Where HAVE all our woods gone? Up in smoke - as the new trendy 'green' wood-burning stoves and boilers (funded by tax millions) are being fuelled by birches and oaks... leaving swathes of Britain barren

Daily Mail

 

• More wood being burnt from British woods than since industrial revolution
• Government said annual fuel harvest should reach two million tons by 2020
• Bickerton Hill in Cheshire has seen a large decrease in the number of trees 

Biggest Fraud In Science History – The NASA/NOAA Surface Temperature Record

Real Science
Over the last ten years, satellites show that the Earth is cooling. But that doesn’t suit the needs of the climate criminal community ahead of their convention in Paris this year, so NASA/NOAA created a completely fake surface temperature record – which is diverging from satellite temperatures at a rate of two degrees per century"

Ocean Heat: New Study Shows Climate Scientists Can Still Torture Data until the Data Confess

WUWT
Bottom line: To manufacture the new warming, Cheng et al. adjusted, tweaked, modified (tortured) subsurface ocean temperature reconstructions to the depths of 700 meters starting in 1970. "

How Arctic ice has made fools of all those poor warmists

Christopher Booker, Telegraph
Two events last week brought yet further twists to one of the longest-running farces of our modern world. One was the revelation by the European Space Agency that in 2013 and 2014, after years when the volume of Arctic ice had been diminishing, it increased again by as much as 33 per cent. The other was that Canadian scientists studying the effect of climate change on Arctic ice from an icebreaker had to suspend their research, when their vessel was called to the aid of other ships trapped in the thickest summer ice seen in Hudson Bay for 20 years.  ..........
Of course, the reason why they have all wanted the ice at the poles to melt, not least on the land in Antarctica and Greenland, is that this would bring about their ultimate scare scenario: those sea levels rising by as much as 20 feet, which, as Al Gore showed in his Oscar-winning film An Inconvenient Truth, would flood New York, Shanghai and many of the world’s most populous cities.
But, alas, it just isn’t happening. In recent years there has been more polar ice in the world than at any time since satellite records began in 1979. In the very year they had forecast that the Arctic would be “ice free”, its thickness increased by a third. Polar bear numbers are rising, not falling. Temperatures in Greenland have shown no increase for decades.
The greatest scare story of all simply isn’t turning out as their computer models predicted. And no one has been more dangerously taken in by this silly scare story than the warmists themselves."

Climate Fraud Ahead Of Paris

Real Science
The criminals at NOAA are pushing the biggest lie in scientific history ahead of the Paris conference ....In fact, satellites show that 2015 has been a very ordinary year, and nowhere near as warm as several other years. There has been no warming for almost two decades."

My Arctic Forecast

Real Science
Greenland’s surface has gained nearly 300 billion tons of ice over the past year. .......My forecast is that climate criminals like James Hansen will continue their desperate lies about polar melt, in order to keep the public and government officials misinformed ahead of the Paris summit. There is no large scale Polar meltdown. It is one piece of the biggest fraud in history."

Earth heading for 'mini ice age' within 15 years

Telegraph

The earth is 15 years from a "mini ice-age" that will cause bitterly cold winters during which rivers such as the Thames freeze over, scientists have predicted.

Solar researchers at the University of Northumbria have created a new model of the sun's activity which they claim produces "unprecedentedly accurate predictions".

They said fluid movements within the sun, which are thought to create 11-year cycles in the weather, will converge in such a way that temperatures will fall dramatically in the 2030s.

Solar activity will fall by 60 per cent as two waves of fluid "effectively cancel each other out", according to Prof Valentina Zharkova"

Met Office caught out over its 'hottest July day ever’ claim

Christopher Booker, Telegraph

Since my story last week headed “Mystery grows over Met Office’s 'hottest day’”, there have been further developments. How could the Met Office justify its widely publicised claim that July 1 was the hottest July day recorded in Britain, based solely on a reading of 36.7 degrees Celsius (98 degrees Fahrenheit) made at Heathrow airport?

When the blogger Paul Homewood (on Notalotofpeopleknowthat) tracked down four weather stations around Heathrow, none showed readings on July 1 above 35.1. He wondered how far the Met Office figure might have been influenced by the siting of its Heathrow temperature gauge, shown by aerial photographs to be surrounded by heat-radiating Tarmac and near a runway."

Yes, why DOES John Cook of ‘SkepticalScience’ and the 97% have to use identity theft in his ‘research’?

WUWT
If it wasn’t enough that John Cook dresses himself up as a Nazi in his SkS uniform on his forum, now we have him caught in what looks to be identity theft of a well known scientist.   .......
This isn’t a brush away issue that he can ignore, as Dr. Lubos Motl found out yesterday, John Cook has been using the name of Dr. Lubos Motl to post comments that Dr. Motl has NOT written."

Pope’s popularity fall 17% — preaching the climate change religion not so popular?

JoNova (Australia)
Pope Francis put out his pro-climate encyclical eight weeks ago, getting mass media attention, but the latest Gallop poll shows the people were not so enthused:

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Pope Francis’ favorability rating in the U.S. has returned to where it was when he was elected pope. It is now at 59%, down from 76% in early 2014. The pontiff’s rating is similar to the 58% he received from Americans in April 2013, soon after he was elected pope.

Is this about “climate change” — the encyclical has 245 paragraphs, 16 mentions of “climate”, 7 mentions of “carbon”, and more than 100 mentions of the “environment”. Moreso it reported around the globe as a “coup” on the climate issue by groups who normally think the Pope is wrong, silly and anachronistic. Furthermore,  the biggest change has come among Catholics, Protestants, and especially conservatives. But he’s less popular among liberals too.

The drop in the pope’s favorable rating is driven by a decline among Catholics and political conservatives, two groups that have been ardent supporters of the modern papacy. Seventy-one percent of Catholics say they have a favorable image of Francis, down from 89% last year."

Using IPCC numbers we can expect only half a degree of warming this century. Time to Panic?

JoNova(Australia)

Christopher Monckton calculates below that even if we assume the IPCC and mainstream estimates are right, the warming from here to 2100 is likely to be a minor half a degree. (He doesn’t even bother to argue about whether this would be beneficial or not). Monckton just makes the point that for all the scare campaign about preventing a “two degree” apocalypse, what we are really talking about is a half degree in the next ninety years with some theoretical further warming in the centuries after that. The “two degrees” of fear is measured from the bottom of the Little Ice Age, as if that was the ideal “pre industrial” climate that we somehow want to return to.

As usual, everything about the Great Global Warming Scare falls apart under the most cursory glance, yet the billion dollar PR truck rolls on. The climate sensitivity of the IPCC dropped in Assessment Report 5 to about 2.2 C as it slowly is dragged toward a more realistic number.  The data coming in tells us that the climate feedback factors are likely net negative, so climate sensitivity is below 1°C. Hence even a  “half a degree” due to CO2 is an overestimate."

Green energy subsidies spiral out of control

Telegraph

The cost of subsidising new wind farms is spiralling out of control, government sources have privately warned.

Officials admitted that so-called “green” energy schemes will require a staggering £9 billion a year in subsidies - paid for by customers - by 2020. This is £1.5 billion more than the maximum limit the coalition had originally planned.

The mounting costs will mean every household in the country is forced to pay an estimated £170 a year by the end of the decade to support the renewable electricity schemes that were promoted by the coalition.

Tory ministers are said to be "angry" at the scale of the over-running costs. They are blaming the Liberal Democrats who ran the Department for Energy and Climate Change for the past five years for the spectacular failure to control renewable energy programmes."

Debunking Bloomberg’s ‘alarming’ climate graph: Are we really on track for 4°C global warming by 2100?

WUWT
David Burton has already done a wonderful deconstruction of Bloomberg’s absurd global warming attribution graph, by Eric Roston and Blacki Migliozzi, contrived from data by the notoriously unreliable NASA GISS, purporting to demonstrate that 20^th-century global warming was reely ’n’ truly all caused by our sins of emission, honest it was, guv’nor, cross me ’eart an’ ’ope to die.
What that graph really helps to indicate – though its fanatical originators would be horrified if they realized it – is just how little global warming we are likely to see this century, even if no one cuts emissions at all from now on and CO2 concentration continues inexorably to climb."

Slime and Punishment – How AGW believers have made their own Faustian Bargain

WUWT
A lot of us look at the actions of climate change alarmists and wonder how what would seem to be educated people can justify their own actions given the way they sometimes behave. Personally, I often wonder if they aren’t just so off-the-rails that they end up becoming like the “crazy cat lady of climate” in Australia who spends most of her waking hours digging in her own virtual cat litter for nuggets to expound upon, to prove that somehow “climate deniers” are bad and that climate alarmists are good. Dr. Judith curry has an interesting post about the editor of Science, she writes: ......."Here is a clear-cut example of advocacy by a scientist, Marcia McNutt, who also happens to be the Chief Editor of Science: The beyond-two-degree inferno.  Read the whole thing, its only about 600 words. I cite here the passages that I particularly want to comment on:"

Second Coldest July 6 On Record In Fort Collins

Real Science
We are experiencing near record cold, and unprecedented wet conditions in Fort Collins. Yesterday only reached 66 degrees – the coldest July 6 since 1904. July 6 temperatures peaked in the 1980’s, and have been generally declining ever since.

New paper finds increased CO2 or methane will have 'essentially no effect' upon global temperature or climate

TheHockeySchtick
A new paper by USC Professor Emeritus of Geology, Dr. George Chilingar (with three co-authors), finds that increasing levels of the greenhouse gases CO2 & methane will have "essentially no effect" upon global temperatures or climate. 

The authors utilize a one-dimensional adiabatic model of climate to demonstrate that the entire tropospheric temperature profile of the atmosphere on both Earth and Venus may be mathematically derived solely on the basis of atmospheric pressure/mass and solar activity, confirmed by observations on both planets, despite vast differences in atmospheric composition and mass/pressure on Earth and Venus. The paper corroborates the 33C Maxwell/Clausius/Carnot greenhouse theory and thereby excludes the alternative 33C Arrhenius radiative greenhouse theory."

Met Office still brazen

Bishop Hill

Readers may recall the paper I wrote for GWPF on the problems with the UKCP09 climate projections. These were demonstrably unreliable: the predictions were formulated as a weighted average of possible future climates, but it was discovered that only unrealistic future climates were taken into account. Readers may also recall that this has all been acknowledged by the Met Office, but that they are refusing to acknowledge that it is a problem.
Astonishing then to see that the Met Office is still pushing UKCP09, with a new paper in Nature Climate Change, dutifully (and inevitably) picked up by the BBC:

Scorching summers such as the one in 2003 look set to become more common in England and Wales, a study suggests...

The work draws on a major analysis, known as UKCP09, released back in 2009 which offered projections of the future British climate divided into 30-year periods.

Can anyone think of a way in which this could be seen as:

• reputable behaviour by the scientists concerned
• reputable behaviour by the journal involved
• reputable behaviour by the BBC? "

Millions paying too much for energy 'due to lack of competition'

Telegraph
Millions of households are paying hundreds of pounds too much for their energy due to a lack of competition between the Big Six energy suppliers, a landmark investigation into the sector is expected to conclude."