategate controversy know that much of the mêlée surrounds an e-mail in which Climate Research Unit (CRU) chief Phil Jones wrote about using “Mike’s Nature Trick” (MNT) to “hide the decline.” And yet, seventeen days and thousands of almost exclusively on-line op-eds into this scandal, it still seems that very few understand exactly which “decline” was being hidden, what “trick” was used to do so, and why Jones’s words have become the slogan for the greatest scientific fraud in history.
Comment: This is regarded as an excellent summary. Met Office to re-examine 160 years of climate data The Times, 5th December 2009 
The Met Office plans to re-examine 160 years of temperature data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made global warming has been shattered by leaked e-mails. [...]
The Government is attempting to stop the Met Office from carrying out the re-examination, arguing that it would be seized upon by climate change sceptics. The Met Office works closely with the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU), which is being investigated after e-mails written by its director, Phil Jones, appeared to show an attempt to manipulate temperature data and block alternative scientific views. The Met Office’s published data showing a warming trend draws heavily on CRU analysis. CRU supplied all the land temperature data to the Met Office, which added this to its own analysis of sea temperature data. Since the stolen e-mails were published, the chief executive of the Met Office has written to national meteorological offices in 188 countries asking their permission to release the raw data that they collected from their weather stations. The Met Office is confident that its analysis will eventually be shown to be correct. Comment: My first thought is that the UK Met office are seizing the opportunity to acquire the status of becoming THE world authority on climate change. The government trying to stop them "re-doing" the scientific analysis, just shows you that agendas are in play with strict timetables. I also imagine that Eco Barons, who who have invested into Green investments worth about 145 trillion dollars, are probably also miffed, especially with Al Gore, 'Prince of Darkness'. Al Gore is not going to Copenhagen, there is talk of people demanding that the Academy rescind Al Gore’s Oscar in light of the Climategate revelations, and some think he has gone on the run... The situation is breathtaking... Climategate: Phil Jones accused of making error of judgment by colleague The Telegraph, 3rd December 2009 
One of the scientists to whom the emails were addressed, Professor Michael Mann, the Director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University has moved to distance himself from some of the comments in the emails that suggest scientists did not want the IPCC, the UN body charged with monitoring climate change, to consider studies that challenged the view global warming was genuine and man-made.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s The World Tonight, Prof Mann said: “I can’t put myself in the mind of the person who wrote that email and sent it. I in no way endorse what was in that email.” Prof Mann also said he could not “justify” a request from Prof Jones that he should delete some of his own emails to prevent them from being seen by outsiders. #147;I can’t justify the action, I can only speculate that he was feeling so under attack that he made some poor decisions frankly and I think that’s clear.” Comment: Climategate is now starting to get brutal, as the 'The Team' that once stuck together and fired on anyone who dared to oppose them, start firing on each other. The image icon is from Watts Up With That, see Mann throws Jones under the bus White House Balks at ClimateGate, Says Climate Change is Happening The Heritage Foundry, 1st December 2009 
When asked about ClimateGate, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs dismissed its importance, emphasizing that “climate change is happening.”
Of course climate change is happening. Soon we’ll be calling press conferences to declare, “The earth is moving” or “It’s going to get dark tonight.” The reality is the climate has been changing ever since there was a climate, and part of that change was a cooling period as recent as the 1940s to the 1970s giving rise to fears of a coming ice age. When Gibbs spouts this rhetoric, he’s clearly referring to human-induced warming, but since when has climate change become synonymous with manmade global warming? And what does it take for a scientific consensus to stop being one? Comment: Now, maybe I can agree here with the White House, but removing CO2 will not make any difference with the cosmic influences now driving climate change on Earth. All it will do is make some people even richer whilst giving others the ability to have a tighter grip on people's lives. Unfortunately, controllers, authorities and politicians don't like telling people the truth because KNOWLEDGE IS POWER. Hence, the poor excuse for science erroneously called "global warming", did not happen and many scientists believe we are in a period of global cooling, some even think a mini Ice Age is foreeseable. Today, Climategate is a major headache, but it is only the latest in a series of climate scandals. As I have tried to explain, we have a serious problem that is being caused by extreme Space Weather, that is literally blowing in new conditions in our solar system that we can barely understand. We live in a very complex ecosystem that is being managed by Universal Intelligence, what's more, we now know that there is an Earth Management Team in operation, that military and civilian organisations call the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena. These entities are totally independent of human control but they are very busy at the moment and it may be causing some nervousness as to why they are suddenly appearing to the general public. Well, if you agree that climate change can be interpreted to mean energy driven evolutionary change caused by cosmic factors, then the White House are right and that is exactly what is happening. Note: Obama science advisers grilled over hacked e-mails Geologist 'appalled' at NYT's Krugman: 'Legitimate scientists do not doctor data...hijack peer-review...send fraudulent data to UN that is used to perpetuate greatest hoax in the history of science' Climate Depot, 29th November 2009 
Prominent Geologist Dr. Don Easterbrook's comments were originally published on ABC News website in reaction to New York Times Columnist Paul Krugman's dismissal of the significance of ClimateGate. Dr. Easterbrook is an Emeritus Professor at Western Washington University who has authored eight books and 150 journal publications. Easterbrook's full resume is here.
Geologist Dr. Don Easterbrook - November 29, 2009 "I've spent four decades studying global climate change and as a scientist I am appalled at [NYT's Paul] Krugman's cavalier shrugging off the Hadley email scandal as 'just the way scientists talk among themselves.' That's like saying it's alright for politicians to be corrupt because that's the way they are."Comment: This is probably the best quote you will find at the moment about how true scientists feel about what has been done in the name of science. See also Christopher Booker at the Telegraph, Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation I truly believe that the vast majority of the scientific community will be so appalled that matters will not rest until something tangible happens that indicates that amends have been made. Global Warming Fraud and the Future of Science The America Thinker, 29th November 2009 The East Anglia Climate Research Unit (CRU) revelations come as no real surprise to anyone who has closely followed the global-warming saga.The Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) thesis, to give it its semi-official name, is no stranger to fraud. It is no real exaggeration to state that it was fertilized with fraud, marinated in fraud, stewed in fraud, and at last served up to the world as prime, grade-A fraud with nice side orders of fakery and disingenuousness. Damning as they may be, the CRU e-mails are merely the climactic element in an exhaustively long line. Comment: This is a history lesson of AGW fraud by climate scientists, facts that are now well known to those who have been watching the "man-made" warming from the sidelines. Well, it's a start, UK climate scientist to temporarily step down & also Fraudulent hockey sticks and hidden data Balancing the Energy Budget Climategate’s Perry Mason Moment PJM, 26th November 2009 
What’s the real smoking gun among the emails allegedly “hacked” from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit? [...]
But the real “mushroom cloud” among the emails comes from Kevin Trenberth, a senior scientist with the National Center for Atmospheric Research and a lead author of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports on global warming. In an October 14 email to fellow alarmist Tom Wigley, Trenberth plaintively writes: How come you do not agree with a statement that says we are no where close to knowing where energy is going or whether clouds are changing to make the planet brighter. We are not close to balancing the energy budget. The fact that we can not account for what is happening in the climate system makes any consideration of geoengineering quite hopeless as we will never be able to tell if it is successful or not! It is a travesty!It’s a Perry Mason moment. First, by admitting that we “are nowhere close” to understanding atmospheric energy flows, the much-vaunted Trenberth has trashed all the climate models on which the gloom-and-doom IPCC forecasts are based. If energy flows in the climate system cannot be accounted for, then they cannot be modeled – and there can be no basis upon which to make predictions of future temperatures. That’s case closed, right there. But there’s more. Two years ago, I privately surveyed U.S. scientists who participated in the IPCC’s review of climate science. Trenberth was one of those who responded to the survey. One question asked: Which best describes the role of manmade CO2 emissions in climate change? Trenberth checked off the following answer: Manmade CO2 emissions drive climate change, but other natural and human-related factors are also important. Comment: I took the liberty of changing the headline to reflect the article. Perry Mason is a fictional character, a defense attorney who originally was the main character in numerous pieces of detective fiction see wikipedia for more info. Anyway, I have been waiting for someone to highlight and discuss this highly significant comment about the atmospheric energy budget. Now that we are experiencing extreme Space Weather, where Earth is being bombarded by high energy from some of the most enigmatic and extreme objects in the known universe, it is at least comforting that even some of the most brainwashed scientists have recognised that there are "other factors" that are effecting the atmospheric energy budget. It must also be stated that it is well beyond our current scientific capabilities to determine the impact for Earth as we are told in this correspondence. Climategate: the scandal spreads, the plot thickens, the shame deepens… The Telegraph Delingpole Blog, 26th November 2009
Wow! The scandal just gets juicier and juicier. Now it seems that the Kiwis may have been at it too – tinkering with raw data to make “Global Warming” look scarier than it really is. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That; Ian Wishart)
The alleged villains this time are the climate scientists at the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NiWA) – New Zealand’s answer to Britain’s Climate Research Unit. And to judge by this news alert by the Climate Science Coalition of NZ, both institutions share a similarly laissez-faire attitude to scientific accuracy. Comment: See story at Watts Up With That Uh, oh – raw data in New Zealand tells a different story than the “official” one, for more technical details see Warwick Hughes shows how Jones selections put bias in Australian Temperatures . Obviously, there is a tremendous amount going on but I liked the headline. Now, I am actually waiting for someone to write something sensible about "cult deprogramming" for the AGWers who believed the lie and are coming to the realisation that they have been duped. As could be expected, there are now some interesting mainstream news video clips of AGWers going completely nuts as their religious beliefs have been shaken. This is an excellent short YouTube video [6:53] done for The Corbett Report where Dr. Tim Ball talks about Phil Jones and the Climate Research Unit, but the video is remarkable prescient and was actually made in September 2009! Climategate: The Backstory Scientist in climate change 'cover-up' storm told to quit Daily Mail, 25th November 2009
The scientist at the heart of the climate change scandal was under growing pressure to quit last night.
George Monbiot, a leading environmentalist, said Phil Jones should resign from the Climatic Research Unit over leaked emails that appear to show researchers suppressed scientific data.
More emails came to light yesterday, including one in which an American climatologist admitted it was a travesty that scientists could not explain a lack of global warming in recent years.
Comment: Of course the Daily Mail is well behind the blogosphere on this one, but at least they are reporting and the internet has been on fire with people trying to find out the latest news. As I continue to watch events unfold, I have noted the glee of some of climate skeptics but most people are totally shocked. However, there have been a few voices who have stated they are concerned for the welfare of the people at the centre of this furore and one person even stated they had said prayers. The discussion about the rights and wrongs are being debated all over the internet so I will not even attempt to repeat them here, but at the end of the day, what these guys were doing was not science and the question of ethics has become a recurring theme. I was actually struck by the following post at Watts Up With, Bryan Clark (11:53:40) : As a (retired) professional engineer from Canada, I am truly shocked by the contemptible behaviour of the scientists at Britain’s CRU. A total lack of ethics.This is another engineer Ken Coffman (12:14:14) : I work for a semiconductor company similar to the ones listed above (Linear Tech, National) and I collect data and do analysis. I can tell you without any hesitation that I have never seen anything like the manipulation documented in the e-mails and the computer codes. It would be unthinkable to massage and edit the data in that manner. If I got caught doing something like that, I’d be fired immediately and would have a lot of trouble finding another job in our tight-knit technical community. However, I’m not honest just to keep my job. As an engineer, I worship at the altar of uncorrupted data and professional ethics. I send curt e-mail at times (even drop the f-bomb when I’m upset), but have never seen anything like those personal attacks, “circling the wagons” and corruption of the peer review process. The whoring of science by the AGW hockey team makes me [snip] angry and you won’t need a FOI request to get that on record. [Bold added for emphasis] sourceEthics and integrity are becoming a major issue in science, which is something that is supported by the energetic changes taking place on the planet and has been emphasised by the most respected metaphysical sources. Due to the new climate [please excuse the pun] where it is become extremely difficult to hide wrongdoing, we now see new efforts to encourage people to adhere to new higher standards. Personally, I would like to see similar for the New Age community but first there needs to be some serious efforts to teach ethics as I have now realised that some don't even know even know what integrity means and many just think "the end justifies the means", which is the same mentality that governed the behaviour of these "fallen" scientists. See also, The “Hippocratic Oath” for Scientists The CRUtape Letters™, an Alternative Explanation. Watts Up With That, 23rd November 2009
I have a theory.
With the blogosphere all atwitter about the emails and data “stolen” from the Climatic Research Institute at the University of East Anglia, two theories have become dominant describing the origin of the incident.
1. CRU was hacked and the data stolen by skilled hackers, perhaps an individual or more insidiously some sophisticated group, such as Russian agents. 2. An insider leaked the information to the NSM (non-mainstream media) Comment: Since this is real history in the making and I see this in terms of light being shed on some very dark practices (scientific dark arts?) that were being used to enforce unnecessary climate legislation, I am continuing to focus on the emails "released" from the Climatic Research Institute at the University of East Anglia [CRU]. Here we are given a plausible explanation that the emails and data were collected together by administrators so that the CRU could comply with a Freedom of Information request. Yet, somehow the file was stolen off an unsecured server. The replies to this theory from the most informed, suggest that this theory is not completely right and I personally think that someone on the inside knew that this exercise was taking place and seized the opportunity to release the information to the world. Whatever, the real story, the concensus amongst climate "realists" is that whoever made these emails and data commonly available, is a hero or heroes. For the discussion of the file HARRY_READ_ME.txt file and the computer programmer's efforts to sort out the awful coding and databases that were a complete mess, is probably only of great interest to those who are more technically minded. See CRU Emails “may” be open to interpretation, but commented code by the programmer tells the real story Update This is from another website that has been examining the CRU programmer code. The following comment made me laugh, especially as I have already compared the manipulaiton of data to scientists practicing the 'dark' arts; Code this bad is the equivalent of witchcraft. There is essentially no empirical test to distinguish its output from nonsense. Sad to say, I've seen things like this before. Multi-author, non-software engineer-written codebases tend to have these sorts of hair-raising betises liberally sprinkled throughout (although this an extreme example - I wouldn't want to go into that code without a pump-action shotgun and a torch). Ian Harris certainly deserves our sympathy. Trying to hack your way through this utter balderdash must still have him sitting bolt upright in the middle of the night with a look of horror on his face. David Gillies | 24.Nov.09 - 18:43 | # link Global WarmingGate: What Does It Mean? Pajamas Media, 22nd November 2009
Late on the night of of November 19, news broke on PJM and elsewhere that a large amount of data had been stolen from one of the major climate research institutions by an unknown hacker and made available on the Internet. The institution is the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit, home institution for Dr Phil Jones and one of the world’s centers of research into anthropogenic global warming (AGW), or “climate change.”
The hackers released about 172 megabytes of data, and we can be sure examining it closely will take some time. But after a few days, certain things are beginning to become clear.
Video: Dr. Tim Ball on the CRU emails Watts Up With That, 22nd November 2009 
Retired climatologist Dr. Tim Ball was interviewed to discuss the significance of the recently leaked emails and documents from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University. These emails reveal stunning behind-the-scenes details, and Dr. Ball shares his insights on what they show. Of interest is what he has to say about the Wegman report.
Comment: Well, I am still reading these emails and the subseqent discussion because this a very major event in the scientific world with major repercussions. Global Warming is the official cover for the massive evolutionary changes taking place on this planet and the core scientific data, that so many people are reliant on, has just been exposed as being 'unreliable', which is a nice euphemism for RIGGED. Note the comment here by P Gosselin (20:09:26): It’s the Vatican of the Climate religion.I am highlighting this YouTube video [9:58] by this retired Canadian professor because he has been very vocal in opposing AGW (manmade global warming) to the point where he received deaths threats. Dr Tim Ball states that there was actually a "clan" of 42 insiders controlling the peer review process, so now he can be commended for opposing these corrupt scientists. By the way, the comments mention that someone started dumping 20 times the normal trading volume of the green fund, First Trust NASDAQ® Clean Edge® Green Energy Index Fund (QCLN) GREEN stock very very quickly.... If you go through the Green Business archives, you will see that there has been massive investments in Green funds, so it looks like someone just panicked. Also: Fox News: Calls for Investigation of Climategate Grow Red Hot Lies! Fox News report on YouTube [8:35] Hackers 'expose global warming con': Sceptics claim that leaked emails reveal research centre massaged temperature data Daily Mail, 21st November 2009
One of the world’s leading climate change research centres has been accused of manipulating data on global warming after thousands of private emails and documents were leaked.
Hackers targeted the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit and published the files, including some personal messages, on the internet. Among the most damaging is one which appears to suggest using a ‘trick’ to massage years of temperature data to ‘hide the decline’.[...] Spokesman Dave Britton said the two organisations had to turn down numerous Freedom of Information requests because they did not hold the copyright to the data.Comment: I think the final comment highlighted by the Daily Mail is just so representative of the mentality of these 'rogue' climate scientists. Science is not supposed to be about "PUSHING" anything! Yet, one of the most shocking things that has been revealed is how scientists are being guided by "marketing" principles. One of the 75 documents "released" is a five-page PDF document entitled The Rules of the Game , which discusses indoctrinating the residents of the United Kingdom with global warming propaganda. Here are a few of the "rules": Excerpt:This document was previously highlighted on the 20th October 2009 in a guest post by Dr. Tony Brown at Watts Up with that, Revealed: the UK government strategy for personal carbon rations The Day Global Warming Stood Still Investors Business Daily, 20th November 2009
Climate Change: As scientists confirm the earth has not warmed at all in the past decade, others wonder how this could be and what it means for Copenhagen. Maybe Al Gore can Photoshop something before December. [...]
"I proudly declare 2009 as the 'Year of the Skeptic,' the year in which scientists who question the so-called global warming consensus are being heard," Inhofe said to Boxer in a Senate speech. "Until this year, any scientist, reporter or politician who dared raise even the slightest suspicion about the science behind global warming was dismissed and repeatedly mocked." Inhofe added: "Today I have been vindicated." [...] In an article titled, "Climatologists Baffled By Global Warming Time-Out," author Gerald Traufetter leads off with the observation: "Climatologists are baffled as to why average global temperatures have stopped rising over the last 10 years. "They better figure it out, Der Spiegel warns, because "billions of euros are at stake in the negotiations." We are told in sad tones that "not much is happening with global warming at the moment" and that "it even looks as though global warming could come to a standstill this year." But how can it be that the earth isn't following all those computer models? Is the earth goddess Gaia herself a climate change "denier"? Comment: I could not resist the headline or some of the quotes, in this article, indeed, it is a time of celebration. Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming'? The Telegraph, 20th November 2009
If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU) and released 61 megabites of confidential files onto the internet. [...]
As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest: Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.Comment: The US is now reporting this scandal and I have seen reports at Fox News & The New York Times, but initial comment at American Thinker is worth pointing out as they are amongst many who have been targeted for their stance on global warming. Here, they object to being referred to as American Stinker demonstrating the war mentality of the UK/US climate scientists for persons or organisations that opposed the AGW worldview. Well, I have spent a lot of time in the last 24 hours reading the highlights of the leaked emails and despite the fact that I intuitively KNEW that scientists were tampering with climate data and it is widely known that certain scientists have been caught out in the past, there is nothing that can prepare someone, especially honest scientists, for the scale of the misdemeanors that have been uncovered. This is a list that has been compiled elsewhere that I will update if necessary:
So, I have been out on a limb for a good 5 years with my understanding of Space Weather driving evolutionary change. Now I can say I am not alone in my beliefs and it is evident that Space Weather is the REAL reason for the panic. For those that a new to this website, the latest major press releases from NASA re Space Weather can be found at the following link, It's Official; The New Cosmic Age has arrived! What's more I can now link to articles and videos that visually demonstrate that our planet is under a massive cosmic bombardment. Yet, even I was shocked to see some of this year's computer simulations of Earth's magnetosphere taking a pounding and literally flapping about in a galactic wind. I would just like to take this opportunity to say that I am very greatful for the insights provided by Mayan Elders, other Keepers of Ancient Knowledge and the few in metaphysical community who have been way ahead of the curve in helping me to decipher what is taking place. As aetheric energies continue to build-up around our planet, I am expecting more and more astonishing events and human folly can be forgotten for a while, as we witness the greatest transition in the history of mankind. Hadley hacked: warmist conspiracy exposed? Herald Sun, 20th November 2009 
8.15 PM UPDATE: The Hadley CRU director admits the emails seem to be genuine:
The director of Britain’s leading Climate Research Unit, Phil Jones, has told Investigate magazine’s TGIF Edition tonight ..."It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days ago that someone had hacked into our system and taken and copied loads of data files and emails."…So the 1079 emails and 72 documents seem indeed evidence of a scandal involving most of the most prominent scientists pushing the man-made warming theory - a scandal that is one of the greatest in modern science. I’ve been adding some of the most astonishing in updates below - emails suggesting conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more. If it is as it now seems, never again will “peer review” be used to shout down sceptics. This is clearly not the work of some hacker, but of an insider who’s now blown the whistle. Not surprising, then, that Steve McIntyre reports: Earlier today, CRU cancelled all existing passwords. Actions speaking loudly. [...] The anonymous hackers offer this brief summary of their alleged finds so far: 0926010576.txt * Mann: working towards a common goalComment: What kind of hacker gives you a nice little summary of the information and data that has just been stolen? I have been reading the comments at the Watts Up With That thread (see below) who have attracted a lot of academics and Andrew Bolts summary is absolutely excellent. Here we have it on good authority that the emails are true and people are comparing this to a supernova as the downloaded data goes viral all over the internet. There is discussion of a need for a Special Prosecutor and we even have a tax official commentating on emails that discuss avoiding tax on payouts of 10,000 dollars. If you know your conspiracy stuff well enough, the figure of 10,000 dollars should jump out at you immediately. People are talking about the need for an academic suicide watch and they are being partly serious. This is as absolutely sensational. If you want to understand the importance of this leak then you have to start reading the emails that clearly reveal that there was a team of scientists working together to mislead the public by manipulating climate data to give the impression that in recent times, we have experienced unprecedented global warming. Nothing that has been exposed before can be compared to this, this is sensational.... Hackers target leading climate research unit BBC News, 20th November 2009
The e-mail system of one of the world's leading climate research units has been breached by hackers.
E-mails reportedly from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU), including personal exchanges, appeared on the internet on Thursday.
A university spokesman confirmed the email system had been hacked and that information was taken and published without permission.
An investigation was underway and the police had been informed, he added. Comment: It would be extremely difficult for the mainstream media to ignore this story, but this is a start. As one person has commented on the Watts Up With That thread (see below), Stop Common Purpose (02:20:25): ...it sounds like there [is] a smoking gun.”I think we can expect scientists running for cover and those that are able to protect their "reputations" turning on the guilty. There has to be a major purging of the ranks, but so far, the "consensus" is that there is a "team" of scientists that have been exposed through these emails that could go to jail. Well, it’s amazing what can happen when a few people stand up for the ’scientific’ truth and I feel very proud of the minority of scientists who endured much abuse for their public stance on climate change and global warming. Breaking News Story: Hadley CRU has apparently been hacked – hundreds of files released Watts Up With that, 19th November 2009
The details on this are still sketchy, we’ll probably never know what went on. But it appears that Hadley Climate Research Unit has been hacked and many many files have been released by the hacker or person unknown [...]
An unknown person put postings on some climate skeptic websites that advertsied an FTP file on a Russian FTP server, here is the message that was placed on the Air Vent today: We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept under wraps. We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and documentsThe file was large, about 61 megabytes, containing hundreds of files. It contained data, code, and emails from Phil Jones at CRU to and from many people. I’ve seen the file, it appears to be genuine and from CRU. Others who have seen it concur- it appears genuine. There are so many files it appears unlikely that it is a hoax. The effort would be too great. Comment: As this is just breaking news, people are still unsure whether the data is real, but because of the sheer volume, it is extremely unlikely that the emails and data are fake as the unzipped file expands to 157MB. As one commentator stated, Konrad (14:26:24) : So, as people are already digging into the emails, there is already some rejoicing.... We have a long way to go yet, but it looks like the start of the final chapter in the war on global warming alarmism. Stay tuned.... Monckton climate change video goes viral Video of Lord Monckton Warning of Copenhagen Climate Treaty Exceeds 3.5 Million Views in a Single Month Watts Up With That, 16th November 2009
Minneapolis – A video of Lord Christopher Monckton warning of the impending Copenhagen climate treaty has received over 3.5 million views in 30 days, according to Minnesota Majority, the organization responsible for posting the original 4-minute excerpt of Monckton’s speech.
The organization says that its original clip, together with the 100+ cloned versions that now exist on YouTube, in total exceeded 3.5 million views as of November 15, 2009. The video clip made Minnesota Majority the #1 most viewed Non-Profit & Activism channel in the month of October on YouTube. Comment: This is quite strong stuff, watch the [4:12] YouTube clip. This is the oratory of a great statesman! Global Warming Fatigue Spreads The Reslient Earth, 16th November 2009 
In the run up to Copenhagen, global warming alarmists are spreading the word that climate change is progressing even faster than the IPCC has projected. But contradictory data from skeptics and open minded scientists continues to indicate that global warming has gone on hiatus and may not return for decades.
This has sparked a noticeable drop in public concern over climate change and has led some climate change true believers to bemoan increasing public “Climate Fatigue.” #147;We are basically looking now at a future climate that is beyond anything that we've considered seriously,” ecologist and IPCC author Christopher Field of Stanford University in Palo Alto, California, said in February at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). In March, a meeting of 2000 climate scientists in Copenhagen prompted the headline “Projections of Climate Change Go From Bad to Worse, Scientists Report.” Comment: It does seem that climate "realists" are having quite a serious impact on the global warming alarmism despite true believers refering to the enemy as mavericks, deniers and other such insults. However, I think the true battle has been won by those who have exposed the poor and fraudulent data that most of the alarmism has been based on. This all goes to show that power IS greater than force, as elucidated by Sir David Hawkins in his scientific understanding of the interaction of consciosuness. In the future, we will look back clearly and see that it was the truth that prevailed. Lord Monckton on Glenn Beck show Watts Up With That, 30th October 2009
In case you missed it live, Christopher Monckton spent an entire hour on the Glenn Beck program today on the topic of global warming, skepticism, and the Copenhagen Treaty.
Comment: I have not watched this show, but the blog comments here indicate it is well worth watching. There is some reaction here and I like the comment from Just The Facts (17:05:37) : Here’s the Guardian on Monckton’s appearance: Climate change denier Lord Monckton meets Glenn Beck They seem worried, I can tell by the tone of their insults… Climate Fools Day rallies the heretics: Stop them, before they Deny again! The Register, 30th October 2009 
On my way to a climate conference yesterday, I wondered what £6m worth of TV advertising might look like if it climate sceptics dominated the political and media elites, rather than environmental activists. [...]
I expect that this would become a national sensation, (but perhaps not with Guardian readers,) and possibly even generate spin-offs. It would surely draw fewer complaints than the current £6m "behaviour change" campaign featuring the drowning cartoon dog. It would certainly meet with approval from most attendees of Piers Corbyn's "Climate Fool's Day" conference yesterday. There, at Imperial College, the air was thick with heresy. The BBC sent two employees - who strangely, put as much distance between themselves and the "Deniers" as they could. If they were any further back from the stage, they would have been in the next room. A Freudian choice of seating? At Fools Day, almost every foundation of the manmade global warming hypothesis was attacked - including the views of other sceptical scientists. This may be somewhat confusing to an agnostic. There's a great hunger for a 'silver bullet' to slay the Greenhouse Global Warming hypothesis, when none is really necessary. A hypothesis will die a natural death, if it is no longer an adequate explanation of the observations. No amount of financial or political buttress - or as a last resort, the precautionary principle - can prop up a bad theory forever." Comment: This is a basic report of what went on at the Climate Fools Day conference. Prominent Russian Scientist: 'We should fear a deep temperature drop -- not catastrophic global warming' 'Warming had a natural origin...CO2 is 'not guilty' Climate Depot, 27th October 2009 
THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
(Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. - Head of Space research laboratory of the Pulkovo Observatory, Head of the Russian/Ukrainian joint project Astrometria - (translated from Russian by Lucy Hancock) Dr. Abdussamatov is featured on page 140 of the 2009 U.S. Senate Report of More Than 700 Dissenting Scientists Over Man-Made Global Warming. Also see "Related Links" below.) Key Excerpts: Observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in temperature, carbon dioxide is "not guilty" and as for what lies ahead in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global, and very prolonged, temperature drop. [...] Over the past decade, global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global warming has ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep temperature drop. Comment: For a shorter synopsis, see The Sun Defines the Climate – an essay from Russia Has Climate Change had its "Ten Minutes of Fame"? Net News Ledger, 25th October 2009 
THUNDER BAY - Yesterday was the International Day of Action on Climate Change. In Ottawa, cold weather kept the crowd from hitting the 5,000 people that organizers hoped. About 500 people showed up. In Calgary, a snowstorm dumped wet heavy snow on the city. On Google, unlike past climate change events, there was not a special logo created. On the front pages of major newspapers across Canada the major stories were not about the looming climate crisis.
In Winnipeg, about 200 people made it to a rally at the Manitoba Legislature. In Vancouver, a city steeped in protest, the crowd was estimated at 5000. Across Canada interest in the day of action appeared less than ever. Could it be that the fire is smoldering out on the issue of climate change? Maybe in an era where ever shorter attention spans want to shift to other topics the climate issue has had its "ten minutes of fame"? Comment: The discussion here is that global warming has got boring.... but quite frankly, who is going to tell the sheeple the more correct version of the situation, that some fear could be in store for mankind if the heliosphere goes pop?!? Climate Change Skeptics Embrace ‘Freakonomics’ Sequel Global Warming Chapter Attracts Criticism From Environmental Journalists Washington Independent, 23rd October 2009 
"The early reviews for “SuperFreakonomics” have been harsh. The book, wrote Brad Johnson in The Guardian, is a “super freaking mess.” According to environmental journalist Joe Romm, it contains “many, many pieces of outright nonsense” and “major howlers.” In The New Republic, Brad Plumer attacked the book for “garden variety ignorance.” And all of those pans appeared before the book actually hit the shelves this week.
Authors Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner didn’t face anything like this three years ago when they published “Freakonomics,” a surprise smash that sold 4 million copies. Unlike that book, which was based entirely on Levitt’s economic research from the University of Chicago, “SuperFreakonomics” is a guided tour of other peoples’ contrarian research and ideas. The final chapter deals with global warming, characterizing the beliefs of pessimistic environmentalists as “religious fervor,” and arguing that the climate change solutions proposed by Al Gore and many Democrats are ineffective and unworkable." [...] Levitt and Dubner have engaged their critics in the environmental movement, accusing them of “smears” for suggesting that the climate change chapter of “SuperFreakonomics” makes them “global warming denialists.” #147;I think anyone who actually reads that chapter will come away with a better fact-based understanding of the actual issues surrounding global warming,” Levitt told TWI. “That said, I also think that partisans love to cherry-pick, regardless of what side of the aisle they sit on.” Comment: I think this is the latest gobal warming/climate change spat and many are now debating the chapter on geo-enginnering which was widely circulated on the internet, it can be downloaded here. Well, I have just found some more factual information about what has been taking place in our our solar system for the last 10 years that fills in the details about why scientists are so worried about the Earth's shielding "evaporating". At the time of NASA's major Space Weather announcement in September 2008 , and accompanying scientifc comment, I thought it was just speculation, but it seems that we are in an environment of interstellar space which really could cause some severe "planetary challenges". From The UK Telegraph article, dated 18th October 2008, we find; "The interstellar medium, which is part of the galaxy as a whole, is actually quite a harsh environment. There is a very high energy galactic radiation that is dangerous to living things. "Around 90 per cent of the galactic cosmic radiation is deflected by our heliosphere, so the boundary protects us from this harsh galactic environment." [...]I started my mission because I wanted to understand why metaphysical sources were encouraging people to protect their energy fields and I decided the only way to do this was to integrate science and metaphysics. The discovery of Space Weather provided me with the ability to integrate various sources of information. However, in most mainstream and alternative articles about the impact of cosmic influences on Earth, there is a major reluctance to talk about the massive evolutionary change that will occur if the shielding around our solar system simply vanishes or evaporates and we have to cope with "full on" Galactic Cosmic Radiation causing DNA mutations. Well, according to the most credible metaphysical sources that I have come across, that is the exact scenario we can expect and it explains the desperation from various government, quasi-government organisations and scientific establishments, that we need expensive geoengineering schemes. Please note, the concept of mirrors and metal plates in space amongst the plethora of geoengineering schemes. Any decent metaphysician will know immediately that this is about the deflection of universal energies. The science of what is going on in the local interstellar environment of our solar system is in the public domain, but generally ignored by media pundits who don't understand or want to contemplate the impact for all life on Earth. The metaphysical community have been warned and a few have developed ways to strengthen the human energy field but of course it has attracted the charlatans for which the New Age community is famed. I have dedicated my life to understanding the science and metaphysics of evolutionary change to weed out the fraudsters, because this is important to the destiny of mankind, whether people realise it or not. Cosmic pattern to UK tree growth BBC News, 19th October 2009 
"The growth of British trees appears to follow a cosmic pattern, with trees growing faster when high levels of cosmic radiation arrive from space. Researchers made the discovery studying how growth rings of spruce trees have varied over the past half a century. As yet, they cannot explain the pattern, but variation in cosmic rays impacted tree growth more than changes in temperature or precipitation. [...]
As the trees aged, they showed a usual decline in growth. However, during a number of years, the trees' growth also particularly slowed. These years correlated with periods when a relatively low level of cosmic rays reached the Earth's surface. When the intensity of cosmic rays reaching the Earth's surface was higher, the rate of tree growth was faster. The effect is not large, but it is statistically significant. The intensity of cosmic rays also correlates better with the changes in tree growth than any other climatological factor, such as varying levels of temperature or precipitation over the years. "The correlation between growth and cosmic rays was moderately high, but the correlation with the climatological variables was barely visible," Ms Dengel told the BBC. [...] But the influence of cosmic rays could resolve other as yet unexplained cycles in tree growth found in studies in North America." Comment: More evidence that life on Earth is directly influenced by cosmic factors, but even though it is known that trees have electrical potentials that vary with light and dark, thunderstorms, lunar cycles and changes in the ionosphere due to sunspots and geomagnetic storms, the influence of cosmic rays is not so obvious, hence why these scientists are stumped. What happened to global warming? BBC News, 9th October 2009
This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998. But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures. And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise. So what on Earth is going on?
Comment: Well, it quite obvious what's going on..... climate realists are gloating over their recent victories and global warming alarmists are in disarray. Over at the website Watts Up With That, who posted the original BBC Story, see Quote of the week #21 The beeb’s big bombshell, I found this response, Bulldust (22:41:02) : Did someone hack their web site? LOL!! The general opinion from this particular clued up crowd is that the BBC is now hedging their bets just in case the AGW argument becomes completely "unhinged", but this kind of backtracking has been happening with prominent scientists for a while now, as already blogged. See Daily Mail piece for the 14th October, Whatever happened to global warming? How freezing temperatures are starting to shatter climate change theory Defence unmoved by climate change data - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) News, 9th October 2009 
"The science of climate change is too doubtful to dramatically change Australia’s national defence plans, according to a key adviser on the Australian Defence Force’s recent White Paper.
While the white paper acknowledges for the first time climate change is a potential security risk, it says large-scale strategic consequences of climate change are not likely to be felt before 2030. A key adviser on the white paper, Professor Ross Babbage, says he is not convinced that climate change exists at all. #147;The data on what’s really happening in climate change was looked at pretty closely and the main judgment reached was that it was pretty uncertain – it wasn’t clear exactly what was going on,” he said." Comment: I think the sentiment that scientists don't understand what is taking place on this planet just about sums up the situation and thats because there is very little integration of cosmic factors when studying climate change. The end is near The media, polls and even scientists suggest the global warming scare is all over but the shouting Financial Post, 2nd October 2009
The great global warming scare is over – it is well past its peak, very much a spent force, sputtering in fits and starts to a whimpering end. You may not know this yet. Or rather, you may know it but don’t want to acknowledge it until every one else does, and that won’t happen until the press, much of which also knows it, formally acknowledges it.
I know that the global warming scare is over but for the shouting because that’s what the polls show, at least those in the U.S., where unlike Canada the public is polled extensively on global warming. Most Americans don’t blame humans for climate change – they consider global warming to be a natural phenomenon. Even when the polls showed the public believed man was responsible for global warming, the public didn’t take the scare seriously. When asked to rank global warming’s importance compared to numerous other concerns – unemployment, trade, health care, poverty, crime, and education among them – global warming came in dead last. Fewer than 1% chose global warming as scare-worthy. [...] But the press has also begun to tire of Armageddon All-The-Time... Comment: The energy is certainly changing and this last week has seen some serious nails being driven into the global warming scare coffin... Carbon credits have tanked too, see Carbon Credit Market Imploding: CCX now 10 cents a tonne Response from Briffa on the Yamal tree ring affair – plus rebuttal Watts Up With That, 1st October 2009 
First here is Dr. Keith Briffa’s response in entirety direct from his CRU web page: My attention has been drawn to a comment by Steve McIntyre on the Climate Audit website relating to the pattern of radial tree growth displayed in the ring-width chronology “Yamal” that I first published in Briffa (2000).
The substantive implication of McIntyre’s comment (made explicitly in subsequent postings by others) is that the recent data that make up this chronology (i.e. the ring-width measurements from living trees) were purposely selected by me from among a larger available data set, specifically because they exhibited recent growth increases. [...] It appears that your results are heavily influenced by a single tree, as Steve McIntyre has just demonstrated here. As McIntyre points out: “YAD061 reaches 8 sigma and is the most influential tree in the world.” Comment: This is a great victory for climate 'realists' and one that will be savoured for many years to come. Here, is a great quote here from Robinson (09:22:49) :If you want a more scientific synopsis of the latest round of this battle see, Yamal - the debate continues. Quote of the week #20 – ding dong the stick is dead Watts Up With That, 27th September 2009 
We’ve always suspected that Mann’s tree ring proxies aren’t all they are cracked up to be. The graph below is stunning in it’s message and I’m pleased to present it to WUWT readers. I’m sure the Team is already working up ways to say “it doesn’t matter”. The QOTW this week centers around this graph:The quote of the week is: I hardly know where to begin in terms of commentary on this difference.The graph above shows what happens to the “Hockey Stick” after additional tree ring data, recently released (after a long and protracted fight over data access) is added to the analysis of Hadley’s archived tree ring data in Yamal, Russia. [...] All of the sudden, it isn’t the “hottest period in 2000 years” anymore. I’ll say. Ding Dong the stick is dead. Comment: This revelation is causing a great deal of excitement amongst climate sceptics.... This is the latest global warming spat and it looks like a massive victory for climate realists Steve McIntyre and Anthony Watts, in their battle for truth and enlightenment. There is a ongoing saga here with tree ring data, but follow the links if you want to know the background. Also, Update: A zoomed look at the broken hockey stick The following comments are worth noting, kim (23:58:28) :Yes, the truth will set you free..... Here is a layman’s guide to the story described by Anthony Watts as 'A must read: The Yamal Hockey Stick Implosion in laymans terms' here . The Dog Ate Global Warming Interpreting climate data can be hard enough. What if some key data have been fiddled? National Review, 23rd September 2009 
"Imagine if there were no reliable records of global surface temperature. Raucous policy debates such as cap-and-trade would have no scientific basis, Al Gore would at this point be little more than a historical footnote, and President Obama would not be spending this U.N. session talking up a (likely unattainable) international climate deal in Copenhagen in December.
Steel yourself for the new reality, because the data needed to verify the gloom-and-doom warming forecasts have disappeared. Or so it seems. Apparently, they were either lost or purged from some discarded computer. Only a very few people know what really happened, and they aren’t talking much. And what little they are saying makes no sense. Comment: This story is nothing new for those who have been following the scientific sheenanigans that have accompanied the political thrust to support the concept of global warming, but the denial of this original data is highly suspicious and smacks of junk science. This article is a nice summary of the situation and demonstrates the fact that sometimes, peer reviews are just not convenient.... For more comment, this article can be found at Watts Up With That, here. U.N. climate meeting was propaganda: Czech president Reuters, 22nd September 2009 
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Czech President Vaclav Klaus sharply criticized a U.N. meeting on climate change on Tuesday at which U.S. President Barack Obama was among the top speakers, describing it as propagandistic and undignified.
"It was sad and it was frustrating," said Klaus, one of the world's most vocal skeptics on the topic of global warming. "It's a propagandistic exercise where 13-year-old girls from some far-away country perform a pre-rehearsed poem," he said. "It's simply not dignified." [...] Klaus said there were increasing doubts in the scientific community about whether humans are causing changes in the climate or whether the changes are simply naturally occurring phenomena. But politicians, he said, seem to be moving closer to a consensus on climate change. "The train can't be stopped and I consider that a huge mistake," Klaus said. Comment: Vaclav Klaus simply tells it how it is. At globalwarming.org they believe that Obama's claims are exaggerated and have generated the data to prove it, see Obama Speech to the UN: The Data. Sceptics seize on climate cooling model Research suggesting that global temperatures may fall is being used by deniers and sceptics to dismiss the entire canon of climate science The Guardian - George Monbiot, 16th September 2009 
"Could it be true that global temperatures will fall before they rise? That's the thrust of a presentation at last week's World Climate conference. Mojib Latif of Kiel University in Germany suggested that cooling caused by natural factors could suppress global temperatures for several years, after which they will start to rise again.
His presentation, first reported by the eagle-eyed Fred Pearce in the New Scientist, has been seized upon by sceptics and deniers all over the blogosphere. It was picked up this morning by the BBC's Today programme, which invited my old friend Philip Stott (who spends his time championing such dubious productions as The Great Global Warming Swindle and Michael Crichton's State of Fear) to raise questions about the global warming thesis." Comment: The climate change "realists" appear to be gaining the upper hand as they now appear "all over the blogosphere" and that is where the battle will be won. See links posted here. Icecap photo shows 'mother nature in tears' A photograph of a shrinking icecap that looks like 'mother nature in tears' is set to become a stark image of the dangers of global warming. The Telegraph, 2nd September 2009 
"Marine photographer and environmental lecturer Michael Nolan captured the pictures while on an annual voyage to observe the largest icecap in Norway Austfonna on July 16.
He said the image looked just like mother nature in tears, "as if she was crying about our inability to reduce global warming". 'Tears' in the natural sculpture were created by a waterfall of glacial water falling from one of the face's 'eyes'. " Comment: Well, I am sure this image will be considered a gift for environmentalists and most certainly, it's a good picture. FARMERS' ALMANAC PREDICTS NUMBING COLD THIS WINTER NY Post, 31st August 2009 
"The venerable almanac's 2010 edition, which goes on sale Tuesday, says numbing cold will predominate in the country's midsection, from the Rocky Mountains in the West to the Appalachians in the East.
Managing Editor Sandi Duncan says it's going to be an "ice cold sandwich." [...] The almanac's forecast, however, is at odds with the National Weather Service, which is calling for warmer-than-normal temperatures across much of the country because of an El Nino system in the tropical Pacific Ocean, said Mike Halpert, deputy director of the NOAA Climate Prediction Center in Camp Springs, Md. "The stronger El Nino becomes, the more confident and the more likely it will be the northern part of the country will have a milder-than-average winter," Halpert said. The almanac and the Weather Service agree on their predictions of warmer-than-usual conditions across much of the country next summer. The Farmers' Almanac, not to be confused with the New Hampshire-based Old Farmer's Almanac, has a circulation of about 3.5 million. Comment: What is interesting is that the The Farmers' Almanac and the Old The Farmers' Almanac use sunspot data to make predictions that have been historically far more accurate than the US Weather Service and that is why it sells. Ignoring the behaviour of the Sun is just plain folly and in the last few weeks, there have been lots more reports linking the behaviour of our climate to solar variations. See Small Fluctuations In Solar Activity, Large Influence On Climate & Sun's Cycle Alters Earth's Climate Wobbling earth triggers climate change ABC News, 14th August 2009 
"Regular wobbles in the earth's tilt were responsible for the global warming episodes that interspersed prehistoric ice ages, according to new evidence.
The finding is the result of research led by Dr Russell Drysdale of the University of Newcastle that has been able to accurately date the end of the penultimate ice age for the first time. The new dates, which appear in the today's edition of Science, show the end of the second last ice age occurring 141,000 years ago, thousands of years earlier than previously thought. Using information gathered from a trio of Italian stalagmites, the research has punched a hole in the prevailing theory that interglacial periods are related to changes in the intensity of the northern hemisphere summer. Drysdale and colleagues suggest that the earth emerges from ice ages due in large part to changes in the tilt of the planet in relation to the sun, otherwise known as its obliquity. This affects the total amount of sunlight each hemisphere receives in its respective summer, rather than the peak intensity of the solar radiation during the northern summer." Comment: In terms of understanding our reality, the main message is that the universe works in cycles, to allow for evolutionary change. There is nothing static in the universe and the complexity is beyond the understanding of human consciousness, the current conumdrum with the Sun is a good example. Hence, it does seem strange when scientists noted decades ago that Earth is affected by regular cosmic cycles that politicians and their friends have attempted to blame global changes on one element CO2, where increases in CO2 are proven by ice core samples to lag global mean temperature increases by up to 800 years. Another UK climate data withholding scandal is emerging Watts Up With That, 14th August 2009 
"Scientists study tree rings for two main purposes. One purpose is to learn something about what the climate was like many years ago. For instance, if many trees in a region had thick rings in some particular years, then climatic conditions in those years were presumably good (e.g. warm and with lots of rain); tree rings have been used in this way to learn about the climate centuries ago. The other purpose in studying tree rings is to date artefacts found in archaeological contexts; for an example, see here. Tree-ring data from Northern Ireland
One of the world’s leading centers for tree-ring work is at Queen’s University Belfast (QUB), in Northern Ireland. The tree-ring data that QUB has gathered is valuable for studying the global climate during the past 7000 years: for a brief explanation of this, see here. Most of the tree-ring data held by QUB was gathered decades ago; yet it has never been published. There is a standard place on the internet to publish such data: the International Tree-Ring Data Bank (ITRDB), which currently holds tree-ring data from over 1500 sites around the world. QUB refuses to publish or otherwise release most of its data, though. So I have tried to obtain the data by applying under the UK Freedom of Information Act (FoI Act). I have submitted three separate requests for the data." Comment: Well, many moons ago, I came across someone on the internet that claimed that tree ring data had been manipulated to hide the fact that there was approx. 300 years of missing time in our history. As usual, this piece of information was place on a metal shelf in my mind, but when this same notion cropped up in other completely different scenarios, I started to take the concept more seriously. It is known that in the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church were so busy forging 'historical' documents and meddling with calendars that the situation got to the state where they had no idea what century they were in. I even read a book recently, where the author, a scientist could not understand why the Earth's precession had apparently speedied up by about three hundred years, I supose he was using markers that could not be disputed, but I would argue that the only discrepancy is in our calendars. Maybe this is the reason why Mayan Timekeepers INSIST that they DO NOT have a problem with their calendars and they are accurate over thousands of years. Therefore, Steve McIntyre's efforts to obtain raw tree ring data, may not just be about climate proxies..... Mann hockey-sticks hurricanes: Hurricanes in the Atlantic are more frequent than at any time in the last 1,000 years Watts Up With that, 13th August 2009 
"Just when you think it couldn’t get any more bizarre in Mann-world, out comes a new paper in Nature hawking hurricane frequency by proxy analysis. I guess Dr. Mann missed seeing the work of National Hurricane Center’s lead scientist, Chris Landsea which we highlighted a couple of days ago on WUWT: NOAA: More tropical storms counted due to better observational tools, wider reporting. Greenhouse warming not involved.
Mann is using “overwash” silt and sand as his new proxy. Chris Landsea disagrees in the Houston Chronicle interview saying: “The paper comes to very erroneous conclusions because of using improper data and illogical techniques,” Comment: From a higher perspective, it's almost like Mann is deliberately putting out rubbish to see if anyone will object! The comparison has to be drawn with those on the spiritual path and the need to use discernment to obtain the highest truth. Climate data spat intensifies Nature, 12th August 2009
"A leading UK climatologist is being inundated by freedom-of-information-act requests to make raw climate data publicly available, leading to a renewed row over data access. Since 2002, Steve McIntyre, the editor of Climate Audit, a blog that investigates the statistical methods used in climate science, has repeatedly asked Phil Jones, director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, UK, for access to monthly global surface temperature data held by the institute."
Comment: This Nature article is subscription only but the full report can be found on Steve McIntyre's website here. A link between the Sun, cosmic rays, aerosols, and liquid-water clouds appears to exist on a global scale… Watts Up With That, 4th August 2009 
"Svensmark has a new paper and it is a doozy: Cosmic ray decreases affect atmospheric aerosols and clouds (full text PDF).
The major conclusion: “A link between the Sun, cosmic rays, aerosols, and liquid-water clouds appears to exist on a global scale…” This paper confirms 13 years of discoveries that suggest a key role for cosmic rays in climate change. It links observable variations in the world’s cloudiness to laboratory experiments in Copenhagen showing how cosmic rays help generate atmospheric aerosols. This is important, because it confirms the existence of a sun-earth atmospheric modulation mechanism for clouds and aerosols. It is seen in an event called a Forbush Decrease, which A Forbush decrease is a rapid decrease in the observed galactic cosmic ray [activity due to a] coronal mass ejection (CME). It occurs due to the magnetic field of the plasma solar wind sweeping some of the galactic cosmic rays away from Earth." Comment: Svensmark's cosmoclimatology (cosmic ray cloud formation and climate modulation hypothesis) is now seriously challenging the status quo. I note that in the comments here, details have been posted that cosmic rays arriving on Earth are at "historic highs" ( Michael Ronayne (03:25:41) : see and data here. Since the Sun has reverted back to being very quiet, there is nothing to 'bat away' cosmic rays and hence we can expect more obvious examples of DNA mutation. 'Consensus' Takes Another Hit! More than 60 German Scientists Dissent Over Global Warming Claims! Call Climate Fears 'Pseudo 'Religion'; Urge Chancellor to 'reconsider' views 'Growing body of evidence shows anthropogenic CO2 plays no measurable role' Climate Depot, 4th August 2009
"More than 60 prominent German scientists have publicly declared their dissent from man-made global warming fears in an Open Letter to German Chancellor Angela Merkel. The more than 60 signers of the letter include several United Nations IPCC scientists. The scientists declared that global warming has become a “pseudo religion” and they noted that rising CO2 has “had no measurable effect” on temperatures. The German scientists, also wrote that the “UN IPCC has lost its scientific credibility.”
Comment: I would say the letter (copy included) to German Chancellor Angela Merkel is rather straight and to the point and constitutes a good poke in the eye! Climate Revolt: Major Science Group 'Startled' By Outpouring of Scientists Rejecting Man-Made Climate Fears! Climate Depot, 29th July 2009
"An outpouring of skeptical scientists who are members of the American Chemical Society (ACS) are revolting against the group's editor-in-chief -- with some demanding he be removed -- after an editorial appeared claiming “the science of anthropogenic climate change is becoming increasingly well established.”
[...]
Dozens of letters were published on July 27, 2009 castigating Baum, with some scientists calling for his replacement as editor-in-chief. The editorial was met with a swift, passionate and scientific rebuke from Baum's colleagues. Virtually all of the letters published on July 27 in castigated Baum's climate science views. Scientists rebuked Baum's use of the word “deniers” because of the terms “association with Holocaust deniers.” In addition, the scientists called Baum's editorial: “disgusting”; “a disgrace”; “filled with misinformation”; “unworthy of a scientific periodical” and “pap.” One outraged ACS member wrote to Baum: "When all is said and done, and you and your kind are proven wrong (again), you will have moved on to be an unthinking urn for another rat pleading catastrophe. You will be removed. I promise." Baum 'startled' by scientists reaction Baum wrote on July 27, that he was "startled" and "surprised" by the "contempt" and "vehemence" of the ACS scientists to his view of the global warming "consensus." "Some of the letters I received are not fit to print. Many of the letters we have printed are, I think it is fair to say, outraged by my position on global warming," Baum wrote." Comment: Oh dear! "... another rat pleading catastrophe..." This reaction by chemists is not surprising, these scientists deal in reality not speculation. Review of “Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years” Intellectual Conservative, 26th July 2009 
"S. Fred Singer, a climate physicist, and Dennis T. Avery, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, have written the definitive book about global warming. They carefully explain the complexities and facts so the average person can understand. It is true the earth goes through warming phases, but they are cyclical and not manmade. Climate change is not a dramatic event but something as regular and dull as grass growing.
A close look at the evidence reveals that climate change is probably due to variations in the sun's radiation – sunspots. Global warmings and coolings have occurred regularly about every 1,500 years. The earth's temperature increased in the early 20th century, before most man-made emissions began, but stopped increasing in the latter half of the century when man-made emissions were highest." Comment: I am not sure it's fair to describe this as 'the definitive book', but this review is very much written from the point of view of a skeptic. There are some useful nuggets of information to explain how the global warming alarmism has gathered momentum. Is the Climate Science Debate Over? No, It's Just Getting Very, Very Interesting MasterResource, 24th July 2009
"How many times have you been told that the debate on the science of climate change is "over"? Probably almost as many times as Al Gore has traveled in private jets and limousines to urge audiences to repent of their fuelish ways.
[...]
The world has warmed overall during the past 130 years, as evidenced by melting glaciers, longer growing seasons, and both proxy and instrumental data. However, the main era of "anthropogenic" global warming supposedly began in the mid-1970s, and ongoing research by retired meteorologist Anthony Watts leaves no doubt that in recent decades, the U.S. surface temperature record - reputed to be the best in the world - is unreliable and riddled with false warming biases. Watts and a team of more than 650 volunteers have visually inspected and photographically documented 1003, or 82%, of the 1,221 climate monitoring stations overseen by the U.S. Weather Service. In a report summarizing an earlier phase of the team's investigation (a survey of 860+ stations), Watts says, "We were shocked by what we found." He continues: We found stations located next to exhaust fans of air conditioning units, surrounded by asphalt parking lots and roads, on blistering-hot rooftops, and near sidewalks and buildings that absorb and radiate heat. We found 68 stations located at wastewater treatment plants, where the process of waste digestion causes temperatures to be higher than in surrounding areas. In fact, we found that 89 percent of the stations - nearly 9 of every 10 - fail to meet the National Weather Services's own siting requirements that stations must be 30 meters (about 100 feet) or more away from an artificial heating or radiating/reflecting heat source. In other words, 9 or every 10 stations are likely reporting higher or rising temperatures because they are badly sited. "It gets worse," Watts continues:" Comment: I did not realise that Anthony Watts was retired, but he is one of many that have the time to fight the good fight. In fact, I have started to really love the old people.... New Scientist: science is now inadequate Reference Frame, 22nd July 2009 
"Olda K. has pointed out the following article in Nude Socialist to me,
George Marshall: "Why people don't act on climate change. The author, a boss of a climate pressure group "COIN" in Oxford, is conducting an "informal research project". [...] Instead of investigating whether his beliefs are actually correct or wrong, he wants to bring artists and writers to science because science has failed, he thinks. "Collective imagination" should replace it because: It is clear that the cautious language of science is now inadequate to inspire concerted change, even among scientists. We need a fundamentally different approach. Only then will scientists be in a position to throw down the ultimate challenge to the public: "We've done the work, we believe the results, now when the hell will you wake up?" Well, religious bigots have always needed a fundamentally different approach than science to achieve their goals, and Mr Marshall is surely not the first example in the human history. In fact, science is literally threatening to the core values that people like Mr Marshall worship, such as blind beliefs, unlimited fear, irrationality, and brainwashing of whole nations. Science has always been their enemy, whether they were potent in inspiring a new large religious awakening or as impotent as Mr Marshall." Comment: The desperate Green and the decisive Yellow put down.... if you are aware of Spiral Dynamics, this is a gem.... The reference to Nude Socialist is also very naughty, here is the original article at New Scientist: Comment: Why people don't act on climate change Climate Money: The Climate Industry: $79 billion so far - Trillions to come JoNova, 22nd July 2009 
"For the first time, the numbers from government documents have been compiled in one place. It’s time to start talking of “Monopolistic Science”. It’s time to expose the lie that those who claim “to save the planet” are the underdogs. And it’s time to get serious about auditing science, especially when it comes to pronouncements that are used to justify giant government programs and massive movements of money. Who audits the IPCC?The Summary * The US government has provided over $79 billion since 1989 on policies related to climate change, including science and technology research, foreign aid, and tax breaks. * Despite the billions: “audits” of the science are left to unpaid volunteers. A dedicated but largely uncoordinated grassroots movement of scientists has sprung up around the globe to test the integrity of the theory and compete with a well funded highly organized climate monopoly. They have exposed major errors. Comment: Big Business... Solar Cycle Linked to Global Climate Drives events similar to El Niño, La Niña National Science Foundation, 16th July 2009 
"Establishing a key link between the solar cycle and global climate, research led by scientists at the National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colo., shows that maximum solar activity and its aftermath have impacts on Earth that resemble La Niña and El Niño events in the tropical Pacific Ocean. The research may pave the way toward predictions of temperature and precipitation patterns at certain times during the approximately 11-year solar cycle.
"These results are striking in that they point to a scientifically feasible series of events that link the 11-year solar cycle with ENSO, the tropical Pacific phenomenon that so strongly influences climate variability around the world," says Jay Fein, program director in NSF's Division of Atmospheric Sciences. "The next step is to confirm or dispute these intriguing model results with observational data analyses and targeted new observations."" Comment: At the moment, like so many aspects of our weather and climate, scientists have not until now understand what drives El Niño and La Niña El, but research that points to solar variability has been just too obvious for most scientists to contemplate. El Niño reports have been coming for a while, see El Nino Now Official - Possible Implications. Global warming: Our best guess is likely wrong E! Science News, 14th July 2009 
"No one knows exactly how much Earth's climate will warm due to carbon emissions, but a new study this week suggests scientists' best predictions about global warming might be incorrect. The study, which appears in Nature Geoscience, found that climate models explain only about half of the heating that occurred during a well-documented period of rapid global warming in Earth's ancient past.
The study, which was published online today, contains an analysis of published records from a period of rapid climatic warming about 55 million years ago known as the Palaeocene-Eocene thermal maximum, or PETM. "In a nutshell, theoretical models cannot explain what we observe in the geological record," said oceanographer Gerald Dickens, a co-author of the study and professor of Earth science at Rice University. "There appears to be something fundamentally wrong with the way temperature and carbon are linked in climate models." [...]" The conclusion, Dickens said, is that something other than carbon dioxide caused much of the heating during the PETM. "Some feedback loop or other processes that aren't accounted for in these models -- the same ones used by the IPCC for current best estimates of 21st Century warming -- caused a substantial portion of the warming that occurred during the PETM." Comment: See Watts Up With That: #147;There appears to be something fundamentally wrong with the way temperature and carbon are linked in climate models.” Climate change: The sun and the oceans do not lie Even a compromised agreement to reduce emissions could devastate the economy - and all for a theory shot full of holes, says Christopher Booker. The Telegraph, 11th July 2009 
"The moves now being made by the world's political establishment to lock us into December's Copenhagen treaty to halt global warming are as alarming as anything that has happened in our lifetimes. Last week in Italy, the various branches of our emerging world government, G8 and G20, agreed in principle that the world must by 2050 cut its CO2 emissions in half.
Britain and the US are already committed to cutting their use of fossil fuels by more than 80 per cent. Short of an unimaginable technological revolution, this could only be achieved by closing down virtually all our economic activity: no electricity, no transport, no industry. All this is being egged on by a gigantic publicity machine, by the UN, by serried ranks of government-funded scientists, by cheerleaders such as Al Gore, last week comparing the fight against global warming to that against Hitler's Nazis, and by politicians who have no idea what they are setting in train. What makes this even odder is that the runaway warming predicted by their computer models simply isn't happening. " Comment: I wondering when intelligent influential people will start to realise that the Earth is losing it's protection against space weather and this is the real reason that Al Gore and select friends are in a state of panic as they try to herd the crowd into agreeing to serious climate change prevention. The science cannot support the notion that CO2 is causing "global warming" and anybody with any intelligence can check the data and see for themselves that world temperatures are going down instead of up! The desperation is obvious when geoengineering ideas like placing mirrors in space are being seriously suggested. For those who are monitoring the situation, it would seem like human intervention is doomed to failure and the idea of a global shield is a non-starter as the first major hurdle is getting past all the debris in low Earth orbit on a regular basis, a problem that is definitely man-made. Cosmic Ray Decreases Affect Atmospheric Aerosols and Clouds Climate Research News, 2nd July 2009 
"Henrik Svensmark et al have a new GRL paper in press entitled: 'Cosmic ray decreases affect atmospheric aerosols and clouds' The Abstract states:
Close passages of coronal mass ejections from the sun are signaled at the Earth's surface by Forbush decreases in cosmic ray counts. We find that low clouds contain less liquid water following Forbush decreases (FDs), and for the most influential events the liquid water in the oceanic atmosphere can diminish by as much as 7%. [...] The paper concludes: Our results show global-scale evidence of conspicuous influences of solar variability on cloudiness and aerosols. Irrespective of the detailed mechanism, the loss of ions from the air during FDs reduces the cloud liquid water content over the oceans. So marked is the response to relatively small variations in the total ionization, we suspect that a large fraction of Earth's clouds could be controlled by ionization. Future work should estimate how large a volume of the Earth's atmosphere is involved in the ion process that leads to the changes seen in CCN and its importance for the Earth's radiation budget. From solar activity to cosmic ray ionization to aerosols and liquid-water clouds, a causal chain appears to operate on a global scale." Comment: The Danish should be very proud of Henrik Svensmark for the paradigm shift in scientific understanding that is now occuring as we learn that Earth's climate can be effected by outside electromagnetic influences. Incidentally, at the weekend I actually saw a few thin parrallel streaks of clouds almost like vapour trails that seem to come out of the clouds at an angle, but they did not quite reach the ground. I was on my way home with shopping and within half an hour it clouded over and rained or elsewhere I would have tried to see how widespread this event was. I have never seen anything like it because it was so distinct, and particularly interesting because at that time, I was not aware of any solar activity. Cosmic rays only take just over 8 minutes to travel at the speed of light to arrive on Earth from the Sun, and the particles generated must have been extremely energetic (according to Svensmark these would have been muons or heavy electrons to penetrate to ground level) and cause cloud condensation nuclei in such a manner. At the time, I was wondering what exactly was going on, but of course I saw the news that the Sun had "suddenly" woken up and was putting on a show for the 4th July. Incredible..... Message in the CLOUD for Warmists: The end is near? Watts Up With That, 1st July 2009 
"You’ve probably all heard of Svensmark and the Galactic Cosmic Ray (GCR) to cloud cover modulation theory by now. Lot’s of warmists say it is “discredited”. However, CERN in Switzerland isn’t following that thinking, and after getting some encouraging results in the CLOUD06 experiment, they have funded a much larger and more comprehensive CLOUD09 experiment. I figure if it is “discredited”, a bunch of smart guys and gals like CERN wouldn’t be ramping up the investigation.
There’s also word now of a new correlation: I get so many tips now it is hard to choose, but this one is a gem. If you look at nothing else this month, please take the time to download the slide show from CERN’s Jasper Kirkby at the end of this article." Comment: Despite, the evidence that the science related to the myth of global warming has become a political tool, I still believe there are some old-fashion scientists out there who are still only interested in REAL SCIENCE. It seems that the scientists at CERN are of this calibre and are keen to do the necessary scientific research and analysis. To echo the remarks here, the Galactic Cosmic Ray (GCR) to cloud cover modulation theory certainly seems far from “discredited”. Senator Inhofe Calls for Inquiry Into 'Suppressed' Climate Change Report Fox News, 29th June 2009 
"A top Republican senator has ordered an investigation into the Environmental Protection Agency's alleged suppression of a report that questioned the science behind global warming.
The 98-page report, co-authored by EPA analyst Alan Carlin, pushed back on the prospect of regulating gases like carbon dioxide as a way to reduce global warming. Carlin's report argued that the information the EPA was using was out of date, and that even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have increased, global temperatures have declined. "He came out with the truth. They don't want the truth at the EPA," Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., a global warming skeptic, told FOX News, saying he's ordered an investigation. "We're going to expose it." The controversy comes after the House of Representatives passed a landmark bill to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, one that Inhofe said will be "dead on arrival" in the Senate despite President Obama's energy adviser voicing confidence in the measure. According to internal e-mails that have been made public by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Carlin's boss told him in March that his material would not be incorporated into a broader EPA finding and ordered Carlin to stop working on the climate change issue. The draft EPA finding released in April lists six greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, that the EPA says threaten public health and welfare." Comment: Oh dear! The Climate Change Climate Change The number of skeptics is swelling everywhere. Wall Street Journal, 29th June 2009
"Steve Fielding recently asked the Obama administration to reassure him on the science of man-made global warming. When the administration proved unhelpful, Mr. Fielding decided to vote against climate-change legislation.
If you haven't heard of this politician, it's because he's a member of the Australian Senate. As the U.S. House of Representatives prepares to pass a climate-change bill, the Australian Parliament is preparing to kill its own country's carbon-emissions scheme. Why? A growing number of Australian politicians, scientists and citizens once again doubt the science of human-caused global warming." Comment: Some detailed reports of world-wide scepticism.... it will be interesting to see what happens when these people find out about Space Weather. See also Could Australia Blow Apart the Great Global Warming Scare? Note the following excerpt: "Much of what we have read about climate change, [Plimer] argues, is rubbish, especially the computer modeling on which much current scientific opinion is based, which he describes as "primitive."… Debate heats up over long-term climate forecasts New Scientist News 26th June 2009
"The UK Met Office has produced detailed forecasts of the climate many years from now, but climate scientists have criticised such predictions as worthless or worse."By focusing on that sort of detail you detract from the solid science of climate change," says Leonard Smith, a mathematician at the University of Oxford.
"At the local scale we can be almost certain that there will be big surprises, way outside what they say we should expect."" Comment: Obviously, we can point to the fact that weather forecasting is still only a guesstimate based on known factors, with unknown factors the cause of why predictions can be so poor. This has to be highlighted as it is acknowledged by NASA that there is a link between Space Weather and our terrestrial weather systems. Therefore, when the UK Met Office are derided for their poor predictions for the recent winters and summers, it is no wonder that their long range forecasts based on flawed computer models is seriously questioned. Twisted Science, Crooked Policy SPPI, 25th June 2009 
"...The White House Document Entitled: Global Climate Change Impacts In The United States Like other politicized scientific establishments throughout the world in the frenetic push to flog the dead horse of “global warming” in the months preceding the Great Abdication at Copenhagen, the scientific-technological elite of the US, no longer
watched over by a President as perceptive and alert as Eisenhower, have almost – but not quite – been able to keep a straight face.
We shall not bother much with the text because it is a mere recitative – a regurgitation of the fanciful documents of the UN’s climate panel, of the US Climate Change Science Program, of the National Research Council et hoc genus omne. You have heard it all before, and we have answered it all before. The Context: A Tissue of Lies The “executive” summary – or, in plain English, the summary – sets the scene with a series of equivocations and downright falsehoods." Comment: Once again, Lord Christopher Monckton writes another paper to dismiss the rampant storytelling that the world is facing catastrophic global warming induced by just one component CO2. It is now widely understood, that most of the schemes that have been devised to tackle global warming, will benefit financially the "in-crowd", but are in effect worthless as we don't fully understand the many environmental factors that govern how the Earth functions. Thus, we are faced with the general public being driven by fear into accepting large tax increases by the legislation of all sorts of bizzare schemes following the old pattern of financial speculation that we see over and over in history. However, there is very little doubt that our planet is experiencing a massive increase of evolutionary energies being driven by celestial forces and resulting in evolutionary change. Now that GPS is on it's way out and we are seeing more and "strange" clouds that are a result of scientifically poorly understood factors, it seems that the analogy of the pot boiling is fair. See Hathor message April 2009; Chaotic Nodes: A Hathor Planetary Message through Tom Kenyon CARBONGATE – Global Warming Study Censored by EPA Watts Up With That?, 25th June 2009
"Washington, D.C., June 26, 2009–The Competitive Enterprise Institute is today making public an internal study on climate science which was suppressed by the Environmental Protection Agency. Internal EPA email messages, released by CEI earlier in the week, indicate that the report was kept under wraps and its author silenced because of pressure to support the Administration’s agenda of regulating carbon dioxide.
The report finds that EPA, by adopting the United Nations’ 2007 “Fourth Assessment” report, is relying on outdated research and is ignoring major new developments. Those developments include a continued decline in global temperatures, a new consensus that future hurricanes will not be more frequent or intense, and new findings that water vapor will moderate, rather than exacerbate, temperature." Comment: Hmmm.... Despite the opinion by some that the Global Warming alarmism is an excuse to raise taxes, our planet is seriously under threat from Space Weather, ordinary folk are not supposed to understand or be interested in the technicalities. However, many scientists do realise that something is amiss and some have become highly vocal in their efforts to scare people into accepting 'wild' and risky geoengineering projects. Others are just refusing to accept that they are part of any scientific concensus and are being highly vocal about what is going on. Meanwhile, the energetic transformation of Earth continues, the pot starts to boil and we await some kind of phase transition that will be happening soon.... Scientist: Obama's climate report 'would make Pravda editors blush with envy on how they can misconstrue and mis-report truths for a propaganda angle' Climate Depot, 21st June 2009 
"The following is a guest post by Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Chris Walcek, a professor at the University at Albany in NY and a Senior Research Associate at the Atmospheric Sciences Research Center who studies the relationship of pollutants within the atmosphere."
Comment: The headline caught my attention and it seems that this Obama report has really upset some scientists. As I have stated before, it is certainly not wise to trample over the intellectuals in a society because they could become a serious force for any government to reckon with. See Big taxes need big lies Just where are those grid killing tornadoes anyway? Watts Up With That?, 17th June 2009
"I know that skepticism is a lost art in journalism, so I will forgive Mr. Drum. But in running a business, people put all kinds of BS analyses in front of me trying to get me to spend my money one way or another. And so for those of us for whom data analysis actually has financial consequences, it is a useful skill to be able to recognize a steaming pile of BS when one sees it.
First, does anyone here really think that we have seen a 20-fold increase in electrical grid outages over the last 15 years but no one noticed? Really?" Comment: GCCI #4: I Am Calling Bullsh*t on this Chart LOL! Update: Of course this was the response, "One private citizen and a phone call undid the entire premise of this graph portrayed by the National Climatic Data Center. We need more people like Warren willing to ask questions." Geologist rips Obama's 'new scare report': 'I become more skeptical every year. I am now beginning to conclude that global warming simply does not exist' Climate Depot, 17th June 2009
"Below is a guest post by Geophysicist Dr. David Deming, associate professor of arts and sciences at the University of Oklahoma, who has published numerous peer-reviewed research articles. (For more reactions see Climate Depot exclusive: 'Scaremongering': Scientists Pan Obama Climate Report: 'This is not a work of science but an embarrassing episode for the authors and NOAA'...'Misrepresents the science' - June 16, 2009 )
1. The new scare report issued by the Obama administration refers (reference list) to the work of Stephen H. Schneider six times. You will recall that Schneider is infamous for telling Discover magazine (October, 1989, p. 45-48) that "we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have...each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest." Comment: The faithful are losing the faith! Fielding slammed over solar flare theory Sydney Morning Herald, 8th June 2009 
"Scientists have slammed Family First's Steve Fielding after he returned from the US suggesting solar flares rather than human activity are responsible for climate change.
Senator Fielding said he wanted to debate the cause of global warming with government scientists before he votes on Labor's climate change legislation. He recently returned from a trip to the United States where he met climate change sceptics who blame global warming on solar flares, not human activity or carbon emissions. It is a theory he believes has some credibility. Comment: Andrew Bolt, a seasoned climate 'realist' and journalist at the Herald Sun, has seized the opportunity and wrote on his blog: The questions Fielding wants Wong to answer Obviously, Fielding was de-programmed and 're-orientated'..... Well, I was quite pleasantly surprised to read that a politician has in effect undermined the argument of a 'Chief Scientist' who does not seem to totally understand the science, but is playing the alarmist card, that is quite a turnabout! LOL! 'Worse Than Fiction' Walls Street Journal, 6th June 2009 
"Global warming alarmists are fond of invoking the authority of experts against the skepticism of supposedly amateur detractors -- a.k.a. "deniers." So when one of those experts says that a recent report on the effects of climate change is "worse than fiction, it is a lie," the alarmists should, well, be alarmed.
The latest contretemps pits former U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, now president of the Geneva-based Global Humanitarian Forum, against Roger Pielke, Jr., an expert in disaster trends at the University of Colorado. Mr. Annan's outfit issued a lengthy report late last month warning that climate change-induced disasters, such as droughts and floods, kill 315,000 each year and cost $125 billion, numbers it says will rise to 500,000 dead and $340 billion by 2030. Adding to the gloom, Mr. Annan predicts "mass starvation, mass migration, and mass sickness" unless countries agree to "the most ambitious international agreement ever negotiated" at a meeting this year in Copenhagen. [...] Enter Mr. Pielke, who, we hasten to add, does not speak for us (nor we for him). But given the headlines the Annan report has garnered, his views deserve amplification. Writing in the Prometheus science policy blog, Mr. Pielke calls the report a "methodological embarrassment" and a "poster child for how to lie with statistics" that "does a disservice" to those who take climate change issues seriously." Comment: Quite frankly, I have largely ignored the latest global warming 'storm in a teacup' since last the couple of weeks, I have been in shock that my predictions are coming true, much faster than I had anticipated. If you want to catch up, articles written by Roger Pielke Sr. can be found at Climate Science. Climate Change Reconsidered Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), June 2009 
"As Congress debates global warming legislation that would raise energy costs to consumers by hundreds of billions of dollars, the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) has released an 880-page book challenging the scientific basis of concerns that global warming is either man-made or would have harmful effects.
In “Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC),” coauthors Dr. S. Fred Singer and Dr. Craig Idso and 35 contributors and reviewers present an authoritative and detailed rebuttal of the findings of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), on which the Obama Administration and Democrats in Congress rely for their regulatory proposals. Comment: Free download! Background info on NIPCC conference, A response to the IPCC. Skeptical French Scientist Rebukes Climate Critics: 'We are not in the Soviet Union, we can contest a scientific thesis' Climate Depot, 28th May 2009 
"Washington, DC: Controversy continues to swirl around French President Nicolas Sarkozy's possible appointment of renowned geophysicist and former socialist party leader Dr. Claude Allegre – France's most outspoken global warming skeptic -- as the new super-ministry of industry and innovation.
Just one day after news reports revealed Sarkozy is close to appointing Allegre to a high government post, Allegre has fired back at critics upset that he has embraced a skeptical view of man-made global warming fears. "We are not in the Soviet Union, we can contest a scientific thesis," Allegre retorted, according to a May 28, 2009 article in Nature's blog. (See: Claude Allegre back in French government? - May 28, 2009) Comment: Hmmm... see previous Vaclav Klaus entries. INTERVIEW - Hurricane Intensity Forecasting Still A Puzzle Planet Ark, 13th May 2009 
"FORT LAUDERDALE - People living in hurricane danger zones could have a long wait -- as much as 10 years -- for improved forecasts of rapid intensity changes in a hurricane, the top US hurricane forecaster said on Tuesday. In the past 15 years, forecasters have cut their errors in predicting the track of a hurricane by half. But there's been almost no improvement in their ability to foresee a storm quickly revving up from a mild Category 1 to a destructive Category 5, National Hurricane Centre director Bill Read said. US researchers are making a major effort to figure out the complex interactions inside a hurricane that might lead to explosive growth.
"Unless there's some Einstein out there that knows something none of us do, the prevailing thought among the researchers is that a good 24-hour forecast of intensity change is a goal, a stretch goal, that might be attainable (in 10 years)," Read told Reuters." Comment: I wasn't going to add this article until I read that 140,000 people had died in Mayanmar last year when Cyclone Nargis went from a Category 1 to Category 4 in the 24 hours before it hit land. Please note the comments about a genius knowing something that they don't know. The top scientists in the world have made the link between Space Weather and the world's weather which has always been the case as the world is electrically linked to the rest of the solar system and beyond. Maybe all that is required is intelligent people who can think outside the box and a scientific world that does not think maintaining the same old worn out theories can possible encourage progress. Our scientists don't understand tornadoes either, which clearly demonstrate electromagnetic and hyperdimensional behaviour, see World's Largest Tornado Experiment Heads For Great Plains. Attempt To Discredit Cosmic Ray-Climate Link Using Computer Model The Resilient Earth, 10th May 2009 
"Two computer modelers from CMU have written a program to simulate the interaction of cosmic rays with Earth's atmosphere. Because the model failed to predict significant increases in cloud cover, global warming activists are claiming the theory linking cosmic rays to climate change has been discredited. Climate models have failed to accurately predict the current downward trend in temperatures and now we are asked to accept a model as proof of how the Universe works. [...]
This is not real science, it is a parlor trick, a conjuring act using computer software to summon up meaningless data that are then spun into “facts” used to dismiss out of hand an inconvenient competing theory. A more truthful title to the report would have been “Computer Model Fails To Establish Cosmic Ray – Climate Link.” This model proves nothing about the real world. It is one thing to construct a model as a way to gain insight to a larger investigation, I do not fault Pierce and Adams for that. I do hold them and the journals who have reported their results as scientifically significant in contempt as climate change spin doctors, on the same level as Gore and Hansen. As Wolfgang Pauli famously said of a paper submitted by a colleague, #147;This isn't right. This isn't even wrong.” To that I will add this is not science and it sure as hell isn't proof. Comment: A nice short summary of the Cosmic Ray–Climate Link theory first proposed by physicists Henrik Svensmark and Eigil Friis-Christensen of the Technical University of Denmark in Copenhagen and a few shots taken at the science community for prefering computer models to proper science. Here we have a scientist who still values old fashioned science where people get their hands dirty and actually create experiments and/or instruments to take REAL measurements and test theories with REAL observations not just make up computer programs, made-up with approximate and guesswork parameters. Climate change: The elements conspire against the warmists The Telegraph, 9th May 2009
An international team of scientists has used the latest electro-magnetic induction equipment to discover that the Arctic ice is in fact "twice as thick" as they had expected, says Christopher Booker.
"As the clock ticks down towards December's historic UN Copenhagen conference on climate change, the frenzied efforts of the warmists to panic us over all that vanishing Arctic and Antarctic ice are degenerating into farce. " Comment: A nice short summary of recent events with Christopher Booker as witty as ever. See also, Catlin Arctic Ice Survey Packing It Up – What Have They Accomplished? Science a slave to expediency The Australian, 7th May 2009 
"THE notion that human activity has an alarming influence on climate is based on Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports and spurious claims about a scientific consensus. Independent scientists who question these claims are accused of being in the pay of the energy industry and of believing that the notion of man-made climate change is a conspiracy.
To the best of my knowledge, no climate conspiracy has ever existed. But another force has driven science into its present parlous state where the output of computer software is held in higher regard than observational data, where marketing spin is more important than fact and evidence, and where a trenchant defence of the notion of man-made global warming is seen as paramount." Comment: It is very easy to understand 'the other force' if we see this in terms of a spiritual battle. There are forces on this planet that aim to keep the vibration as low as possible but they are having a hard time as 'higher' or 'christ' energies are now pouring onto the planet and as humans respond, consciousness flowers. UN IPCC Scientist: 'No convincing scientific arguments to support claim that increases in greenhouse gases are harmful to the climate' Climate Depot, 5th May 2009
"IPCC reviewer and climate researcher and chemist Dr. Vincent Gray of New Zealand is an expert reviewer on every single draft of the IPCC reports going back to 1990 and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of "Climate Change 2001.
Dr. Gray's research is featured on page 155 of the 2009 edition of the 255-page "U.S. Senate Minority Report Update: More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims". Below are selected excerpts of his testimony before New Zealand's Committee for the Emissions Trading Scheme Review May 5, 2009: [...] I have reluctantly concluded, after detailed study of the evidence presented by the IPCC, that there are no convincing scientific arguments to support the claim that increases in greenhouse gases are harmful to the climate. [...] Not only has no computer climate model ever been subjected to this process, no IPCC Report has even discussed how it might be done. As a result, computer models cannot make "predictions", they only provide "projections" which are based on the value of the assumptions made in their preparation. Also there is no evidence as to how accurate they might be. This is one reason why the IPCC never gives opinions on the relative importance of the many models. There is no probability range for the models, and there is no "central" model. They do, however, seem prepared to provide "best estimates" and "likely ranges", which are no more than guesswork. One early example of such a "best estimate" was decided by "a show of hands" by model providers. Comment: See also: Top British boffin: Time to ditch the climate consensus This is how consciousness is being raised on the planet. 'True' scientists are considering the facts and then telling the truth regardless of whether it is in the best interests of their careers. I am truly proud of those who are prepared to steer away from popular concensus in the fight for truth and enlightenment. Earth Institute Meeting Turns Into Complaint Session About “Deniers” The Resilient Earth, 26th April 2009 
"The New York Times recently did a complimentary article on physicist Freeman Dyson, who has questioned the dangers of global warming and the accuracy of its proponents predictions. [...]
An audience member at the Columbia forum said of Dyson, #147;This is another in a long line of scientists who knows just enough to be dangerous.” A math prodigy, called “infinitely smart” by one colleague, Dyson was made a professor at Cornell University despite his lack of a Ph.D. He subsequently worked on nuclear reactors, solid state physics, ferromagnetism, astrophysics and biology. According to the Times article, Dyson’s gifts include interpretive clarity, a penetrating ability to grasp the method and significance of what many kinds of scientists do: “His thoughts about how science works appear in a series of lucid, elegant books for nonspecialists that have made him a trusted arbiter of ideas ranging far beyond physics.” And just what are the audience member's qualifications? [...] Oddly, psychological engineering seems to be an exception to this abhorrence. As I reported in my previous blog post, a move is afoot to bring behaviorists and other social scientists into the fray. Having failed to convince the world on the merits of their scientific evidence, global warming activists are shifting to an Orwellian propagandist phase. Mass social engineering, as a conference attendee stated, may be the only way to get everyone to act on the crisis. Facts are out, spin is in." Comment: Quite frankly, the whole article is quite interesting, especially the mention of psychological engineering and social engineering. So we may ask, is this another term for brain-washing by any chance? It just seems that the desperation gets more and more acute as global temperatures FALL and levels of cosmic radiation due to Space Weather INCREASES. By the way, I could not help highlighting the comment about qualifications after my own battles with the "infinitely stupid". Monckton not allowed to debate with Gore Watts Up with That, 23rd April 2009 
"UK's Lord Christopher Monckton, a former science advisor to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, claimed House Democrats have refused to allow him to appear alongside former Vice President Al Gore at high profile global warming hearing on Friday April 24, 2009 at 10am in Washington. Monckton told Climate Depot that the Democrats rescinded his scheduled joint appearance at the House Energy and Commerce hearing on Friday. Monckton said he was informed that he would not be allowed to testify alongside Gore when his plane landed from England Thursday afternoon.
“The House Democrats don’t want Gore humiliated, so they slammed the door of the Capitol in my face,” Monckton told Climate Depot in an exclusive interview. “They are cowards.”" Comment: I am not surprised, Lord Monckton knows THE FACTS.... Update It seems that somone else had the pleasure of providing The FACTS, see Global Warming - Neocon Newt Gingrich Rips Gore’s ‘Facts’ To Pieces . Passion for global warming cools in the face of evidence The Australian, 15th April 2009 
Former believer Paul Sheehan, in The Sydney Morning Herald yesterday, develops a new respect for informed dissent. What I am about to write questions much of what I have written in this space, in numerous columns, over the past five years.
The subject of this column is a book entitled Heaven and Earth, written by one of Australia's foremost earth scientists, Ian Plimer. Much of what we have read about climate change, he argues, is rubbish, especially the computer modelling on which much current scientific opinion is based, which he describes as "primitive". Comment: Interesting, now mainstream newspaper columnists are featuring books by former global warming believers, I would suggest this is a sign that many are reconsidering THE FACTS as opposed to the hype... Climate change 'own goal': Laws to combat acid rain are DRIVING Arctic warming, claims Nasa Daily Mail, 10th April 2009 
"The latest research from Nasa suggests laws created to preserve the environment are causing much of the damage. Legislation to improve air quality and cut acid rain has accounted for a shocking half of Arctic warming over the past three decades, the space agency reports. Climate scientist Drew Shindell of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York found that declines in solid 'aerosol' particles brought in under laws to improve air quality likely triggered 45 per cent of temperature rises.
Aerosols - including the man-made particles sulfates and soot - have a direct impact on climate change by reflecting and absorbing the sun's radiation, Nasa explains. But laws brought in by the U.S. and European countries over the past three decades have slashed emissions of sulfates, and with them atmospheric cooling. The revelation shakes the theory that greenhouse gases, in particular carbon dioxide, are the main problem in the fight to steady the planet's climate." Shindell said: 'There's a tendency to think of aerosols as small players, but they're not. Right now, in the mid-latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere and in the Arctic, the impact of aerosols is just as strong as that of greenhouse gases. 'We will have very little leverage over climate in the next couple of decades if we're just looking at carbon dioxide. 'If we want to stop the Arctic summer sea ice from melting completely over the next few decades, we're much better off looking at aerosols and ozone.' Comment: Talk about the tide turning.... In reality with the strange behaviour of the Sun and the possibility of severe global cooling, it seems efforts are being made by scientists eager to jump off the CO2 is causing global warming bandwagon. The other thought is that this is just another argument for more severe action in the form of geo-engineering. Obviously though, this has nothing to do with global warming and everything to do with protecting Earth from Space Weather. Obama Science Chief Exposes The Fallacy Of Global Warming AccuWeather Blog, 8th April 2009 
"It is almost inconceivable that something this shallow in thinking could come from someone trying to convince you that co2 is responsible for the ills of our world. First of all, over the past 30-40 years, we have cleaned the air so much of pollutants that there are very few smog days here in the US. Billions have been spent over decades cleaning So2 out of the air. Now we want to put it back into the air to facilitate global cooling? What does this mean. That if we had left it there in the first place, we wouldnt have the problem that we do. Now let me explain to you how stupid, and that is the only word for this, this reasoning is."
Comment: I imagine there will be a similar reaction by many who understand the fallacy of global warming. Yet, how many have worked out that the problem has nothing to do with global temperatures but lots to do with Space Weather changing our climate with a myriad of effects. Massive volcanic erruptions produce lots of SO2 and have been proven to reduced temperatures in the past. Climate models predict that the Earth will self-regulate and volcanic erruptions will cool Earth but the consequences of a blocked out Sun on food production could be dire for humanity. Has the climate recently shifted? World Climate Report, 8th April 2009
"Has the climate recently shifted?" is the title of a just-published paper in Geophysical Research Letters by researchers Kyle Swanson and Anastasios Tsonis from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Their examination of this topic was undoubtedly prompted by the recent behavior of global temperature which shows that the rate of warming has dramatically slowed during the past 7-12 years. [...]
...the authors think that they have identified another in a string of break points that signal a change in the general state of the earth's climate. Comment: Expert opinion here at World Climate Report, note the conclusion, "The most important lesson of all that should be drawn from the work of Swanson and Tsonis is that the modeling community still has some important work to do, not only for projecting the future, but also for properly replicating the past. And until they can do the latter, they have no business even attempting the former." Tipping Point In The Media Watts Up With That, 31st March 2009 
Over the last year or so I have been taking an informal survey of a key news metric - Google news searches for the term "global warming."
A year ago, the ratio of alarmist/skeptical articles was close to 100/1. About six months ago, the ratio was 90/10, Two months ago it was 80/20, and today it hit 50/50 for the first time - including the lead skeptical story "A Cooling Trend Toward Global Warming". One thing that has changed is the rise of blogs written by informed citizens, complemented by the demise of corporate newspapers which make money from keeping people continually alarmed about one thing or another. Comment: Quite remarkable really, the upward march of consciousness continues unabated! Rise of sea levels is 'the greatest lie ever told' The Telegraph, 28th March 2009 
"But if there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change. And the uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story. Despite fluctuations down as well as up, "the sea is not rising," he says.
"It hasn't risen in 50 years." If there is any rise this century it will "not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm". And quite apart from examining the hard evidence, he says, the elementary laws of physics (latent heat needed to melt ice) tell us that the apocalypse conjured up by Al Gore and Co could not possibly come about." Comment: Personally, after studying the history of Christianity, I just can't agree that the rise of sea levels is the greatest lie ever told and I actually think it would come way down on the list. Global Warming--a cesspool of misinformation says prominent Scientist New York Times, 26th March 2009
"For more than half a century the eminent physicist Freeman Dyson has quietly resided in Princeton, N.J., on the wooded former farmland that is home to his employer, the Institute for Advanced Study, this country's most rarefied community of scholars. Lately, however, since coming "out of the closet as far as global warming is concerned," as Dyson sometimes puts it, there has been noise all around him.
Chat rooms, Web threads, editors' letter boxes and Dyson's own e-mail queue resonate with a thermal current of invective in which Dyson has discovered himself variously described as "a pompous twit," "a blowhard," "a cesspool of misinformation," "an old coot riding into the sunset" and, perhaps inevitably, "a mad scientist." [...] It was four years ago that Dyson began publicly stating his doubts about climate change. Speaking at the Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future at Boston University, Dyson announced that "all the fuss about global warming is grossly exaggerated." Since then he has only heated up his misgivings, declaring in a 2007 interview with Salon.com that "the fact that the climate is getting warmer doesn't scare me at all" and writing in an essay for The New York Review of Books, the left-leaning publication that is to gravitas what the Beagle was to Darwin, that climate change has become an "obsession" - the primary article of faith for "a worldwide secular religion" known as environmentalism. Among those he considers true believers, Dyson has been particularly dismissive of Al Gore, whom Dyson calls climate change's "chief propagandist," and James Hansen, the head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York and an adviser to Gore's film, "An Inconvenient Truth." Dyson accuses them of relying too heavily on computer-generated climate models that foresee a Grand Guignol of imminent world devastation as icecaps melt, oceans rise and storms and plagues sweep the earth, and he blames the pair's "lousy science" for "distracting public attention" from "more serious and more immediate dangers to the planet." " Comment: Hear Hear! Well, now that there is near panic in other parts of the scientific community with extreme energies being produced in our atmosphere and claims that Space Weather is influencing our climate, we are losing the shielding around our planet and solar system and the miseducated are worried about CO2, the situation is unbelievable." Heartland Meeting of Climate "Realists" a Huge Success - Icecap, 11th March 2009 
"Over 800 scientists and economists from 24 countries were in attendance this week at the Second Annual ICCC in New York City organized by the Heartland and with 60 co-sponsoring organizations including Icecap.
They heard talks by 80 scientists from 14 countries. The presentations of the keynote speakers which included Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic and the European Union, Dr. Richard Lindzen, Astronaut Harrison Schmidt, former Hansen boss Dr. John Theon, Former Governor Dr. John Sununu, Dr. Arthur Robinson, Dr. Bob Carter, Lord Monckton, and Dr. Willie Soon will soon be all available on the Heartland ICCC 2009 web site. The others were all videotaped and will be made available over upcoming weeks. Sections from the talks will be combined into other videos that tell the real climate story and distributed to decision makers and schools and groups that care about the truth or wish to hear both sides of the story." Comment: It sounds like it was quite a jamboree... Japan's boffins: Global warming isn't man-made Climate science is 'ancient astrology' The Register, 25th February 2009
"Exclusive Japanese scientists have made a dramatic break with the UN and Western-backed hypothesis of climate change in a new report from its Energy Commission. Three of the five researchers disagree with the UN's IPCC view that recent warming is primarily the consequence of man-made industrial emissions of greenhouse gases.
Remarkably, the subtle and nuanced language typical in such reports has been set aside. One of the five contributors compares computer climate modelling to ancient astrology. Others castigate the paucity of the US ground temperature data set used to support the hypothesis, and declare that the unambiguous warming trend from the mid-part of the 20th Century has ceased. The report by Japan Society of Energy and Resources (JSER) is astonishing rebuke to international pressure, and a vote of confidence in Japan's native marine and astronomical research. Publicly-funded science in the West uniformly backs the hypothesis that industrial influence is primarily responsible for climate change, although fissures have appeared recently. Only one of the five top Japanese scientists commissioned here concurs with the man-made global warming hypothesis." Comment: It's a sign of the times when even the normally polite Japanese take the knife out to the IPCC!! Note the comment about the US ground temperature data set, they must have been following Anthony Watt's series, How not to measure temperature! LOL!! Forecasting Guru Announces: "no scientific basis for forecasting climate" Watts Up With That.com, 28th January 2009
"It has been an interesting couple of days. Today yet another scientist has come forward with a press release saying that not only did their audit of IPCC forecasting procedures and found that they "violated 72 scientific principles of forecasting", but that "The models were not intended as forecasting models and they have not been validated for that purpose." [...]
What these two authorities, Drs Theon and Armstrong, are independently and explicitly stating is that the computer models underpinning the work of many scientific institutions concerned with global warming, including Australia’s CSIRO, are fundamentally flawed. Comment: Well, this is getting really interesting, before we just had fisticuffs but this is starting to sound like a declaration of war! James Hansen's Former NASA Supervisor Declares Himself a Skeptic - Says Hansen 'Embarrassed NASA' & 'Was Never Muzzled' EPW, 27th January 2009
"Washington DC: NASA warming scientist James Hansen, one of former Vice-President Al Gore's closest allies in the promotion of man-made global warming fears, is being publicly rebuked by his former supervisor at NASA.
Retired senior NASA atmospheric scientist, Dr. John S. Theon, the former supervisor of James Hansen, NASA's vocal man-made global warming fear soothsayer, has now publicly declared himself a skeptic and declared that Hansen "embarrassed NASA" with his alarming climate claims and said Hansen was "was never muzzled." Theon joins the rapidly growing ranks of international scientists abandoning the promotion of man-made global warming fears." [...] Theon declared "climate models are useless." "My own belief concerning anthropogenic climate change is that the models do not realistically simulate the climate system because there are many very important sub-grid scale processes that the models either replicate poorly or completely omit," Theon explained. "Furthermore, some scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results. In doing so, they neither explain what they have modified in the observations, nor explain how they did it. They have resisted making their work transparent so that it can be replicated independently by other scientists. This is clearly contrary to how science should be done. Thus there is no rational justification for using climate model forecasts to determine public policy," he added. Comment: Note that this 'denier' is retired. Unfortunately, there is a clear pattern where many people only speak out against popular ideas when they have nothing to lose financially. Thus, I have the most respect for scientists who publish controversial papers or take a public stance on certain issues knowing full well that their livelihood is at stake. Whatever, this statement totally damning.... I will be interesting to see how other scientists react and whether the steady stream of scientists who have been running for the exit will now turn into a sudden flood.... Update Another NASA Defection to the Skeptics' Camp How the world was bullied into silence Canada Free Press, 19th January 2009
"One of the most disturbing aspects of the global warming scam is the number of prominent people and entire segments of society bullied into silence. Consider the case of Dr. Joanne Simpson described as follows. "the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology, and formerly of NASA, who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called "among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years." Then consider her statement. "Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical...
The main basis of the claim that man's release of greenhouse gases is the cause of the warming is based almost entirely upon climate models. We all know the frailty of models concerning the air-surface system." No, we don't all know the frailty of the models! Certainly most of the media and thereby the public and politicians don’t know, otherwise the latter would not be planning completely unnecessary, incredibly expensive and society altering policies. But the opening comment is actually frightening and speaks to why the scam has progressed so far. "Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receive any funding, I can speak quite frankly." [...] Why would a scientist in an organization directly involved in climate science not feel free to speak out? But they are not the only ones who have kept quiet. Entire segments of society have either remained silent or taken evasive action. Few had the courage to even ask for a full and open debate. Now everything is changing as the claims of warming are offset by the realities of cooling." Comment: Professor Tim Ball who wrote this article and who appeared in the documentary, 'The Great Global Warming Swindle' has stated that he received death threats due to his skepticism that anthropogenic (manmade) global warming was caused by an increase in CO2 that was being generated by humans. Now that NASA have informed the world that Space Weather is now a threat to our civilisation and there are a host of geoengineering plans that even include placing a giant mirror in space to reflect energy from the Sun. It is hoped that a few more intelligent folk will realise that the global warming alarmism is a cover to mask the symptoms of evolutionary change on our planet. Klaus: Climate issues are silly luxury good Reference Frame, 12th December 2008
"Czech President Vaclav Klaus hit out at the EU climate [20-20-2020-20-20] deal concluded Friday and described global climate issues as "a silly luxury."
"I do not like the way they forced it", Klaus said shortly after an agreement was announced in Brussels. He also claimed that his French counterpart Nicolas Sarkozy had "pushed" the deal so that it would not be left when the Czech Republic takes over the EU presidency from France on January 1. "This is scandalous," he said. "We should have been able to discuss it during our presidency, to force it now is not very good." "Environmental issues are a luxury good," Klaus added. "Now we have to tighten our belt and to cut the luxury." Comment: When I started to do some serious research for my book, I developed certain strategies for working out who was standing in their truth. I realised that scientists who stood up for what they believed, despite the risk to their reputation and loss of funding opportunities were more likely to have attained some ground breaking insights. The other group were scientists with 30, 40 or even 50 years experience in their fields and were on the verge of retiring. This is when some will publish their most controversial papers with their truth because they have secured their pensions and they no longer feel the need to tow the line. This is the point when I started to fall in love with the old people! Vaclav Klaus is another type who is strong and ferocious, and knows how to play the political game but at the same time is enlightened, I'm in love! UN Blowback: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims Inhofe EPW Press Blog, 10th December 2008
"The UN global warming conference currently underway in Poland is about to face a serious challenge from over 650 dissenting scientists from around the globe who are criticizing the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.
Set for release this week, a newly updated U.S. Senate Minority Report features the dissenting voices of over 650 international scientists, many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN. The report has added about 250 scientists (and growing) in 2008 to the over 400 scientists who spoke out in 2007. The over 650 dissenting scientists are more than 12 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers." [...] A hint of what the upcoming report contains: "I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion."- Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever. Comment: Due to the upward evolution of consciousness, the truth will prevail.... Update Link to Full Printable PDF Report Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is Not Pollution Popular Technology, 20th November 2008 
"Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is not pollution and Global Warming has nothing to do with pollution. The average person has been misled and is confused about what the current Global Warming debate is about, greenhouse gases. None of which has anything to do with air pollution. People are confusing Smog, Carbon Monoxide (CO) and the pollutants in car exhaust with the life supporting, essential trace gas in our atmosphere, Carbon Dioxide (CO2)."
Comment: This report aims to clear up many common misconceptions. HOW BARYCENTRIC ORBITS INFLUENCE CLIMATE NZ Climate Science Coalition, 18th November 2008 
The projections of the IPCC are simplistic, superficial, and now proven wrong. The whole issue requires a fresh start, based on the mass of irrefutable data which has been assembled. Certainly New Zealand should not incur any expenditure based on the fallacious IPCC Report. Indeed, New Zealand should take a lead internationally to publicise the barycentric science, demonstrating how it explains the recent finding of low sun-spot activity, the very cold winter in Europe, and thereby destroys the whole 'conventional wisdom' of so-called global warming. Here is a real opportunity for New Zealand to lead the world." Dr Jim Sprott, OBE, MSc, PhD, FNZIC, consulting chemist and forensic scientist, Auckland New Zealand.
The postulated connection between atmospheric temperature and atmospheric CO2 has broken down, and therefore the "greenhouse gas" proposition has failed. The disparity between the IPCC prediction and observed data continues to widen, and no amount of rhetoric can alter this. The tests on which IPCC relies now contradict its scenario, and therefore its proposition is discredited. It is usually believed that the planets orbit around the sun, but this is not so – the sun and the planets orbit around the centre of mass of the solar system (termed the barycentre) in so-called "barycentric orbits". Sometimes the barycentre is inside the sun, and at other times well away from the sun, depending on the juxtapositions of the planets especially Saturn, Jupiter and Neptune. The orbit path of the sun as the locations of barycentre and planets alter is complex, as demonstrated by Fairbridge. This divergent behavior causes widely varying outputs of energy from the sun on a regular basis, and these variations in the interactions between the sun and the planets have been assessed by various geological and related studies. The variations in energy correlate with uncanny precision with past vagaries of the Earth's climate on a cyclical basis, the periodicity being about 179 years. The correlations with recurring periods of very cold weather, as evidenced by historical data, can only be described as irrefutable. Comment: Another global warming sceptic with another line of argument related to the Earth's climate being regulated by the solar system. If you are new to this blog, the sceptism by many scientists from many different disciplines, is not about whether we are experiencing climate change, the scepticism is about whether we are experiencing "global warming" caused by man-made carbon emissions and the scientific arguments are now looking very tenuous. Greenhouse Misconceptions Junk Science, November 2008 
"As a retired chemist with experience in absorption and emission spectroscopy, I've noticed basic errors in arguments promoted by speculators of man-made climate change and propagated in the popular media.
Specifically, they've incorrectly compared absorption behavior of carbon dioxide gas to a functioning greenhouse, erroneously equated infrared (IR) radiation to greenhouse-energizing radiation from the sun, and distorted textbook science." Comment: Just for the record.... Water vapor confirmed as major player in climate change Physorg.com, 17th November 2008 
Water vapor is known to be Earth's most abundant greenhouse gas, but the extent of its contribution to global warming has been debated. Using recent NASA satellite data, researchers have estimated more precisely than ever the heat-trapping effect of water in the air, validating the role of the gas as a critical component of climate change. Andrew Dessler and colleagues from Texas A&M University in College Station confirmed that the heat-amplifying effect of water vapor is potent enough to double the climate warming caused by increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
"This study confirms that what was predicted by the models is really happening in the atmosphere," said Eric Fetzer, an atmospheric scientist who works with AIRS data at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. "Water vapor is the big player in the atmosphere as far as climate is concerned." Comment: What is of more interest, is how a positive feedback from water vapor causes the trivial amounts of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to be so catastrophic because there is no evidence cited here? The scientists are implying that any warming is largely unrelated to the amount of carbon, rather the determining factor is the amount of water vapour! What Are Climate Models? What Do They Do? Climate Science, 13th November 2008
"Climate models are comprised of fundamental concepts and parameterizations of physical, biological, and chemical components of the climate system, expressed as mathematical formulations, and then averaged over grid volumes. These formulations are then converted to a programming language so that they can be solved on a computer and integrated forward in discrete time steps over the chosen model domain. A global climate model needs to include component models to represent the oceans, atmosphere, land, and continental ice and the interfacial fluxes between each other."
Comment: In the art of persuasion, computer models are powerful tools, however they are only as good as the input, hence the maxim, "garbage in, garbage out". BBC SHUNNED ME FOR DENYING CLIMATE CHANGE Daily Express, 5th November 2008 
"FOR YEARS David Bellamy was one of the best known faces on TV. A respected botanist and the author of 35 books, he had presented around 400 programmes over the years and was appreciated by audiences for his boundless enthusiasm.
Yet for more than 10 years he has been out of the limelight, shunned by bosses at the BBC where he made his name, as well as fellow scientists and environmentalists. His crime? Bellamy says he doesn’t believe in man-made global warming." Comment: So the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has been censuring scientists who don't "toe the line". David Bellamy was loved by millions of viewers at the peak of his career so I suppose his opinions would have carried a lot of weight. The powers that be must really be in real distress now that so many scientists are prepared to fight the distortion of science and stand up for what they believe in, based on intellectual analysis of the facts. Licence to dissent Herald Sun Blog, 28th October 2008
"British journalism lecturer and warming alarmist Alex Lockwood says my blog [Andrew Bolt] is a menace to the planet. Sceptical bloggers like me need bringing into line, and Lockwood tells a journalism seminar of some options:"
Comment: So, it seems hardline global warming proponents think they have the right to present information, sometimes false and fraudulent, into the mainstream and nobody should debate or query the fundamentals that have lead to the various scientific claims. Maybe it could be suggested that we are seeing signs of desperation and that the so-called scientific concensus is falling apart. Let's think about this; how could a reasonably minded scientist insist on global warming when global temperatures are currently falling and none of the scientific models predicted that this would happen in the near term? Thus, one has to wonder why anyone would want dissent to be stiffled, and losing our hard earned media freedom. Despite claims that the global warming lobby are protecting the Earth, various scientific disciplines tell us that for billions of years, with the help of Universal forces, the Earth has been consistently balancing it's own ecosystems, Gaia does not need human intervention. Spain's ex-prime minister blasts 'new religion' of climate change Associated Press, 23rd October 2008 
"MADRID (AFP) – Former Spanish prime minister Jose Maria Aznar Wednesday dismissed climate change as a "new religion" that is drawing hundreds of billions of euros at a time of economic crisis. Aznar made the remarks at the presentation of a book by Czech President Vaclav Klaus, "Blue Planet in Green Shackles", in which he also questions the widely held theories about climate change.
"In these times of global cooling of the international economy ... the standard bearers of the climatic apocalypse demand hundreds of billions of euros" to combat global warming, said Aznar." Comment: There is an interesting blend of global warming heretics these days... Solar Variations: Too Tiny to Matter CO2 Sceptics, 21st October 2008
"The following article is from The Huffington Post (Global Warming and Predictions of an Impending Ice Age - Part 1), it tries to dismiss the Sun from the "Man Made Climate Change" equation, unfortunately for the author (Bill Chameides), Lord Monckton sent him an email concerning this issue......"
Comment: Piers Corbyn also responds to the Huffington Post article and is viewpoint that scientists need to pay attention to the 22yr Hale cycle and magnetic linkage effects are quite insightful. Here are some short clips of a Cambridge Union presentation by Lord Monckton, YouTube video (5:41) Blame The Sun Not SUV's. The second clip clearly explains how the infamous Mann 'Hockey Stick' graph was produced, YouTube video (8:46) The warming is not unprecedented It's really something else when the scientific community has to be policed by the likes of Lord Monckton! ' DR VINCENT GRAY UPDATES 'GLOBAL WARMING SCAM' PAPER Climate Science NZ, October 2008
"Dr Vincent Gray, expert reviewer of IPCC Assessment Reports since their inception, has up-dated his extensive paper, "The Global Warming Scam", in which he shows that none of the evidence presented by IPCC confirms a relationship between emissions of greenhouse gases and any harmful effect on the climate."
ABSTRACT: The Global Warming Scam has been perpetrated in order to support the Environmentalist belief that the earth is being harmed by the emission of greenhouse gases from the combustion of fossil fuels. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was set up to provide evidence for this belief. They have published four major Reports which are widely considered to have proved it to be true. This paper examines the evidence in detail and shows that none of the evidence presented confirms a relationship between emissions of greenhouse gases and any harmful effect on the climate. It is the result of 18 years of scrutiny and comment on IPCC Reports and of a study of the scientific literature associated with it. Comment: It's really easy to understand the global warming hoax if you realise that a desperately needed scientific concensus can be used as an engine to create the next major speculative bubble. Think tulips, South Sea Bubble, railways, canals, dot.coms and internet related, and the mortgage and credit bubble currently bursting spectacularly. I think this latest episode is even more insidious because it piggy-backs on a widespread shift in human consciousness that can be related to environmentalism. Thirty years of warmer temperatures go poof National Post, 20th October 2008 
"The number of climate change skeptics is growing rapidly. Because a funny thing is happening to global temperatures -- they're going down, not up."
"...weather-satellite scientists David Douglass of the University of Rochester and John Christy of the University of Alabama at Huntsville nonetheless dealt the True Believers a devastating blow last month. For nearly 30 years, Professor Christy has been in charge of NASA's eight weather satellites that take more than 300,000 temperature readings daily around the globe. In a paper co-written with Dr. Douglass, he concludes that while manmade emissions may be having a slight impact, "variations in global temperatures since 1978 ... cannot be attributed to carbon dioxide." Comment: Lorne Gunter is a longstanding global warming dissenter who is delighted that global temperatures are going 'poof'. Here he points out that many more prominent scientists are publicly denouncing the extremely dubious science that blames CO2 for global warming and the even more startling data that shows declining global temperatures. Unlike the ground based temperature measurements, that in some quarters are now considered laughable, NASA's weather satellite measurements are deemed to be highly accurate and so many are starting to warn that global cooling is now most certainly inevitable, to the chagrin of Al Gore et al. Hockey Stick? What Hockey Stick? How Alarmist "scientists" falsely abolished the Mediaeval Warm Period Science and Public Policy Institute, September 2008
"An extraordinary series of postings at www.climateaudit.org, the deservedly well trafficked website of the courageous and tenacious Canadian statistician Steve McIntyre, is a remarkable indictment of the corruption and cynicism that is rife among the alarmist climate scientists favored by the UN's discredited climate panel, the IPCC.
In laymen's language, the present paper respectfully summarizes Dr. McIntyre's account of the systematically dishonest manner in which the "hockey-stick" graph falsely showing that today's temperatures are warmer than those that prevailed during the medieval climate optimum was fabricated in 1998/9, adopted as the poster-child of climate panic by the IPCC in its 2001 climate assessment, and then retained in its 2007 assessment report despite having been demolished in the scientific literature. It is a long tale, but well worth following. No one who reads it will ever again trust the IPCC or the "scientists" and environmental extremists who author its climate assessments." Comment: This long document was written by Lord Monckton who once advised the ex-British Prime Minister Baroness Thatcher on scientific fraud. Lord Monckton is refusing to be quiet on the fraudulent nature of the "Hockey Stick" graph used to persuade the world's policy makers and the general public. My aim in citing these kind of articles is to interpret on a day by day basis some of the information going into the mainstream and alternative media, that seeks to either inform or mislead. I believe understanding why there is such heated scientific debate, helps us to see why some scientists cite the recently identified phenomena of Space Weather, as the true cause of climate change. BBC investigated after peer says climate change programme was biased 'one-sided polemic' Daily Mail, 27th September 2008
"The BBC is being investigated by television watchdogs after a leading climate
change sceptic claimed his views were deliberately misrepresented.
Lord Monckton, a former adviser to Margaret Thatcher, says he was made to look
like a 'potty peer' on a TV programme that 'was a one-sided polemic for the
new religion of global warming'."
Comment: Not surprising, this documentary was billed as a definitive answer to The Great Global Warming Swindle, but it seems to have failed miserably. See also BBC2 show ignites contributor row Astronomical Influences Affect Climate More Than CO2, Say Experts CNS News, 17th September 2008
"Warming and cooling cycles are more directly tied in with astronomical influences than they are with human-caused carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, some scientists now say. Recent observations point to a strong link between "solar variability" – or fluctuations in the sun’s radiation – and climate change on Earth, while other research sees the sun as just one of many heavenly bodies affecting global warming in the later half of the 20th century."
"An examination of warming and cooling trends over the last 400 years shows an "almost exact correlation" between all of the known climate changes that have occurred and solar energy transmitted to the Earth, while showing "no correlation at all with CO2."" Comment: It is apparent that we have a war of ideology between those that who want to believe that the Earth is totally isolated in space and those who believe that our climate is driven by celestial forces. The comparison has to be made with those who once believed that the world was flat and those who believed that the Earth was the centre of the Universe.... Old Farmers Almanac: Global cooling may be underway USA Today, 10th September 2008 
The Old Farmer's Almanac is going further out on a limb than usual this year, not only forecasting a cooler winter, but looking ahead decades to suggest we are in for global cooling, not warming. Based on the same time-honored, complex calculations it uses to predict weather, the Almanac hits the newsstands on Tuesday saying a study of solar activity and corresponding records on ocean temperatures and climate point to a cooler, not warmer, climate, for perhaps the next half century.
"We at the Almanac are among those who believe that sunspot cycles and their effects on oceans correlate with climate changes," writes meteorologist and climatologist Joseph D'Aleo. "Studying these and other factor suggests that cold, not warm, climate may be our future." Comment: The highly successful Old Farmer's Almanac only sells because it's rate of accuracy is so high. Meteorologists and other climate scientists have traditionally ignored the role of the Sun which seems strange when ALL LIFE ON EARTH is dependent on the Sun for sustenance. Why I recanted 'There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming' Financial Post, 30th August 2008
"I devoted six years to carbon accounting when I built models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia's compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector.....
When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas; the old ice core data; no other suspects....But since 1999, new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming. As Lord Keynes famously said, "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" Comment: I think there are quite a few scientists recanting or repenting their former beliefs and are seeking to make amends. Climate myths: Global warming stopped in 1998 New Scientist News, 15th August 2008 
"Even if the atmospheric temperature near the earth's surface has become cooler recently, that doesn't mean the planet as a whole isn't heating up." The article concludes with the following; "Some climate scientists are predicting that surface temperatures will remain static or even fall slightly over the next few years, before warming resumes.....
If these predictions are right - and not all climate scientists think they are - you can expect to hear more claims from climate-change deniers about how global warming has stopped. But unless we see a simultaneous fall in both surface temperatures and ocean-heat content, claims that the "entire planet" is cooling are nonsense. And while a big volcanic eruption could indeed trigger genuine cooling for a few years, global warming will resume again once the dust has settled." Comment: I would say that New Scientist is still trying to beat the drum that global warming is still happening but the current facts show global cooling and so they are trying to reassure the faithful that their belief in global warming is still valid. However, the writer here realises that a major volcanic eruption would act as a wild card and lower world temperatures dramatically. Personally, I think that there are so many large active volcanoes rumbling at the moment and some big eruptions already that I think it is most certain that the Earth will self-regulate. It's interesting though that the writer completely ignores what's happening on the Sun and the lack of sunspots which will be a harbinger of major global cooling if this situation continues. 'To greens, I was worse than a child abuser' The Independent, 10th August 2008
"Martin Durkin's documentary 'The Great Global Warming Swindle', aired on Channel 4 last year, enraged the green lobby by claiming human activity wasn't behind global warming. Ofcom, the TV regulator, received 265 complaints and last month ruled that its writer and director lacked impartiality.
However, Ofcom ceded that, despite "certain reservations", it did not believe audiences had been "materially misled". Writing for the first time since the documentary was screened, Durkin tells 'The Independent on Sunday' why he stands by his film in the face of continued criticism." Comment: I still chuckle about the "middle class fatwa placed on his head". LOL!! Award-winning Astronaut Questions Man Made Global Warming In Science, Ignorance is not Bliss Launch Magazine, 4th August 2008
Walter Cunningham states: "I believe in global climate change, but there is no way that humans can influence the temperature of our planet to any measurable degree with the tools currently at their disposal. Any human contribution to global temperature change is lost in the noise of terrestrial and cosmic factors. Our beautiful home planet has been warming and cooling for the last 4.8 billion years. Most recently, it has been warming – be it ever so slightly – but there is nothing unusual about it! The changes and rates of change in the Earth's temperature, just since the Industrial Revolution, have occurred many times in our climatic history. While climate scientists generally agree that the Earth's temperature is always changing, not many of them would say that humans are responsible for those changes."
It is the true believers who, when they have no facts on their side, try to silence their critics. When former NASA mathematician Ferenc Miskolczi pointed out that "greenhouse warming" may be mathematically impossible, NASA would not allow him to publish his work. Miskolczi dared to question the simplifying assumption in the warming model that the atmosphere is infinitely thick. He pointed out that when you use the correct thickness – about 65 miles – the greenhouse effect disappears! Ergo: no AGW. Miskolczi resigned in disgust and published his proof in the peer reviewed Hungarian journal Weather. Comment: Astronaunts are becoming quite chatty these days...... There is some interesting info here, and it does seem that the pseudoscience inherent in global warming theory, is being exposed left, right and centre. "Consensus" on Man-Made Warming Shattering Canada Free Press, 19th July 2008
"Physics & Society, The journal of the 46,000-member American Physical Society, just published "Climate Sensitivity Revisited," by Viscount Christopher Monckton. Monckton is an avowed man-made warming skeptic, and former science advisor to the late British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. (If you want to see the science, click here )
Viscount Monckton contends that the climate alarmists have mistakenly pre-programmed their computer models with equations that overstate the earth's sensitivity to CO2 by 500 to 2,000 percent thus creating a senseless First World panic that itself threatens the future of society." Comment: I think most ordinary people would call this level of data manipulation FRAUD! American Physical Society and Monckton at odds over paper Watts Up With That, 19th July 2008
"Two days ago I posted on this story in this blog related to APS opening up debate on climate change. It appears Lord Monckton did in fact have his paper, Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered, reviewed by APS, and he drafted revisions per that review, after which the paper was accepted by APS for publication. Yesterday, APS put this disclaimer in red over the paper on their website: The following article has not undergone any scientific peer review. Its conclusions are in disagreement with the overwhelming opinion of the world scientific community. The Council of the American Physical Society disagrees with this article's conclusions."
Comment: We have a storm in a teacup! Update See, The shaming of American Physics and Statement by The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley . I think the reviewer did a good job from what I can see.....so, will heads now role? Myth of Consensus Explodes: APS Opens Global Warming Debate "Considerable presence" of skeptics Daily Tech, 16th July 2008
The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science. The leadership of the society had previously
called the evidence for global warming "incontrovertible."
In a posting to the APS forum, editor Jeffrey Marque explains,"There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution. Larry Gould, Professor of Physics at the University of Hartford and Chairman of the New England Section of the APS, called Monckton's paper an "expose of the IPCC that details numerous exaggerations and "extensive errors". In an email to DailyTech, Monckton says, "I was dismayed to discover that the IPCC's 2001 and 2007 reports did not devote chapters to the central 'climate sensitivity' question, and did not explain in proper, systematic detail the methods by which they evaluated it. When I began to investigate, it seemed that the IPCC was deliberately concealing and obscuring its method." Comment: Well, well, well, more scientists are now seeing the wood for the trees. There have been lots of reports about disatisfaction with the IPCC and I suppose that's why Al Gore is hitting the headlines again.... Incidentally, I can't believe Will.i.am is thinking of composing a YouTube song for Gore..... that's a mistake for sure.... Public not being told the whole truth about global warming Engineering News, 11th July 2008
"In 2006, there were predictions in the media that global warming would cause 2007 to be the hottest year on record. Now think about it, what have you read in the media in 2008 about this? Well, nothing actually. Why? Well, the answer is simple – because 2007 turned out to be the coolest year recorded for the last 30 years. This, the public was not told.
The public was also not told that, since the warm year of 1998, there has been continuous cooling. What the public is told is that, during the twentieth century, there was a global temperature increase of 0,6 oC. This is true, but what is left out is that most of the warming took place from 1920 to 1940 and that global temperature fell from 1940 to 1970, prompting announcements in the mid 1970s that a global ice age was about to pounce on us. During all this, the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere continued to rise. In fact, atmospheric carbon dioxide (C02) continued to increase after 1940, while atmospheric cooling was taking place. Should that not make people think a bit?" Comment: The last sentence struck a nerve....people don't generally think 'outside of the box', if you do, many assume you're a bit odd.... Earth begins to kill people for changing its climate Pravda, 4th July 2008 
"At least 2.5 million people have been killed in natural disasters over the recent 48 years. The number of casualties over the recent 20 years made up 1.6 million people, the UN said. Rob Vos, the director of the Development Policy and Analysis Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), said that the number of natural disasters taking place in the world nowadays has quadrupled in comparison with the 1970s. The disaster-related economic damage has increased at least seven times."
Comment: Enlightened Russian scientists were the first to highlight the impact of "Space Weather" and massive changes in ALL the planets in our solar system, which is the true cause of the Earth's catastrophes, see PLANETOPHYSICAL STATE OF THE EARTH AND LIFE [1998] . Yet, the report actually suggests that humanity has a part to play to DECREASE catastrophes, but this requires a spiritual change in humanity and unfortunately this understanding seems to have bypassed the majority of the metaphysical community. I realised what was happening in 2005 and that is why I decided to write, self-publish and end up having to market my book, "Tuning the Diamonds: Electromagnetism & Spiritual Evolution". As things turn out I think my concerns have been borne out..... Anyway, there are hundreds of thousands of left-brained people "waking up" to a new reality who need an explanation in terms that they can understand. The right-brained are supposed to "know" already right? I also wrote my book for the intelligentsia to find out what the more "intuitive" folks are up to by balancing their electromagnetic fields and activating diamond energy bodies. It's fairly obvious that the Russian headline would provoke a reaction, and it seems that people don't like idea that we are living at a time where Universal Consciousness is re-balancing and eliminating the stresses in the environment. In my opinion, it's up to us to co-operate with the Universe and not seek to make a fast buck, as the Earth is littered with the remains of previous civilisations that also failed to understand Universal Order. Global warming predictions challenged Daily Times, 15th June 2008 
"John Coleman, the founder of American TV's Weather Channel, has challenged Al Gore's dire predictions that the planet is in peril because of global warming.
In a speech to the San Diego Chamber of Commerce, Coleman said,"There is no significant man made global warming. There has not been any in the past, there is none now and there is no reason to fear any in the future. The climate of Earth is changing. It has always changed. But mankind's activities have not overwhelmed or significantly modified the natural forces."" Comment: Still fighting on I see...... Environmentalists Seize Green Moral High Ground Ignoring Science - Canada Free Press, 15th June 2008
"The first qualification on my resume now is "Environmentalist". Actually, it is a title everyone can put after their name. We are all environmentalists to greater or lesser degrees. It is an outrage that certain people and groups have usurped this title and implied that only they care about the environment. While this series of articles has shown the role the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in manipulating climate science it has succeeded within the dominance of environmentalism over the western view of the world." " Comment: This entry is added for anyone new to this blog that is not aware of the ongoing global warming 'debate'. The Cosmic Ray-Climate Connection CO2 Science, 19th May 2008
The paper concludes: "Numerous palaeoclimatic observations, covering a wide range of time scales, suggest that galactic cosmic ray variability is associated with climate change. The quality and diversity of the observations make it difficult to dismiss them merely as chance associations. But is the GCR flux directly affecting the climate or merely acting as a proxy for variations of the solar irradiance or a spectral component such as UV?
Here, there is some palaeoclimatic evidence for associations of the climate with geomagnetic and galactic modulations of the GCR flux, which, if confirmed, point to a direct GCR-climate forcing. Moreover, numerous studies have reported meteorological responses to short-term changes of cosmic rays or the global electrical current, which are unambiguously associated with ionising particle radiation." Comment: Is a new light dawning in the wider scientific community? Whatever, I have already been convinced by the existing scientific data that we are seeing evolutionary change being driven by cosmic factors. 31,000 Scientists Rejecting Global Warming Theory to be Named Monday NewsBusters.org, 18th May 2008
The names of over 31,000 American scientists that reject the theory of anthropogenic global warming are to be revealed on Monday. Although this will occur at the National Press Club in Washington, DC., it seems a metaphysical certitude media will completely ignore the event.
Comment: Apparently, the petition was signed by 9,021 American PhD's and 22,051 additional American scientists. I have copied from www.junkscience.com a list of mostly 100 celebrities and politicians who believe in man-made catastrophic global warming. Reviewing the list, I am not even interested in Oprah's opinion on this one.....
Celebrities
Al Gore, B.A. Government (no science degree) Alanis Morissette, High School Diploma Bill Maher, B.A. English (no science degree) Bono (Paul Hewson), High School Diploma Daryl Hanna, B.F.A. Theater (no science degree) Ed Begley Jr., High School Diploma Jackson Browne, High School Diploma Jon Bon Jovi (John Bongiovi), High School Diploma Oprah Winfrey, B.A. Speech and Drama (no science degree) Prince Charles of Whales, B.A. (no science degree) Sheryl Crow, B.A. Music Education (no science degree) Sienna Miller, High School Diploma ABC - Sam Champion, B.A. Broadcast News (no science degree, not a meteorologist) CBS - Harry Smith, B.A. Communications and Theater (no science degree) CBS - Katie Couric, B.A. English (no science degree) CBS - Scott Pelley, College Dropout NBC - Ann Curry, B.A. Journalism (no science degree) NBC - Anne Thompson, B.A. American studies (no science degree) NBC - Matt Lauer. B.A. Communications (no science degree) NBC - Meredith Vieira, B.A. English (no science degree) Al Sharpton, College Dropout Alicia Keys, College Dropout Alicia Silverstone, High School Dropout Art Bell, College Dropout Ben Affleck, College Dropout Ben Stiller, College Dropout Billy Jean King, College Dropout Brad Pitt, College Dropout Britney Spears, High School Dropout Bruce Springsteen, College Dropout Cameron Diaz, High School Dropout Cindy Crawford, College Dropout Diane Keaton, College Dropout Drew Barrymore, High School Dropout George Clooney, College Dropout Gwyneth Paltrow, College Dropout Jason Biggs, College Dropout Jennifer Connelly, College Dropout Jessica Simpson, High School Dropout John Travolta, High School Dropout Joshua Jackson, High School Dropout Julia Louis-Dreyfus, College Dropout Julia Roberts, College Dropout Kanye West, College Dropout Keanu Reeves, High School Dropout Kevin Bacon, High School Dropout Kiefer Sutherland, High School Dropout Leonardo DiCaprio, High School Dropout Lindsay Lohan, High School Dropout Ludacris (Christopher Bridges), College Dropout Madonna (Madonna Ciccone), College Dropout Matt Damon, College Dropout Matthew Modine, College Dropout Michael Moore, College Dropout Nicole Richie, College Dropout Neve Campbell, High School Dropout Olivia Newton-John, High School Dropout Orlando Bloom, High School Dropout Paris Hilton, High School Dropout Pierce Brosnan. High School Dropout Queen Latifah (Dana Elaine Owens), College Dropout Richard Branson, High School Dropout Robert Redford, College Dropout Rosie O'Donnell, College Dropout Sarah Silverman, College Dropout Sean Penn, College Dropout Ted Turner, College Dropout Tommy Lee (Thomas Lee Bass), High School Dropout Uma Thurman, High School Dropout Willie Nelson, High School Dropout Politicians: John McCain, B.S. (Graduated 894th out of 899 in his class) Newt Gingrich, Ph.D. Modern European History (no science degree) (Hypocrite) Pat Robertson, B.A., J.D., M.A. Divinity (no science degree) Robert F. Kennedy Jr, B.A. Government, J.D. Law (no science degree, 'recovered' Heroin addict) Scientists: Bill Nye, B.S. Mechanical Engineering (Bill Nye the Science Guy) Gavin Schmidt, B.A. Ph.D. Applied Mathematics (RealClimate.org) James Hansen, B.A. Physics and Mathematics, M.S. Astronomy, Ph.D. Physics (NASA, Gavin Schmidt's Boss) James Lovelock, Ph.D. Medicine, D.Sc. Biophysics Lonnie Thompson, Ph.D. Geological Sciences Michael Mann, A.B. Applied Math, Physics, M.S. Physics, Ph.D. Geology & Geophysics (RealClimate.org) Michael Oppenheimer, S.B. Chemistry, Ph.D. Chemical Physics Richard C. J. Somerville, Ph.D. Meteorology Steven Schneider, Ph.D. Mechanical Engineering and Plasma Physics Social Scientists: Ronald Bailey, B.A. Philosophy and Economics (Science Correspondent, Reason Magazine) 'Blessed are the sceptics' The Australian, 7th May 2008 
"IN 1633 Galileo Galilei was hauled before the religious authorities of his day, the Inquisition, for daring to concur with Copernicus that the Earth was not the centre of the universe and also that it orbited the sun rather than the other way around. For his pains, he was placed under house arrest and forced to recant.
Giordano Bruno failed to recant and suffered a crueller fate. Today we are faced with a newer religion known as environmental activism which has insinuated itself into some aspects of science. It shares some of the intolerance to new or challenging ideas with the old. Immolation at the stake is no longer fashionable but it has been replaced by pillory in the media." Comment: I feel very blessed.... 2008 Climate Debate The New American, 25th March 2008
"There goes another beautiful theory about to be murdered by a brutal gang of facts."
– Duc de La Rochefoucauld, French writer and moralist (1613-1680) However, for many of the world’s leading scientists in the fields of meteorology, climatology, physics, astrophysics, and related sciences, the science is far from settled,
Al Gore’s media accolades notwithstanding. Over the past few years, more than 19,000 American scientists have signed a dissenting petition coauthored by Dr. Frederick Seitz, renowned physicist and former president of the National Academy of Sciences, and Dr. Arthur Robinson, president of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (www.oism.org/pproject). The petition urges political leaders to reject the Gore-supported Kyoto Protocol or other similar proposals that would mandate draconian tax and regulatory measures aimed at virtually all human economic activity. Comment: I just love the above quote, there is a similiar quote in my book, Tuning the Diamonds. Scientific Consensus on Climate Change? Science & Public Policy Institute, 24th March 2008
"FEAR of anthropogenic "global warming" can adversely affect patients’ well-being. Accordingly, the state of the scientific consensus about climate change was studied by a review of the 539 papers on "global climate change" found on the Web of Science database from January 2004 to mid-February 2007, updating research by Oreskes (2004), who had reported that between 1993 and 2003 none of 928 scientific papers on "global climate change" had rejected the consensus that more than half of the warming of the past 50 years was likely to have been anthropogenic.
In the present review, 31 papers (6% of the sample) explicitly or implicitly reject the consensus. Though Oreskes said that 75% of the papers in her sample endorsed the consensus, fewer than half now endorse it. Only 6% do so explicitly. Only one paper refers to "catastrophic" climate change, but without offering evidence. There appears to be little evidence in the learned journals to justify the climate-change alarm that now harms patients. Comment: I believe psychologists are now treating people for global warming anxiety.... Scientific Consensus on Climate Change? Science & Public Policy Institute, 24th March 2008
"FEAR of anthropogenic "global warming" can adversely affect patients’ well-being. Accordingly, the state of the scientific consensus about climate change was studied by a review of the 539 papers on "global climate change" found on the Web of Science database from January 2004 to mid-February 2007, updating research by Oreskes (2004), who had reported that between 1993 and 2003 none of 928 scientific papers on "global climate change" had rejected the consensus that more than half of the warming of the past 50 years was likely to have been anthropogenic.
In the present review, 31 papers (6% of the sample) explicitly or implicitly reject the consensus. Though Oreskes said that 75% of the papers in her sample endorsed the consensus, fewer than half now endorse it. Only 6% do so explicitly. Only one paper refers to "catastrophic" climate change, but without offering evidence. There appears to be little evidence in the learned journals to justify the climate-change alarm that now harms patients. Comment: I believe psychologists are now treating people for global warming anxiety.... Climate Skeptics Reveal ‘Horror Stories’ of Scientific Suppression EPW Senate News, 6th March 2008
"Scientists skeptical of man-made climate fears meeting at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change in New York City described the "absolute horror stories" about how some scientific journals have engaged in “outrageous and unethical behavior” in attempting to suppress them from publishing their work in peer-reviewed journals. The March 2-4 groundbreaking conference, which featured about 100 speakers with over 500 people attending, presented the report of a team of international scientists who formed a group to counter the UN IPCC."
New York Global Warming Conference Considers 'Manhattan Declaration' Heartland Institute, 4th March 2008 
Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change"Global warming" is not a global crisis We, the scientists and researchers in climate and related fields, economists, policymakers, and business leaders, assembled at Times Square, New York City, participating in the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change, Resolving that scientific questions should be evaluated solely by the scientific method; Affirming that global climate has always changed and always will, independent of the actions of humans, and that carbon dioxide (CO2) is not a pollutant but rather a necessity for all life; Recognising that the causes and extent of recently observed climatic change are the subject of intense debates in the climate science community and that oft-repeated assertions of a supposed 'consensus' among climate experts are false; Affirming that attempts by governments to legislate costly regulations on industry and individual citizens to encourage CO2 emission reduction will slow development while having no appreciable impact on the future trajectory of global climate change. Such policies will markedly diminish future prosperity and so reduce the ability of societies to adapt to inevitable climate change, thereby increasing, not decreasing, human suffering; Noting that warmer weather is generally less harmful to life on Earth than colder: Hereby declare: That current plans to restrict anthropogenic CO2 emissions are a dangerous misallocation of intellectual capital and resources that should be dedicated to solving humanity's real and serious problems. That there is no convincing evidence that CO2 emissions from modern industrial activity has in the past, is now, or will in the future cause catastrophic climate change. That attempts by governments to inflict taxes and costly regulations on industry and individual citizens with the aim of reducing emissions of CO2 will pointlessly curtail the prosperity of the West and progress of developing nations without affecting climate. That adaptation as needed is massively more cost-effective than any attempted mitigation and that a focus on such mitigation will divert the attention and resources of governments away from addressing the real problems of their peoples. That human-caused climate change is not a global crisis. Now, therefore, we recommend -- That world leaders reject the views expressed by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as well as popular, but misguided works such as "An Inconvenient Truth." That all taxes, regulations, and other interventions intended to reduce emissions of CO2 be abandoned forthwith. Agreed at New York, 4 March 2008 Hundreds More Scientists Have Found the 1,500-Year Climate Cycle CGGI.org, 3rd March 2008 
"The following list includes more than 400 additional qualified scientists, with their home institutions, and the peer-reviewed studies they have published in professional journals, which reveal evidence of the moderate 1,500-year Dansgaard-Oeschger cycles. Together with a previous list released by Hudson on Sept. 12, 2007, this brings the total of scientific researchers who have published evidence of this natural cycle to more than 700." Comment: More members of the scientific community are rallying for truth.... Hundreds More Scientists Have Found the 1,500-Year Climate Cycle CGGI.org, 3rd March 2008
"The following list includes more than 400 additional qualified scientists, with their home institutions, and the peer-reviewed studies they have published in professional journals, which reveal evidence of the moderate 1,500-year Dansgaard-Oeschger cycles. Together with a previous list released by Hudson on Sept. 12, 2007, this brings the total of scientific researchers who have published evidence of this natural cycle to more than 700."
Comment: More members of the scientific community are rallying for truth.... Global Temperatures Have Dropped: Did Sunspots Predict It? CGGI.org, 1st March 2008 
"Three of the world’s major climate monitors have announced that the earth’s temperatures dropped over the last 12 months–by enough to virtually offset the entire "unprecedented warming" of the last century. This comes after nine years of no warming, and a net warming since 1940 of just 0.2 degrees. Equally important, a drop in temperatures had been predicted by the sunspot index that foretells the earth’s temperature changes with a log time of nearly a decade. Our temperatures have a 79 percent correlation with the sunspot index."
Comment: It looks like the Global Warming gravy train might be coming off the tracks.... A Serious Problem With The Use Of A Global Average Surface Temperature Anomaly To Diagnose Global Warming - Part I Climate Science, 24th January 2008
"This paper raises serious issues with respect to the use of observed land surface air
temperatures to diagnose multi-decadal global temperature trends and to report regional
and local temperature anomalies and extremes. A major key finding from our study is
that the magnitude of global warming is significantly overstated using surface air
temperature as a metric."
Comment: Oh dear! Global Warming: The All-Purpose Farce to Control Your Life Townhall.com, 21st January 2008 
"Everything you do has a carbon footprint and could be regulated by the government. If the Democrats have their way, you could face new limits on what you eat for breakfast, the way you travel to work, the computer on which you read Townhall.com, the medicines you take, the clothes you wear, the DVDs you watch, everything – everything!
"Carbon footprint" is code for limitless government intrusion into every detail of your life. Nothing is beyond the reach of a government determined to reduce your carbon footprint in the name of the environment. To these people, nothing is sacred, nothing is private, nothing is truly yours. Not even your thermostat." Comment:Some plain talk here! What causes Earth’s seasons? Our planet’s tilt dictates cycle of winter and summer MSNBC News, 20th December 2007 
Comment: Interesting article reminding us of the mainstream theory of what generates the seasons on Earth. Unfortunately, the increasing bizarreness of world weather and climate means that the official theory is looking increasingly untenable and climatologist must consider that there are other factors influencing the seasons on Earth. Year of global cooling The Washington Times, 19th December 2007 
"Al Gore says global warming is a planetary emergency. It is difficult to see how this can be so when record low temperatures are being set all over the world. In 2007, hundreds of people died, not from global warming, but from cold weather hazards." "If you think any of the preceding facts can falsify global warming, you're hopelessly naive. Nothing creates cognitive dissonance in the mind of a true believer.
In 2005, a Canadian Greenpeace representative explained "global warming can mean colder, it can mean drier, it can mean wetter." In other words, all weather variations are evidence for global warming. I can't make this stuff up. Global warming has long since passed from scientific hypothesis to the realm of pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo." Comment: Nice summary of the FACTS". Volcanic particles 'can help cool' Earth China Daily, 18th December 2007 
"Russian scientists have discovered that volcanic particles can help cool the Earth, a leading environmental scientist said yesterday."
"Our experiments have shown it's effective, and actually it's more effective than some methods stipulated in the Kyoto Protocol to mitigate global warming," Israel said during a Moscow-Beijing video-conference on climate change. The conference was part of an exchange program between Russia and China." Comment: Well this short report only states what the US Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory also claim from using 12 state-of-the-art climate models. The Earth will self-regulate and deal with climate change by triggering massive volcanic eruptions, however the impact will make human life on this planet more difficult. The Mayan Elders have been begging for years those of higher consciousness to "make the balance", it seems that very few have understood the consequences of not working to achieve higher states of "balanced" consciousness and the impact our consciousness has on our planet. Bias And Concealment In The IPCC Process: The “Hockey-Stick” Affair And Its Implications" Energy & Environment, November 2007 
"ABSTRACT: The climatic "hockey stick" hypothesis has systemic problems. I review how the IPCC came to adopt the "hockey stick" as scientific evidence of human interference with the climate. I report also on independent peer reviewed studies of the "hockey stick" that were instigated by the US House of Representatives in 2006, and which comprehensively invalidated it. The "divergence" problem and the selective and unreliable nature of tree ring reconstructions are discussed, as is the unsatisfactory review process of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report that ignored the invalidation of the "hockey stick".
The error found recently in the GISS temperature series is also noted. It is concluded that the IPCC has neither the structure nor the necessary independence and supervision of its processes to be acceptable as the monopoly authority on climate science. Suggestions are made as to how the IPCC could improve its procedures towards producing reports and recommendations that are more scientifically sound." Comment: When will people learn; You can fool some of the people, some of the time, but you can't fool all the people, all the time! Climate change by Jupiter Canada.com, 10th November 2007 
"The alignment of the planets, and especially that of Jupiter and Saturn, control the climate on Earth. So explained Rhodes Fairbridge of Columbia University, a giant in science over much of the last century whose accomplishments are perhaps unsurpassed for their breadth, depth, and volume. This one man authored or co-authored 100 scientific books and more than 1,000 scientific papers, he edited the Benchmarks in Geology series (more than 90 volumes in print) and was general editor of the Encyclopaedias of the Earth Sciences. He edited eight major encyclopedias of specialized scientific papers in the atmospheric sciences and astrogeology; geomorphology; geochemistry and the earth sciences; geology, sedimentology, paleontology, oceanography and, not least, climatology."
Comment: I see he's got far more scientific credentials than Al Gore and has obviously not been bought and pay for like others with far less credibility. IPCC too blinkered and corrupt to save National Post, 26th October 2007 
"Dr. Gray's mission, in his new role as cofounder of The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, is to stop the IPCC from spreading climate-change propaganda that undermines the integrity of science. "The whole process is a swindle," he states, in large part because the IPCC has a blinkered mandate that excludes natural causes of global warming."
"Other expert reviewers at the IPCC, and scientists elsewhere around the globe, share Dr. Gray's alarm at the conduct of the IPCC. An effort by academics is now underway to reform this UN organization, and have it follow established scientific norms. Dr. Gray was asked to endorse this reform effort, but he refused, saying: "The IPCC is fundamentally corrupt. The only 'reform' I could envisage would be its abolition."" Geological Decoupling Of CO2 Global Warming Politics, 18th October 2007
"Today, I wish to highlight a thoughtful examination of the lack of correlation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and climate during three key geological time periods."
"I congratulate the authors on this analysis, which has the bravery to break away from any prejudgment that carbon dioxide must explain everything. I especially value their look at neglected alternative drivers of climate, especially those relating to the altering albedo of the Earth’s surface and to the water cycle. It is entirely possible that the single biggest driver of them all is the water cycle, which itself could control both carbon dioxide and temperature (the hidden truth behind Gore’s notorious graph?). Above all, of course, this paper shows us just how little we really know." Comment: Linked for those who actually want to study the facts. Please, sir - Gore's got warming wrong TimesOnline, 14th October 2007
Campaigners who won a legal victory against Al Gore's film, An Inconvenient Truth, are to step up their battle by sending British secondary schools
Channel 4’s The Great Global Warming Swindle. Thus, 3,400 copies will be sent to secondary schools "to counter Gore’s flagrant propaganda". This will be funded by Viscount Monckton, who in this article, is smeared by suggesting he is part of a counter-campaign to undermine the scientific consensus on climate change.
Comment: The fight continues! As I have made clear in this blog, there is NO scientific concensus. Camille Paglia on “fancy-pants, speculative, climate models” Watts Up With That?, 10th October 2007
Camille Paglia is listed as one of the top 100 intellectuals in the world today, in fact she’s at number 20. She stated in an interview,
"The simplest facts about geology seem to be missing from the mental equipment of many highly educated people these days. Comment: Wow!! Schools must warn of Gore climate film bias Daily Mail, 3rd October 2007 
"Schools will have to issue a warning before they show pupils Al Gore's controversial film about global warming, a judge indicated yesterday. The move follows a High Court action by a father who accused the Government of 'brainwashing' children with propaganda by showing it in the classroom.
Stewart Dimmock said the former U.S. Vice-President's documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, is unfit for schools because it is politically biased and contains serious scientific inaccuracies and 'sentimental mush'." Comment: I like the bit about the mush..... Challenge to Scientific Consensus on Global Warming: Analysis Finds Hundreds of Scientists Have Published Evidence Countering Man-Made Global Warming Fears Earthtimes.org, 12th September 2007
" WASHINGTON, Sept. 12 -- A new analysis of peer-reviewed literature reveals that more than 500 scientists have published evidence refuting at least one element of current man-made global warming scares.
More than 300 of the scientists found evidence that 1) a natural moderate 1,500-year climate cycle has produced more than a dozen global warmings similar to ours since the last Ice Age and/or that 2) our Modern Warming is linked strongly to variations in the sun's irradiance. "This data and the list of scientists make a mockery of recent claims that scientific consensus blames humans as the primary cause of global temperature increases since 1850," said Hudson Institute Senior Fellow Dennis Avery." Comment: There is NO global warming concensus! Challenge to Scientific Consensus on Global Warming: Analysis Finds Hundreds of Scientists Have Published Evidence Countering Man-Made Global Warming Fears Earthtimes.org, 12th September 2007
" WASHINGTON, Sept. 12 -- A new analysis of peer-reviewed literature reveals that more than 500 scientists have published evidence refuting at least one element of current man-made global warming scares.
More than 300 of the scientists found evidence that 1) a natural moderate 1,500-year climate cycle has produced more than a dozen global warmings similar to ours since the last Ice Age and/or that 2) our Modern Warming is linked strongly to variations in the sun's irradiance. "This data and the list of scientists make a mockery of recent claims that scientific consensus blames humans as the primary cause of global temperature increases since 1850," said Hudson Institute Senior Fellow Dennis Avery." Comment: There is NO global warming concensus! Survey: Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory Comprehensive survey of published climate research reveals changing viewpoints DailyTech.com, 29th August 2007
"Papers published from 2004 to February 2007. The results have been submitted to the journal Energy and Environment, of which DailyTech has obtained a pre-publication copy. The figures are surprising. Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers "implicit" endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no "consensus."
The figures are even more shocking when one remembers the watered-down definition of consensus here. Not only does it not require supporting that man is the "primary" cause of warming, but it doesn't require any belief or support for "catastrophic" global warming. In fact of all papers published in this period (2004 to February 2007), only a single one makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results." Comment: Oh dear! Survey: Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory Comprehensive survey of published climate research reveals changing viewpoints DailyTech.com, 29th August 2007
"Papers published from 2004 to February 2007. The results have been submitted to the journal Energy and Environment, of which DailyTech has obtained a pre-publication copy. The figures are surprising. Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus.
If one considers "implicit" endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no "consensus." The figures are even more shocking when one remembers the watered-down definition of consensus here. Not only does it not require supporting that man is the "primary" cause of warming, but it doesn't require any belief or support for "catastrophic" global warming. In fact of all papers published in this period (2004 to February 2007), only a single one makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results." Comment: Oh dear! Sizzling study concludes: Global warming 'hot air' 'You can spit, have same effect as doubling the carbon dioxide' WorldNetDaily.com, 20th August 2007
A major new scientific study concludes the impact of carbon dioxide emissions on worldwide temperatures is largely irrelevant, prompting one veteran meteorologist to quip, "You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide."
That comment comes from Reid Bryson, founding chairman of the Department of Meteorology at the University of Wisconsin, who said the temperature of the earth is increasing, but that it’s got nothing to do with what man is doing. #147;Of course it’s going up. It has gone up since the early 1800s, before the Industrial Revolution, because we’re coming out of the Little Ice Age, not because we’re putting more carbon dioxide into the air.” #147;Anthropogenic (man-made) global warming bites the dust,” declared astronomer Ian Wilson after reviewing the newest study, now accepted for publication in the peer-reviewed Journal of Geophysical Research. Comment: Are we witnessing the start of a major sea-change in scientific opinion? Red faces at NASA over climate-change blunder Agency roasted after Toronto blogger spots `hot years' data fumble The Star, 14th August 2007
In the United States, the calendar year 1998 ranked as the hottest of them all – until someone checked the math.
After a Toronto skeptic tipped NASA this month to one flaw in its climate calculations, the U.S. agency ordered a full data review. Days later, it put out a revised list of all-time hottest years. The Dust Bowl year of 1934 now ranks as hottest ever in the U.S. – not 1998. More significantly, the agency reduced the mean U.S. "temperature anomalies" for the years 2000 to 2006 by 0.15 degrees Celsius. Comment: Tut Tut! Nice little article that gives a non-technical explanation of why NASA have been forced to re calculate the 'Hot' top ten years on record, and republish the data. As they say, there are lies, damn lies and then there are statistics! Twisting Science to Fit the Global Warming Template American Thinker, 10th August 2007 
"The global warming crowd does not take kindly to being contradicted, either by critics or data. Of course, critics can be defamed and data can be skewed. But unless the critics can be silenced, they can fight back and expose phony data. When it begins to look like predictions of doom are not turning out sufficiently catastrophic, a full Orwell is called for."
Comment: The article then goes on to question why are people being warned, "Global warming is forecast to set in with a vengeance after 2009." and "Climate modelers are finally "scrambling to factor in" natural variation." The answer is obvious, the next solar cycle will have started in earnest and we are being promised EXTREME solar activity. If you think of the solar cycle as a breathing in and out of galactic energy, then the sun's next exhale is going to be delivering some serious evolutionary energies as a natural occurence of directly lining up with the center of our galaxy. This is what all the 2012 hysteria is all about and quite frankly, from what I know from metaphysical and scientific sources, it will be serious. Just think, HUGE blasts of plasma, electrically charged particles, hitting everything on our planet. Yum Yum! UN Climate Panel Accused of Possible Research Fraud NewsBusters.com, 10th August 2007
Comment: An independent mathematical researcher, identified "fabrications" in such studies that suggest a "marked lack of integrity in some important work on global warming that is relied upon by the IPCC" and that "the insignificance of urbanization effects on temperature measurements has not been established as reliably as the IPCC assessment report assumes." I agree with the final end statement, "However, as errors in data collection and dissemination - be they innocent or intentional - continue to surface in reports crucial to the opinion of the IPCC and global warming alarmists around the world, it seems reasonable to conclude that not only isn't the debate over as folks like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore continually avow, it has only just begun." The global warming scam is being blown wide open. Extreme weather? Sure. Blame global warming? Not so fast Terra Daily, 10th August 2007 
Quotes: Jean Jouzel, a climatologist who represents France on the IPCC, said "several more years would be needed to establish a link, or to not establish a link, between these extremes and global warming." "Are the extremes really changing? It's not so simple, because by definition, the extremes are rare events, and to come up with statistics, some hindsight is needed," he added.
Comment: Well, I personally think they will be getting the extremes fairly soon! On the Holland/Webster-Landsea Debate - A Guest Weblog by Roger A. Pielke, Jr. Climate Science, 7th August 2007
Comment: Here we have academic arguments over claims that hurricanes will increase and the cause is linked to global warming. This argument is basicaly over arithmetic but we do get one clear statement, as follows; "It is already well documented that there has been a dramatic increase in activity 1995-2006 as compared to 1970-1994. This is widely accepted and its causes are debated. But it is not the focus of HW2007 which claims to discern a heretofore unseen trend from 1905-2005." We do know that scientists are linking hurricanes to electrical activity connecting the magnetosphere to the ionosphere and this also manifests as increased lightening. No strong electrical connectivity equals no hurricanes. Quite simple really.
Global Warming at Odds With Science NewsMax.com, 6th August 2007
"In an exhaustive 113 page report, "Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics," released in July, professors Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf Tscheuschner used the science of physics to once and for all disprove such claims by the promoters of the global warming hoax." "The report pokes holes in the shaky global warming theory: "(a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, and (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet."
"The report's conclusions: "Modern global climatology has confused and continues to confuse fact with fantasy by introducing the concept of a scenario replacing the concept of a model." EPA to regulate breathing EcoStrive.org, 26 July 2007
"Well folks, be prepared to monitor your breathing. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Massachusetts regarding the question on whether the EPA has to regulate carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions as a "pollutant" in the terms of the Clean Air Act. But humans may be contributing more by breathing than any other source.
Massachusetts contends that global warming is caused by pollutants such as CO2 and that global warming is causing a rise in sea levels, thus causing damage to the state in the form of losing coastal property.
The EPA cited a study by the National Research Council that concluded that “a causal linkage” between greenhouse gases emissions and global warming “cannot be unequivocally established.” EPA said it was inappropriate for the agency to regulate greenhouse gas emissions without more understanding about the causes of global warming. The problem is that regulating CO2 emissions is a very daunting task. Comment: Great comment from The Conservative Environmentalist. Up against the warming zealots The Australian, 21 July 2007 
Comment: Martin Durkin says his British documentary rejecting the idea of human-caused global warming has survived last week's roasting by the ABC. "WHEN I agreed to make The Great Global Warming Swindle, I was warned a middle-class fatwa would be placed on my head."
"The ABC studio assault, led by Tony Jones, was so vitriolic it appears to have backfired. We have been inundated with messages of support." The confessions of a former global warmer NC Media Watch, 9th July 2007
"There is now no observational evidence to support the notion that global warming is
caused by carbon emissions. None. You would think that in over 20 years of intense
investigation, after spending $50 billion of government money on climate change, we
would have found something! The only current reasons for blaming carbon emissions
are the predictions of climate models–which extrapolate a greenhouse effect from the
laboratory into the atmosphere."
As Lord Keynes famously said, "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?". Comment: Great quote! Manmade Global Warming: The Real Assault on Reason American Thinker, 29 June 2007 
In the opening chapter of The Assault on Reason, its seldom reasonable author accuses the Bush administration of exploiting people's fears "to short-circuit debate and drive the public agenda without regard to the evidence, the facts, or the public interest."
Shamelessly abusing lingering September 11th and nascent Iraq anxieties, he argues that the roles of "reason, logic and truth" have been eroded from the American decision-making process. This lack of focus and clarity, charges Al Gore, is personified by an administration that ignores expert advice, circumvents analysis and debate, and suppresses evidence to promote predetermined, agenda driven policies. Comment: A book review on Al Gore's latest book, The Assault on Reason. Some very nice quotes here as to why Al Gore has absolutely no reason to point the finger at anyone about being reasonable. Summing up the author writes: "Say, Al, how about the repetition of the counterfeit phrase "the science is settled," when in fact thousands of papers are published on the subject each year? Or, perhaps, making the irregular concept of a gas essential to life on Earth (CO2) actually representing a life-adverse pollutant seem regular? Or how about the misdirection of claimed "consensus" among panelists when scientists with reasoned yet contrarian evidence, facts and theories are systematically denounced, defunded, demoted and, ultimately, demonized?" Al Gore's spiritual crisis is having a crisis. See also, Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny Swedish Scientist Accuses UN's IPCC of Falsifying Data and Destroying Evidence NewsBusters.org, June 24, 2007 
"If you listen to the global warming alarmists working for the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or folks like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore, sea levels across the globe are rising at a rate that will eventually doom us all. According to Swedish paleogeophysicist Nils-Axel Mörner, who’s been studying and writing about sea levels for four decades, the scientists working for the IPCC have falsified data and destroyed evidence to incorrectly prove their point."
Comment: This scientist gets the "Sword of Truth Award", but he must be also pretty confident that he won't get the golden boot too! Solar Activity, Earth's Magnetic Field and Galactic Cosmic Rays CO2science.org, 20 June 2007 
"Dergachev et al. find that "galactic cosmic ray levels in the earth's atmosphere are inversely related to the strength of the helio- and geomagnetic fields," and they conclude that "cosmic ray flux variations are apparently the most effective natural factor of climate changes on a large time scale." More specifically, they note that "changes in cloud processes under the action of cosmic rays, which are of importance for abundance of condensation nuclei and for ice formation in cyclones, can act as a connecting link between solar variability and changes in weather and climate," and they cite numerous scientific studies that indicate that "cosmic rays are a substantial factor affecting weather and climate on time scales of hundreds to thousands of years." Comment: Oh dear! Freedom, not climate, is at risk FT.com, 13 June 2007
Comment: Vaclav Klaus is President of the Czech Republic, who writes:
As someone who lived under communism for most of his life, I feel obliged to say that I see the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity now in ambitious environmentalism, not in communism. This ideology wants to replace the free and spontaneous evolution of mankind by a sort of central (now global) planning. The following charter should be considered by all who wish to usher in a new golden age for humanity. As a witness to today’s worldwide debate on climate change, I suggest the following: ■Small climate changes do not demand far-reaching restrictive measures ■Any suppression of freedom and democracy should be avoided ■Instead of organising people from above, let us allow everyone to live as he wants ■Let us resist the politicisation of science and oppose the term “scientific consensus”, which is always achieved only by a loud minority, never by a silent majority ■Instead of speaking about “the environment”, let us be attentive to it in our personal behaviour ■Let us be humble but confident in the spontaneous evolution of human society. Let us trust its rationality and not try to slow it down or divert it in any direction ■Let us not scare ourselves with catastrophic forecasts, or use them to defend and promote irrational interventions in human lives. Why It's Not Possible To Estimate 'Mean Global Temperature'" Climate Science NZ, 5th June 2007
It is quite impossible to obtain a statistically or scientifically acceptable estimate of mean
global temperature or its variability over time, from readings on the earth’s surface, for the
following reasons:
Random distribution of measuring equipment is impossible, and thus, so is a truly global average of known accuracy. Comment: IPCC expert reviewer, Dr Vincent Gray, explains why it is impossible to obtain a statistically or scientifically acceptable estimate of mean global temperature or its variability over time, from readings on the earth’s surface. The original report is archived here They call this a consensus? The Canadian Financial Post, 2nd June 2007
Comment: The Editor, Lawrence Solomon from The Canadian Financial Post, describes his predicament of starting to write the series, The Deniers , more than six months ago. "Now, after profiling more than 20 deniers, I do not know when I will stop -- the list of distinguished scientists who question the IPCC grows daily, as does the number of emails I receive, many from scientists who express gratitude for my series."
NASA Chief Draws Incredulity With Global Warming Remarks Tech News World, 1st June 2007 
[...] "I have no doubt that a trend of global warming exists," Griffin began. "I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with." [...]
"To assume that it is a problem is to assume that the state of earth's climate today is the optimal climate, the best climate that we could have or ever have had, and that we need to take steps to make sure that it doesn't change," [...] "I don't think it's within the power of human beings to assure that the climate does not change, as millions of years of history have shown." [...] "And second of all, I guess I would ask which human beings, where and when, are to be accorded the privilege of deciding that this particular climate that we have right here today, right now, is the best climate for all other human beings," Griffin said. "I think that's a rather arrogant position for people to take." Comment: Interesing response here to some common sense comments. We have to remember that NASA are spending a great amount of effort watching the Sun, NOT dreaming up ways to make money through global warming. Freeman Dyson on Global Warming Bogus Climate Models YouTube, May 2007
Comment: "In this 10-minute-long video (two parts), a prominent scientist who's followed the science of global warming from the beginning, Freeman Dyson explains why climate models have no scientific merit, why average global ground temperature is a great fiction, and what he believes the real dangers of increased CO2 in the atmosphere are. He suggests that the relatively simple solution of land use management could potentially give us the ability to control the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere at any level we'd like, and there's no need to stop burning coal and oil. In the second part he talks about stratospheric cooling." (The Reference Frame)
Verification of Climate Models WOODTV, 28th May 2007
"When looking at 32 specific predictions, according to Hughes, the models got 1 right and 27 wrong, with 4 cases where the results were inclusive. The more I study this subject and become increasingly aware of the failings of the computer models, the more I think you can trust the Old Farmer’s Almanac on what next year’s winter will be like more than you can trust the climate models."
Comment: The Farmer's Almanac first published in 1818 makes predictions based on the activity of sunspots and has a highly impressive accuracy rate of 80%. I Was On the Global Warming Gravy Train Ludwig von Mises Institute, 28th May 2007
I was on that gravy train, making a high wage in a science job that would not have existed if we didn't believe carbon emissions caused global warming. And so were lots of people around me; there were international conferences full of such people. We had political support, the ear of government, big budgets. We felt fairly important and useful (I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet! [...]
"I worry that politics could seriously distort the science. Suppose that carbon taxes are widely enacted, but that the rate of global warming increase starts to decline by 2015. The political system might pressure scientists to provide justifications for the taxes." Comment: We have found a scientist that can follow through the logic... The Greenhousers Strike Back and Out CounterPunch, 27th May 2007
I began this series of critiques of the greenhouse fearmongers with an evocation of the papal indulgences of the Middle Ages as precursors of the "carbon credits"-ready relief for carbon sinners, burdened, because all humans exhale carbon, with original sin. In the Middle Ages they burned heretics, and after reading through the hefty pile of abusive comments and supposed refutations of my initial article on global warming I’m fairly sure that the critics would be only to happy to cash in whatever carbon credits they have and torch me without further ado.
The greenhouse fearmongers explode at the first critical word, and have contrived a series of primitive rhetorical pandybats which they flourish in retaliation. Those who disagree with their claim that anthropogenic CO2 is the cause of the small, measured increase in the average earth’s surface temperature, are stigmatized as "denialists," a charge which scurrilously combines an acoustic intimation of nihilism with a suggested affinity to those who insist the Holocaust never took place. Comment: A nice history lesson here about the perversion of science by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This is the UN body that supposedly represents the opinion of thousands of scientists re CO2 and global warming. Apparently, in the IPCC's 1995 report, the statement, "The balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate", was added to the report after the scientists had signed off with the opposite conclusion. Is it any wonder that some scientists are now brandishing the knife. A new phrase here, "sinful combustion".....it's got a catchy ring to it! Climatologist Fired For Exposing Warming Myths National Center for Policy Analysis, 16th May 2007 
Comment: This climatologist is awarded the "The Sword of Truth Award". Yes, scientists do face losing their jobs, but we are doing battle with powers and principalities...liars in high places. I partly agree with the sentiment, "The whole global warming issue is a mess right now. Scientists have not reached a scientific conclusion yet, but the politicians want to jump the gun and be seen as saviors on the issue. This is a recipe for disaster." In reality, politicans are wishing to divert ordinary people from the realisation that planet Earth is witnessing a spiritual transformation. I see this as the manipulation of science to justify false claims.
Climate Momentum Shifting: Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming - Now Skeptics Growing Number of Scientists Convert to Skeptics After Reviewing New Research The Inhofe EPW Press Blog,15 May 2007
Comment: Well I think it's a lot easier to accept that we are witnessing evolutionary change than believe in "global warming" based on scientific theories that can't hold water. Great quotes from Al Gore's arch-enemy Senator Inhofe in his press blog.
"Allegre, who was one of the first scientists to sound global warming fears 20 years ago, now says the cause of climate change is "unknown" and accused the “prophets of doom of global warming” of being motivated by money, noting that "the ecology of helpless protesting has become a very lucrative business for some people!"Well there has been some eye-brows raised & criticism of Al Gore's $200,000 outing to Chile , which works out at $5,000 per minute, for his estimated 40 minute speech. It's really not that hard to see why people are getting very skeptical. Quote 3. "As Lord Keynes famously said, ‘When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?’" Scientist stuns experts by saying trees worsen greenhouse effect EarthTimes.org, 14th May 2007 
Comment:More confirmation that our scientists don't understand the complexities of our eco-systems and the environment. The Earth is in a very unbalanced state, with artificial electromagnetic signals, being compounded with cosmic energies streaming onto our planet, soon to become a deluge. Our scientists are simply barking up the wrong trees.
Deforestation: The hidden cause of global warming London Independent, 14th May 2007 
Comment:
The Independent makes a very good point here, "In the next 24 hours, deforestation will release as much CO2 into the atmosphere as 8 million people flying from London to New York. Stopping the loggers is the fastest and cheapest solution to climate change. So why are global leaders turning a blind eye to this crisis?" If you have not worked it out by now, the environmental movement has been hijacked by politicians and fraudsters who aim to profiteer from the transformation of our planet, which will is taking place anyway. Human efforts to stop this are futile, we can only aim to live more in balance with our Earth. Spending large sums of money to make small changes, is just a pretense to give the impression that our leaders are somehow still in control, while giving some of them an opportunity to make a lot of money in the process.
Gore's guru disagreed National Post, 28th April 2007
In the history of the global-warming movement, no scientist is more revered than Roger Revelle of Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Harvard University and University of California San Diego. He was the co-author of the seminal 1957 paper that demonstrated that fossil fuels had increased carbon-dioxide levels in the air.
Under his leadership, the President's Science Advisory Committee Panel on Environmental Pollution in 1965 published the first authoritative U.S. government report in which carbon dioxide from fossil fuels was officially recognized as a potential global problem. He was the author of the influential 1982 Scientific American article that elevated global warming on to the public agenda. For being "the grandfather of the greenhouse effect," as he put it, he was awarded the National Medal of Science by the first President Bush. Comment: This article is part of a series about global warming derniers , it seems that even Al Gore's supposed guru Dr. Roger Revelle, fell foul and became a dernier in his last days, but attempts to erase this from history have failed. Al Gore's involvement here can only be described as unsavoury. Greenhouse sceptics to congregate TheAge.com.au, February 28, 2007
HARD-CORE global warming sceptics will descend on Canberra today for the release of a book claiming environmentalism is the new religion. [...]
"Environmentalism has largely superseded Christianity as the religion of the upper classes in Europe and to a lesser extent in the United States," Mr Evans says in the publication. "It is a form of religious belief which fosters a sense of moral superiority in the believer, but which places no importance on telling the truth," he says. "The global warming scam has been, arguably, the most extraordinary example of scientific fraud in the postwar period." Comment: I have to agree here and state that we are watching the birth of a new religion, "Environmentalism" led by high powered priests like Al Gore. Here are the best quotes from the report: "Environmentalism has largely superseded Christianity as the religion of the upper classes in Europe and to a lesser extent in the United States."Some maybe confused by my stance. I am a seeker of the truth so I don't care about the source. Global warming alarmists are spreading lies to further an agenda. When they start talking about the Sun and the cosmic environment, then their views will be taken more seriously. When these people understand that we are witnesses to a spiritual transformation of planet Earth, then I will celebrate! The hurricane expert who stood up to UN junk science National Post, December 08, 2006
You're a respected scientist, one of the best in your field. So respected, in fact, that when the United Nations decided to study the relationship between hurricanes and global warming for the largest scientific endeavour in its history -- its International Panel on Climate Change -- it called upon you and your expertise.
You are Christopher Landsea of the Atlantic Oceanographic & Meteorological Laboratory. You were a contributing author for the UN's second International Panel on Climate Change in 1995, writing the sections on observed changes in tropical cyclones around the world. Then the IPCC called on you as a contributing author once more, for its "Third Assessment Report" in 2001. And you were invited to participate yet again, when the IPCC called on you to be an author in the "Fourth Assessment Report." This report would specifically focus on Atlantic hurricanes, your specialty, and be published by the IPCC in 2007. Then something went horribly wrong. Comment: The most important aspect of this story is that it reveals that the IPCC ( UN's Panel on Climate Change) sought to pervert science for political purposes. The 2006 hurricane season proved once and for all that warm water does not generate hurricanes, as we had an unprecedented extened heatwave that traversed the globe but paradoxically hardly generated any hurricanes. Psst! Maybe there are other factors that these scientists have not considered! Decorated Scientist Defects From Belief in Global Warming – Caps Year of Vindication for Skeptics US Senate News, Oct 24, 2006
Washington DC - One of the most decorated French geophysicists has converted from a believer in manmade catastrophic global warming to a climate skeptic. This latest defector from the global warming camp caps a year in which numerous scientific studies have bolstered the claims of climate skeptics. Scientific studies that debunk the dire predictions of human-caused global warming have continued to accumulate and many believe the new science is shattering the media-promoted scientific “consensus” on climate alarmism.
Claude Allegre, a former government official and an active member of France’s Socialist Party, wrote an editorial on September 21, 2006 in the French newspaper L'Express titled “The Snows of Kilimanjaro” (For English Translation, click here: http://epw.senate.gov/fact.cfm?party=rep&id=264835 ) detailing his newfound skepticism about manmade global warming. See: http://www.lexpress.fr/idees/tribunes/dossier/allegre/dossier.asp?ida=451670 Allegre wrote that the “cause of climate change remains unknown” and pointed out that Kilimanjaro is not losing snow due to global warming, but to local land use and precipitation changes. Allegre also pointed out that studies show that Antarctic snowfall rate has been stable over the past 30 years and the continent is actually gaining ice. #147;Following the month of August experienced by the northern half of France, the prophets of doom of global warming will have a lot on their plate in order to make our fellow countrymen swallow their certitudes,” Allegre wrote. He also accused proponents of manmade catastrophic global warming of being motivated by money, noting that “the ecology of helpless protesting has become a very lucrative business for some people!” Comment: Senator Inhofe, a US Senator has been leading the charge against Al Gore and the global warming lobby. This report is a nice summary of some facts for anyone who did not realise that much of the science around global warming can only be described as speculative. This report explains why many scientists are starting to become aware of solar activity and are refusing to bow to any consensus that ignores the role of the Sun. Back 
Susan Joy Rennison, B.Sc.Hons. (Physics with Geophysics)
Home
Joyfire Science & Metaphysics Integration
|
|
|
Anti-carbon trading activists shut down the website of the European Climate Exchange (ECX), over the weekend, replacing the site with a spoof page lampooning the industry.
I don’t have a dog in this fight, as this is between two people with opposing viewpoints, but I’m happy to pass on this rebuttal from Christopher Monckton, who writes:
“Move along now, please… Nothing to see here…” was the predictable burden of Sir Muir Russell’s investigation into Climategate. Are we surprised? Any other conclusion would have made world headlines as a first for the climate change establishment. This is the third Climategate whitewash job and it would be tempting to see it as just as futile as its predecessors. That, however, would be to underrate its value to the sceptic cause, which is considerable.
Science has been changed forever by the so-called "climategate" saga, leading researchers have said ahead of publication of an inquiry into the affair – and mostly it has been changed for the better.
[...] Kalichman, however, feels that everyday reasoning alone is not enough to make someone a denialist [...]
Via press release: Washington, DC: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s track record in predicting the number of Atlantic hurricanes is so abysmal that a trained chimp could do better, says The National Center for Public Policy Research, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank.
The Arctic ice set 30 records in April, one for each day. According to satellite data received by the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, the Arctic was more ice bound each day of April than it had been any other corresponding day in April since its sensors began tracking the extent of Arctic Ice in mid 2002. Click here to see this tracking on the Japan Aerospace website, run jointly with the International Arctic Research Center.
Spring showers are next to non-existent in the High Arctic, so Environment Canada's senior climatologist says he's baffled to hear that it rained near the North Pole this week. A group of British scientists working off Ellef Ringnes Island, near the North Pole, reported being hit with a three-minute rain shower over the weekend. The group reported the rain on Tuesday. Rain in the High Arctic in April is nothing short of bizarre, said David Phillips, senior climatologist with Environment Canada.
In the past environmentalists, from Lord Stern to Sir Paul McCartney, have urged people to stop eating meat because the methane produced by cattle causes global warming. However a new study found that cattle grazed on the grasslands of China actually reduce another greenhouse gas, nitrous oxide. [...]
The World's Leading Global Warming Skeptics Take Your Questions Live on The Air!!! New Global Cooling Radio Show to feature Lord Monckton as first guest 3rd April 2010.
CLIMATE SCIENCE MUST BECOME MORE TRANSPARENT, SAY MPs
A new study suggests that the IPCC is losing 10% of it's credibility mass every month, and could have completely disappeared by Christmas.
SAINT PETERSBURG (AFP) – Walking along a Saint Petersburg Street immersed in music, Milana Kashtanova, became the latest victim of falling icicles and ice blocks that have killed five people and injured 147 in the city following Russia's coldest winter in 30 years.
Moscow - Russian military jets are waging war against an unusual enemy - ice.
A total of 15 Sukhoi fighter planes and Mi-8 combat helicopters have been deployed to bomb ice blocking rivers in Siberia and far Eastern regions to prevent flooding, defence spokesman Vladimir Drik told the state-run Ria Nowosti news agency Wednesday.
In a new blow to the climate change lobby, Russia's top weatherman today announced that the winter now drawing to a close in Siberia may turn out to be the coldest on record.
[...] If the climate system is less sensitive to greenhouse gases than the climate campaign believes, then what is causing plainly observable changes in the climate, such as earlier arriving springs, receding glaciers, and shrinking Arctic Ocean ice caps? There have been alternative explanations in the scientific literature for several years, ignored by the media and the IPCC alike.
The integrity of climate research has taken a very public battering in recent months. Scientists must now emphasize the science, while acknowledging that they are in a street fight.
Ships were on Friday warned to stay off a danger zone in the Baltic Sea after ice breakers freed up to 50 vessels and thousands of passengers stranded in freezing conditions off the Swedish coast.
Undaunted by a rash of scandals over the science underpinning climate change, top climate researchers are plotting to respond with what one scientist involved said needs to be "an outlandishly aggressively partisan approach" to gut the credibility of skeptics.
Here’s something rather astonishing. The Institute of Physics, has made a statement about climate science.
The “Climategate” revelations that began in mid December have crescendoed into a series of almost daily embarrassments for the UN IPCC. This telecast covers as many of them as we can cram into an hour. The program can be viewed in segments. With the intro to each segment you will find links you may use to find more information on the topics covered.
