"Carbon (Dioxide) trading is now the fastest growing commodities market on earth.....And here’s the great thing about it. Unlike traditional commodities markets, which will eventually involve delivery to someone in physical form, the carbon (dioxide) market is based on lack of delivery of an invisible substance to no-one. Since the market revolves around creating carbon (dioxide) credits, or finding carbon (dioxide) reduction projects whose benefits can then be sold to those with a surplus of emissions, it is entirely intangible." (Telegraph)
This blog has been tracking the 'Global Warming Scam' for over four years now. There are a very large number of articles being published in blogs and more in the MSM who are waking up to the fact the public refuse to be conned any more and are objecting to the 'green madness' of governments and the artificially high price of energy. This blog will now be concentrating on the major stories as we move to the pragmatic view of 'not if, but when' and how the situation is managed back to reality. To quote Professor Lindzen, "a lot of people are going to look pretty silly"
PS: If you have arrived here on a page link, then click on the HOME link...
Friday, 19 December 2014
Climate Custers’ Last Stand…Top German Climate Scientists See No End To “Warming Pause”. Now Concede Oceans A “Major Climate Factor”
Germany’s so-called Climate Consortium here has published a telling statement on this year’s “record warm year” in Germany and the reasons behind it. The Climate Consortium represents the collective position of all Germany’s scientific climate institutes. ..."
The 97% “consensus” study, Cook et al. (2013) has been thoroughly refuted in scholarly peer-reviewed journals, by major news media, public policy organizations and think tanks, highly credentialed scientists and extensively in the climate blogosphere. The shoddy methodology of Cook’s study has been shown to be so fatally flawed that well known climate scientists have publicly spoken out against it, "
Monday, 8 December 2014
It’s a global poll done by the United Nations, with over six million responses from all over the planet, and guess what? ..The revealed truth is that of the sixteen choices given to people regarding what they think are the important issues in their lives, climate change is dead last. Not only that, but in every sub-category, by age, by sex, by education, by country grouping, it’s right down at the bottom of the list. NOBODY thinks it’s important."
Phil Jones and Michael Mann are two of the most influential figures in the whole "climate change" racket. What these documents reveal is the greatest scientific scandal of our times - and a tragedy. It's not just their graphs but their battle lines that are drawn all wrong. Science is never "settled," and certainly not on the basis of predictive models. And any scientist who says it is is no longer a scientist. And the dismissal of "skeptics" throughout the Jones/Mann correspondence is most revealing: a real scientist is always a skeptic."
Which brings me to How the Science Got Settled, the latest posting by Mark Steyn on the fifth anniversary of the release of the “climategate” emails. Here I’ll just repeat the quotes from the various climate scientists quoted by Steyn but do go to the article to see the context and the commentary. ................It’s a scandal but the biggest scandal is that just about no one seems to be scandalised."
Experts say that very complex and divergent Mann-made destructive processes, have caused the ice to be almost exactly normal at both poles.
Further unprecedented human interference may well cause increased normalcy."
Saturday, 6 December 2014
But, in what has already been hailed by Forbes magazine as a new "Climategate", Booker records week's revelation of a document showing that a campaign which last year pushed the EU into a damaging ban on certain insecticides was deliberately engineered, on the basis of highly questionable evidence, by a group of environmentally committed scientists working for a green pressure group, the International Union for Conservation in Nature (IUCN). ......But – as we reported earlier, it emerges that IUCN was funded by the EU itself to the tune of £19 milllion, with £350,000 going specifically to a "task force", headed by an environmentalist who was one of the co-founders of the Dutch WWF, to come up with the evidence needed to justify a ban.
Minutes of the task force's first meeting in 2010 show that its only purpose was to find evidence to support a ban. Since 2004 neonics have been successfully used to control crop damage by farmers in 120 countries. On the back of papers produced by the task force, other green lobby groups – some also funded by the EU - launched a Europe-wide campaign calling for a ban, particularly focussed for propaganda purposes on the damage these chemicals were purportedly doing to bees.
When the Commission accordingly proposed its ban, few questioned it more strongly than the chief scientific adviser to the UK's Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), which was why opposition to it in Brussels was led by his minister Owen Paterson. Defra's own field trials had shown no damage to bees, whereas the IUCN relied only on highly artificial laboratory experiments. .......This is yet another example of the bizarre symbiosis the EU has established with green pressure groups, as it showers out hundreds of millions of euros a year for them to lobby it for the all-too often destructive policies they want.
Among those who fell for the dubious science behind this particular ban was David Cameron. In their final tetchy interview last July he raised it as one of his chief reasons for sacking Mr Paterson: easily the best-informed and most effective Defra minister we've ever had."
Investigation: How Green Activist Scientists Rigged an EU Pesticide Ban Costing Farmers and Businesses Billions
What we found was appalling if not altogether surprising. The ban - heavily opposed by Britain's then-Environment Secretary Owen Paterson - had rather less to do with proven necessity than it did with political horse-trading. Indeed, the scientific evidence for justifying the ban seemed flimsy to the point of non-existence. ......So in the name of saving the environment, the Green Blob has once again succeeded in perverting the cause of science, damaging nature, harming the economy, ruining livelihoods and driving up prices. There is nothing new in any of this: it's how the Green Blob rolls - the destruction of the global economy, in this case in its ideological war on the intensive agriculture which keeps us fed, being one of its primary objectives. The only thing that's different this time is this: for a change - as with Climategate - the lying, cheating bastards got caught red-handed."
The war on carbon energy, the carbon tax, the renewable energy targets, escalating electricity costs and the voices in Parliament calling for Emissions Trading Schemes have all unnerved our big users of carbon fuels and electricity. Smelting and refining have become threatened industries in Australia, and closure of the Mount Isa copper smelter and the Townsville copper refinery has been foreshadowed. Already six major metal smelting/refining operations have closed in Australia this century and more are likely. The closures have affected copper, lead, zinc, steel and aluminium – the sinews of modern industry. And the car industry, with all its skills and tools, is closing.
More and more land and offshore waters are totally closed to exploration and mining. Offshore exploration for oil is very limited, except in the north-west. On land, there is no exploration in green no-go areas and the “lock-the-gate” rent-a-crowd are trying to prevent gas explorers from drilling even on their own exploration tenements. Local production and refining of oil is also declining, and it was estimated recently that by next year, half of Australia’s oil refining capacity will have closed. In the event of a disruption to tanker routes, Australia has just 12 days of diesel supplies before city fuel and food supplies start to dry up. Will we see charcoal burners on cars and trucks once again?
Heavy industry is scorned, and is migrating to Asia. We are losing the resources, skills and machinery needed for our own security, while we fritter away precious resources on green energy, direct action, carbon capture and storage and other pointless anti-carbon chimeras.
Our foolish green energy policies and the suicidal war on carbon fuels are killing real industry leaving us unskilled and defenceless – like a fat toothless walrus basking on a sunny beach.
Wake up Australia."
We now have the RSS satellite temperature data out for November, and, as with UAH, they show that this year will be nowhere a record, as is being touted for the surface datasets. Indeed, this year is running in only a modest 7th place."
The obvious message is that these particular proxies don’t work now and probably never did, and that this hockeystick shape depends on not using tree rings after 1980."
Thursday, 27 November 2014
If you suffer from an uncontrollable urge to claim that peer review is a part of The Scientific Method (that’s you Matthew Bailes, Pro VC of Swinburne), the bad news just keeps on coming. Now, we can add the terms “Peer Review Rigging” to “Peer-review tampering”, and “Citation Rings”.
Not only do personal biases and self-serving interests mean good papers are slowed for years and rejected for inane reasons, but gibberish gets published, and in some fields most results can’t be replicated. Now we find (is anyone surprised?) that some authors are even reviewing their own work. It’s called Peer-Review-Rigging. When the editor asks for suggestions of reviewers, you provide pseudonyms and bogus emails. The editor sends the review to a gmail type address, you pick it up, and voila, you can pretend to be an independent reviewer.
One researcher, Hyung-In Moon, was doing this to review his own submissions. He was caught because he sent the reviews back in less than 24 hours. Presumably if he’d waiting a week, no one would have noticed."
Described as a “professor of climate science,” Chris Rapley has no teaching duties. Described as a “climate scientist,” he has spent decades in administrative roles. ..... Who knew this was the path to glory? Spend decades as an administrator managing budgets and recruiting personnel, work hard at being politically-connected, dabble in psychology – and voilà! Before you know it, a university will dress you up as a Professor of Climate Science."
The US and Australia have charted different paths to achieve their common goal of reducing greenhouse emissions. While each makes a fine platform for green rhetoric and electoral posturing, neither course acknowledges the inescapable truth that the developing world couldn't care less about CO2 "
If Utopia last century was populated by Soviet Man, he has been superseded this century by Green Person, but with eerily similar yearnings – this time for a ‘sustainable’ world free of ‘inequity’.
Paradoxically, the contraction-and-convergence concept’s surprise creator, Aubrey Meyer, is neither eco-Marxist nor career UN climate bureaucrat. He is a musician (viola player) by training and former member of the UK Green Party. Now a climate campaigner and composer, he co-founded the Global Commons Institute in 1990.
According to Mr Meyer’s site, his first public “Contraction & Convergence” statement was published in The Guardian on June 18, 1991, with 250 signatories, including 50 UK Parliamentarians. The following year, he presented what appears to have been an influential paper on it — ‘The Unequal Use of the Global Commons’ — to a Policy Working Group at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Surely the developing world did not put the $$$-cart before the dangerous climate-horse? Yet Mr Meyer’s concept appeared years before any UNFCCC appeals to “settled” (climate) science; and before two-decades of confirmation bias led us to where we are today. But that is another story."