Worse than terror?

Obama fights Global Warming with as much guts as he fights Islamofascism.

//Secretary of State John Kerry said Sunday the climate agreement reached this week in Paris did not contain any enforcement provisions because Congress would not have approved them.

"It doesn't have mandatory targets for reduction and it doesn't have an enforcement, compliance mechanism," Kerry said during an interview on "Fox News Sunday."

Kerry said such mechanisms were not included because Congress would have refused to greenlight the deal.

Binding legal requirements would have made the Paris agreement a treaty, requiring approval from two-thirds of the Senate. Because no climate change measure could close to the high bar in the chamber, the Paris deal was written to avoid it.//

It really is a religion for this people.

John Kerry urges the public shaming of people who do not agree with the administration’s position on the matter of climate change. 

Censorship and re-education for reporting the truth.

Good thing the liberal west won against the totalitarians...or something.

//But it was not this that led the trust to order that all those responsible for the programme must attend the “BBC Academy’s impartiality online training module”, with special reference to “reporting climate change science”.

Their real offence had been to allow Letts to interview two climate-sceptical MPs. One of them, the former Cabinet minister Peter Lilley, recalled the Met Office’s prediction from 2004 that, over the next decade, global temperatures would rise by some 0.3 degrees C. And what had happened when 2014 arrived, asked Letts? “Nothing,” Lilley replied. “Zilch.” There had been “no global warming”.

This prompted the trust to quote yards of material from such learned authorities as the Commons Select Committee on Energy and Climate Change to show that it was almost universally agreed by scientists that “human activity is the dominant cause of the warming witnessed in the latter half of the 20th century”, and that those responsible had ignored a “decision that the programme should not include challenge [sic] to the prevailing scientific view about climate change”.

The trust thus ruled that the programme was at fault in not making it clear that the two MPs “represented a minority opinion which contradicted the view of the majority of scientists”. It should have given the Met Office – whose computer models used for “climate prediction” are “highly regarded… around the world” – a chance to rebut Mr Lilley’s claim.//

Liberalism - Denying choice and forcing poorer people to live like rats in the inner city so that the elites can feel good about themselves while flying to "climate change" conferences.

California Supreme Court makes building affordable housing more expensive (or impossible).

//The justices agreed with the "sprawl causes climate change" argument. "Finally, one should not assume a sizeable new housing development planned for a site relatively far from major urban centers, to be built largely on undeveloped land with habitat for several sensitive species, will have comparatively minor impacts either on greenhouse gas emissions or on fish and wildlife," wrote Justice Kathryn Werdegar for the majority.

If Californians aren't going to be housed in suburban-style neighborhoods, how will they live? The answer, many environmentalists say, is infill neighborhoods, smaller, high-density and apartment complexes shoehorned into existing urban areas, where residents can rely more on public transit rather than on automobiles.

One can debate the merits of either type of living. But in a recent column, former California Senate President Pro Tempore Don Perata, D-Oakland, pointed to research showing that CEQA lawsuits are used the most to target the kind of environmentally friendly projects the state wants to encourage, like transit, renewable energy and higher-density housing. Perata now heads a trade group that promotes infill housing.

Meanwhile, there's more chance the problem will get worse before it gets better. Last session, a measure (SB 32) to reduce the state's greenhouse-gas levels by 80 percent of 1990 levels by 2050 stalled after some members of the state's business community pointed out these long-term climate goals can be used under CEQA to halt currently proposed projects. The bill stalled, but is a two-year measure that may come back in January.//

Every population group that has risen in the American economy has welcomed the opportunity to move to the suburbs to give their children a better life.

American liberals for the first time in history want to deny the middle class that opportunity.

Debunking Global Warming Hysteria.

By a Geologist.

Two questions:

1.  Isn't science about sharing information?

2.  Why is it unlawful for the public to see the emails of work done by publicly paid scientists about publicly-funded science?

Government scientists refuse to reveal emails in order to show why they magically reversed their position on global warming.

//A top House lawmaker’s confrontation with government researchers over a groundbreaking climate change study is provoking a national backlash from scientists, who say his campaign represents the most serious threat Congress has posed to scientific freedom.

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, has subpoenaed scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and demanded that they turn over internal e-mails related to their research. Their findings contradicted earlier work showing that global warming had paused, and Smith, a climate change skeptic, has accused them of altering global temperature data and rushing to publish their research in the June issue of the journal Science.

[NOAA chief tells lawmaker: No one will ‘coerce the scientists who work for me’]

So far, NOAA officials have resisted Smith’s demands, and the showdown has escalated.

The lawmaker has threatened to subpoena Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker, while scientists have rallied in solidarity with the researchers.

On Tuesday, seven scientific organizations representing hundreds of thousands of scientists sent an unsparing letter to Smith, warning that his efforts are “establishing a practice of inquests” that will have a chilling effect.

[Congressman now threatens to subpoena commerce secretary over global warming report ]

“The repercussions of the committee’s actions could go well beyond climate science, setting a precedent to question other topics such as genetically modified organisms and vaccines that have controversial regulatory and policy implications,” the letter said.//

Shut up, he explained.

This would be funny....

...if it weren't so scary and pathetic as an example of (a) the cognitive dissonance of American liberalism and (b) didn't reek of succumbing to the totalitarian temptation.

Bill Nye says:

//The single most important thing we can do now, however, is talk about climate change. My claim is that if we were talking about climate change the way we’re talking about Ferguson, Missouri, or Baltimore or other important issues, we would be getting these things done. We would be solving this problem together. And, look, it’s hard. You’re going to meet people who don’t want to talk about it. //

And:


//Yeah, you’re leading to my next point. Part of the solution to this problem or this set of problems associated with climate change is getting the deniers out of our discourse. You know, we can’t have these people – they’re absolutely toxic. And so part of the message in this book is to get the deniers out of the picture...//


This is a very Stalinist approach, one might say, to the traditional American virtue of encouraging speech and debate.

Salon, though, thinks it's terrific.

Another failed prediction.

A question for those who want to put Global Warming Skeptics in prison: How does this effect your certainty that substantial anthropogenic global warming is occurring and will be a threat in the future?

Again, we have growth of ocean ice, growth of Antarctic ice, but loss in one area of the Antarctic.

Isn't the likely explanation that the loss of ice in the West Atlantic ice field is due to local explanations peculiar to that area?

//The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.

According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed   to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.

“We’re essentially in agreement with other studies that show an increase in ice discharge in the Antarctic Peninsula and the Thwaites and Pine Island region of West Antarctica,” said Jay Zwally, a glaciologist with NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study, which was published on Oct. 30 in the Journal of Glaciology. “Our main disagreement is for East Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica – there, we see an ice gain that exceeds the losses in the other areas.”  Zwally added that his team “measured small height changes over large areas, as well as the large changes observed over smaller areas.”//

How many scientists have to defect before the 97% claim is finally abandoned?

This is from 2009


//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.

“I appreciate the opportunity to add my name to those who disagree that global warming is man made,” Theon wrote to the Minority Office at the Environment and Public Works Committee on January 15, 2009. “I was, in effect, Hansen’s supervisor because I had to justify his funding, allocate his resources, and evaluate his results,” Theon, the former Chief of the Climate Processes Research Program at NASA Headquarters and former Chief of the Atmospheric Dynamics & Radiation Branch explained.

“Hansen was never muzzled even though he violated NASA’s official agency position on climate forecasting (i.e., we did not know enough to forecast climate change or mankind’s effect on it). Hansen thus embarrassed NASA by coming out with his claims of global warming in 1988 in his testimony before Congress,” Theon wrote. [Note: NASA scientist James Hansen has created worldwide media frenzy with his dire climate warning, his call for trials against those who dissent against man-made global warming fear, and his claims that he was allegedly muzzled by the Bush administration despite doing 1,400 on-the-job media interviews! – See: Don’t Panic Over Predictions of Climate Doom – Get the Facts on James Hansen – UK Register: Veteran climate scientist says ‘lock up the oil men’ – June 23, 2008 & UK Guardian: NASA scientist calls for putting oil firm chiefs on trial for ‘high crimes against humanity’ for spreading doubt about man-made global warming – June 23, 2008 ]

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.//

/

Here is a long but extremely good survey on the AGW controversy ...

...by an Alarmist who became a Skeptic.

Got to love science.

After a decade of Alarmists explaining where the heat went to explain why there has been no warming since 1987, one scientist solved the problem by simply adding temperature to the more accurate Argo buoy data.

//The main reason for that is that Karl added 0.12°C to all Argo buoy temperature readings and gave them added weighting when calculating the re-analyzed dataset, according to a critique of Karl’s paper by Dr. Ross McKitrick.

The Argo array and ship-based temperature measurements are in disagreement. Argo’s temperatures are colder than ship-based temperatures and show no sea surface temperature increases since its earliest measurements began. Karl’s change to Argo data increases global temperatures after 2004, when Argo buoys started showing up in large numbers. The Argo network went fully operational in late 2007 with 3,000 floats in place.

The international Argo array is a wonder of modern climate science technology. It consists of nearly 3,900 specially designed buoys distributed in oceans all over the world. Each self-contained robotic buoy records ocean temperature, salinity and ocean drift to a depth of 6,500 feet. They normally free float at 3,000 feet. Every 10 days they dive and then return to the surface, taking measurements all along the way. Once surfaced, they automatically upload their collected data via satellite into a global database.

Argo is specifically designed for climate science. Ship-based measurements are not. Ships have taken measurements in many different ways over the years. Most modern-day water temperature readings from ships are taken from boiler room water intakes not designed for rigorous scientific purposes. Those have a built-in heat bias.

Instead of logically recalibrating the less reliable ship-based data to match the Argo data, Karl alters the Argo data to match the ship-based measurements.//

The debate is settled, so the president of the Sierra Club doesn't have to be able to discuss how the satellite data shows no warming for the last 17 years....

...all he has to do is quote a bogus "97% of ALL SCIENTISTS agree" artifact.

You have in this clip the classic Appeal to Authority fallacy AFTER the president of the Sierra Club says that the "preponderance of the evidence," i.e., something greater than 50% support AGW and that debate and discussion is perfectly OK, which came AFTER the Sierra Club's position statement that "debate is closed" was read.

This isn't science; it's ideology all the way down.

Liberalism - Slogans, not rules.

Remember when liberals believed in Free Speech, back before they had the Ring of Power?

Now, they want to use State power to punish public speech from those who dissent from their ideology.

//As you know, an overwhelming majority of climate scientists are convinced about the potentially serious adverse effects of human-induced climate change on human health, agriculture, and biodiversity. We applaud your efforts to regulate emissions and the other steps you are taking. Nonetheless, as climate scientists we are exceedingly concerned that America’s response to climate change – indeed, the world’s response to climate change – is insufficient. The risks posed by climate change, including increasing extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and increasing ocean acidity – and potential strategies for addressing them – are detailed in the Third National Climate Assessment (2014), Climate Change Impacts in the United States. The stability of the Earth’s climate over the past ten thousand years contributed to the growth of agriculture and therefore, a thriving human civilization. We are now at high risk of seriously destabilizing the Earth’s climate and irreparably harming people around the world, especially the world’s poorest people.

We appreciate that you are making aggressive and imaginative use of the limited tools available to you in the face of a recalcitrant Congress. One additional tool – recently proposed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse – is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change. The actions of these organizations have been extensively documented in peerreviewed academic research (Brulle, 2013) and in recent books including: Doubt is their Product (Michaels, 2008), Climate Cover-Up (Hoggan & Littlemore, 2009), Merchants of Doubt (Oreskes & Conway, 2010), The Climate War (Pooley, 2010), and in The Climate Deception Dossiers (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2015). We strongly endorse Senator Whitehouse’s call for a RICO investigation.

The methods of these organizations are quite similar to those used earlier by the tobacco industry. A RICO investigation (1999 to 2006) played an important role in stopping the tobacco industry from continuing to deceive the American people about the dangers of smoking. If corporations in the fossil fuel industry and their supporters are guilty of the misdeeds that have been documented in books and journal articles, it is imperative that these misdeeds be stopped as soon as possible so that America and the world can get on with the critically important business of finding effective ways to restabilize the Earth’s climate, before even more lasting damage is done.//

Baffling?  Like the absence of Global Warming for two decades?

Some people might consider this as some kind of evidence against Global Warming theory.

//Antarctic sea ice has grown to a record large extent for a second straight year, baffling scientists seeking to understand why this ice is expanding rather than shrinking in a warming world.//

How come this Nobel Prize winning scientist never got the message that all scientists agree about global warming?

Nobel Prize-Winning Scientist Who Endorsed Obama Now Says Prez. is ‘Ridiculous’ & ‘Dead Wrong’ on ‘Global Warming’

Nobel Prize Winning Physicist Dr. Ivar Giaever: 'Global warming is a non-problem'

'I say this to Obama: Excuse me, Mr. President, but you're wrong. Dead wrong.'

'Global warming really has become a new religion.'

"I am worried very much about the [UN] conference in Paris in November...I think that the people who are alarmist are in a very strong position.'

'We have to stop wasting huge, I mean huge amounts of money on global warming.'

Consensus means "suppress heretics in the name of Science."

University Pulls Funding For Think Tank Because It’s Run By A Global Warming Skeptic

Professor Bjorn Lomborg has become the target of environmental activists. Last week, activists convinced the University of Western Australia to cancel a plan with Lomborg to create a major research center that would focus on the economics of global development projects.

Why were global warming activists upset? Because Lomborg doesn’t believe global warming is currently the greatest threat facing mankind. Activistspressured the university to return $4 million to the Australian government that would have gone to create the think-tank Australia Consensus.

The move was celebrated by environmentalists, but bemoaned by Australian conservatives as a blow to free and open debate. Lomborg, the self-styled “skeptical environmentalist,” didn’t sit idly by, but instead took to the opinion pages of The Wall Street Journal to voice his disgust.

An Inconvenient Truth.

According to Instapundit

ICE, ICE BABY:   Stop. Collaborate and listen:  Ice is back, and apparently, it isn’t at risk of disappearing, as Steven Hayward explains.  Okay, it’s a bad reference to Vanilla Ice, but the horrific, imminent doom-and-gloom melting of the Earth’s ice caps–which Al Gore predicted would disappear completely by 2013– are doing quite well, thank you very much.  Indeed, satellite images show the Arctic ice cap has grown and thickened 43-63% since 2012.

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) website still claims that the ice caps are the “canary in the coal mine” and “harbinger of things to come” for global warming climate change.  Back in 2009, global warming climate change soothsayer James Hansen of NASA warned the globe that President Obama only “has four years to save the earth.“  Of course, Hansen’s wild exaggerations and data manipulation have been debunked, but this doesn’t stop the leftists, since we all know global warming climate change isn’t really about climate at all, but about wealth redistribution.

President Obama was just down here in South Florida, giving a speech in the Everglades on the hazards of global warmingclimate change, where he did his best Al Gore imitation:

This is not a problem for another generation.  Not anymore.  This is a problem now.  It has serious implications for the way we live right now.  Stronger storms.  Deeper droughts.  Longer wildfire seasons.  The world’s top climate scientists are warning that a changing climate already affects the air that our children are breathing.  The Surgeon General and I recently met with doctors and nurses and parents who see patients and kids grappling with the health impacts.  The Pentagon says that climate change poses an increasing set of risks to our national security.

Huh– that’s weird:  How come Obama and the Surgeon General are seeing “patients and kids grappling with the health impacts” from the “air that our children are breathing,” when the EPA’s own data indicates that U.S. air quality has improved markedly since 1980? And it seems odd to conclude that “our national security” is at risk due to global warming climate change, when the Obama Administration’s massive Clean Power Plan will cause severe electricity reliability problems, which could cause a major breakdown of law-and-order if coal-fired plants are shut down without first identifying adequate electricity generation alternatives to meet citizens’ needs.

It’s almost like Obama and the global warming climate change alarmists are making this stuff up or something.

Indeed.

Global Warming...

...is there anything it can't do!

The earthquake in Nepal, for example.

Because there never were earthquakes before 1900.

An inconvenient truth.

Arctic melting?

Not so much.

//It wasn’t long ago that David Barber, Canada’s Research Chair in Arctic System Science at the University of Manitoba, warned there was almost no multi-year ice left in the Northern Hemisphere.

“We are almost out of multiyear sea ice in the northern hemisphere,” he told Canada’s Parliament in 2009. “I’ve never seen anything like this in my 30 years of working in the high Arctic … it was very dramatic.”

Arctic sea ice extent that year was at its third-lowest extent on record, behind 2007 and 2008, and experts were saying there would be no polar ice during the summer by 2030 for the first time in one million years.

“I would argue that, from a practical perspective, we almost have a seasonally ice-free Arctic now, because multiyear sea ice is the barrier to the use and development of the Arctic,” Barber said.

But such predictions have fallen flat, as the Arctic has seen a resurgence of multi-year ice since 2009.

NSIDC and European satellite data show that multi-year sea ice made a big comeback in 2013 and 2014 — increasing from 2.25 to 3.17 million square kilometers during that time and making up 43 percent of the north pole’s ice pack.

In fact, Arctic sea ice extent as a whole seems to be stabilizing despite this year’s record low maximum in February. NSIDC data shows Arctic sea ice extent is currently within the normal range based on the 1981 to 2010 average extent.

“Global sea ice is at a record high, another key indicator that something is working in the opposite direction of what was predicted,” Dr. Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Forum, told the U.K. Express in January.

“Most people think the poles are melting… they’re not,” he said. “This is a huge inconvenience that reality is now catching up with climate alarmists, who were predicting that the poles would be melting fairly soon.”//

Oh, no!  Global Warming is causing glaciers to melt and reveal forest buried for 1,000 years!!!

....which, if you think about it, means that the globe was warmer 1,000 years ago than it has been for the last 1,000 years.

This actually a fascinating story.