"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 five 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...
Wednesday, 28 October 2015
WUWT readers may recall that on June 4th, 2015, WUWT published a scathing criticism of the paper by Karl et al (“Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus”) that purported to erase the pause in the surface temperature record by applying some highly questionable, and apparently desperate adjustments to SST data. I still stand by this initial critical work of Bob Tisdale and I: NOAA/NCDC’s new ‘pause-buster’ paper: a laughable attempt to create warming by adjusting past data. .....it seems that other climate scientists on the “proponent” side have taken note of this chicanery.
Andrew Montford writes at Bishop Hill: ...."
NOAA says the e-mails aren’t important. .........
"Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology and a prominent congressional skeptic on climate change, issued the subpoenas two weeks ago demanding e-mails and records from U.S. scientists who participated in the study, which undercut a popular argument used by critics who reject the scientific consensus that man-made pollution is behind the planet’s recent warming.
Smith’s document request to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ordered the agency to turn over scientific data as well as internal “communications between or among employees” involved in the study, according to a letter Friday by the House committee’s ranking Democrat, Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (Tex.). Johnson accused Smith of “furthering a fishing expedition” by looking for ways to discredit NOAA’s study, which was published in June in the peer-reviewed journal Science." (Washington Post)
In 1999, NASA’s top climatologists reported that the US was cooling, as greenhouse gases increased. ....That didn’t suit the agenda, so they later tampered with the data to make the cooling disappear. "
Tuesday, 27 October 2015
Even the most ridiculous estimates of ice loss in Greenland are less than 200 km³ per year. The volume of the ice sheet is 3,000,000 km³. Using the most aggressive claims, it would take 15,000 years for the ice sheet to melt. That accounts for a sea level rise of about one hundredth of an inch per year. Does Coral Davenport think that one inch of sea level rise over the next century is going to drown her?
But the reality is that the surface of Greenland gains about 300 billion tons of ice every year. Greenland is not melting. Ninety percent of the ice sheet gained mass from September 1, 2014 to August 30, 2015.
Claims that the ice sheet is losing 200 km³ / year are based on unreliable gravity calculations made by people with an agenda. Glacial flow to the ocean is controlled by the amount of excess ice building up in the interior. If for some reason the amount of ice building up in the interior decreased, flow would also decrease. The New York Times has been reporting this same hysteria for almost 85 years."
As of today, October 24th, it has been 3652 days (including leap years) or a decade (10 years) since the US has been hit by a Category 3 or greater hurricane.
The last such hurricane was Wilma on October 24th, 2005. Hurricane Wilma was the most intense tropical cyclone ever recorded in the Atlantic basin. Each day forward will be a new record in this decade long hurricane drought period. .................But, to listen to Al Gore and the media, you’d think global warming has made more hurricanes hit the U.S. since then. In fact, there has been no Category three or stronger hurricane that has made U.S. landfall in a decade."
A new study claims that, by the end of this century, some cities in the Persian Gulf will be uninhabitable by humans, thanks to extreme temperatures up to 170F (76c). -
"A number of cities in the Persian Gulf region may be unlivable the end of the century due to global warming if humans do not curb greenhouse gas emissions, according to new research." -
According to Wikipedia, the hottest temperature ever recorded was 57c (134F) in Death Valley, in 1913. 76c (170F) might not seem like much of a leap from 57c, but the cities Doha, Abu Dhabi and Bandar Abbas are all coastal cities which experience substantial Summer rainfall.
Summer rainfall and storms are natural air conditioning. When temperatures soar, evaporation, convection and storm activity remove vast amounts of excess heat from the surface and transport the heat straight up to the edge of space. The heat laden water vapour keeps rising until it condenses – the vapour simply punches straight through the bulk of the world’s greenhouse blanket, soaring into the upper reaches of the troposphere, until it finds a height at which it can dump its vast store of heat."
Sunday, 25 October 2015
An Obama supporter who describes himself as "100 per cent Democrat," Dyson says he is disappointed that the President "chose the wrong side." Increasing CO2 in the atmosphere does more good than harm, he argues, and humanity doesn't face an existential crisis. Climate change, he tells us, "is not a scientific mystery but a human mystery. How does it happen that a whole generation of scientific experts is blind to obvious facts?" ......
Are climate models getting better? You wrote how they have the most awful fudges, and they only really impress people who don't know about them.
A: "I would say the opposite. What has happened in the past 10 years is that the discrepancies between what's observed and what's predicted have become much stronger. It's clear now the models are wrong, but it wasn't so clear 10 years ago. I can't say if they'll always be wrong, but the observations are improving and so the models are becoming more verifiable."
Friday, 16 October 2015
Every night, I present myself to five million French people to talk about the wind, the clouds, the sun. And yet, there are some things of importance, of great importance, that I haven’t been able to tell you, because it is neither the time nor the place.
We are hostage to the planetary scandal of global warming — a war-machine designed to keep us afraid. At its heart, it’s a science manipulated and politicized, of conflict of interest, of corruption, of sexual scandal, then the politics, which serves nothing but their image and their thirst for power.
The media, weakened [or blinded], loses control of itself and engages in censorship due to pressure by shareholders and advertisers.
Oppressive financial interests, a self-serving engine, a new religion, the framework of a new faith…"
The US has (by far) the most credible temperature record in the world, so this cooling was devastating to their global warming theory. NASA responded to this challenge as they always do, by tampering with the data and making the cooling disappear."
Thursday, 15 October 2015
According to Mr Verdier, top climate scientists, who often rely on state funding, have been “manipulated and politicised”. He specifically challenges the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, saying they “blatantly erased” data that went against their overall conclusions, and casts doubt on the accuracy of their climate models."
Philippe Verdier is a household name in France where he does the weather on the nightly news on “France 2″. He’s releasing a book “Climat Investigation” being launched right now, outing himself as very much a skeptic, saying top climate scientists “have been “manipulated and politicised”. He decided to write the book because a year ago he was horrified when the French Foreign Minister got all the weather presenters together and urged them to use the term “climate chaos” in their broadcasts."
'This winter will not be normal': Forecasters say El Niño is set to outgrow 1997 event as they warn phenomenon is now too big to fail
Monday, 12 October 2015
The Global Warming Policy Foundation have published a report by IPCC delegate Dr Indur Goklany today calling for a “reassessment” of carbon dioxide. It turns out CO2 is delicious plant food that is reducing world hunger…
“Carbon dioxide fertilises plants, and emissions from fossil fuels have already had a hugely beneficial effect on crops, increasing yields by at least 10-15%. This has not only been good for humankind but for the natural world too, because an acre of land that is not used for crops is an acre of land that is left for nature.”You can read the good news here…
The purpose of this strange get-together was outlined in a keynote speech (visible on YouTube) by Philippe Sands, a QC from Cherie Blair’s Matrix Chambers and professor of law at University College, London. Since it is now unlikely that the world will agree in Paris to a legally binding treaty to limit the rise in global temperatures to no more than 2 degrees C from pre-industrial levels, his theme was that it is now time for the courts to step in, to enforce this as worldwide law."
Tuesday, 6 October 2015
Unfortunately, there seems to be an trend toward classifying events as “1 in 1,000 years”, when there is no way of knowing such things. This is especially true for floods, where paving of urban and suburban areas causes increasing runoff, making river flooding worse for the same amount of rainfall. This is a big reason why flood events have gotten worse in the last 100 years…it has nothing to do with “climate change”.
For some areas the current flood is no doubt a 1 in 100 year event, or even worse. But remember, it is perfectly normal to have a 1 in 100 year event every year…as long as they occur in different locations.
That’s how weather records work.
Monday, 5 October 2015
Saturday, 3 October 2015
The overall trend for Germany over the past 25 years remains slight cooling. There has not been any statistically meaningful warming since 1990."
There is, of course, a bill attached to all of this!
Or $166 billion a year!
I expect this Plan will be lauded by the BBC and the like, but the reality is that India desperately need to increase both its electrical capacity and total energy consumption by large amounts in coming years if its economy is to grow and help reduce poverty levels, not to mention a rapidly expanding population.
Most of this extra power cannot be supplied by inefficient and unreliable renewables, though they do have a role to play in remote rural areas.
Even with mammoth climate aid payments from the West, India’s CO2 emissions will likely treble by 2030. Moreover, there is absolutely no commitment, or for that matter likelihood, that there will be any drop in those emissions after 2030."
Turnbull, Hunt suggest carbon emissions trading could start mid 2016 (Thank Gore and Palmer for the open door)
Australians have voted against a carbon tax twice. Liberals threw out Turnbull over the introduction of an emissions trading scheme in 2009, yet here he is, barely leader for two weeks and already they are floating a timeframe for the introduction of emissions trading."
However, climate change sceptics claim there has been no global warming for 18 years.
Critics have asked why Britain is spending more money on tackling climate change abroad when energy-guzzling nations like China are proving reluctant to sign up to carbon-reducing targets.
They also asked whether the £6billion could not also be better spent at home."
Dr Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, said: “Here is more evidence of what we have known for some time: that climate models simply do not mirror the reality of a chaotic system – and that they should never have been trusted in the first place."
Friday, 2 October 2015
I recently discussed a letter, sent earlier this month to the US president and Attorney General, that called for mobster-style police investigations against those who express non-mainstream climate views.
The letter was signed by 20 American academics (since dubbed the RICO20) who are associated with institutions ranging from George Mason University to Columbia to Rutgers. Declaring imperiously that “the world’s response to climate change” is “insufficient,” it alleged that certain corporations and organizations “have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.”
A public copy of that letter has since disappeared. The letter’s apparent organizer, who heads its lists of signatories, is a George Mason professor named Jagadish Shukla. He also happens to be president of the Institute of Global Environment and Society. It was via that institute’s website that this letter was made public."
At issue is at least 63.5 million dollars from the National Science Foundation, and where it went, whether it was used for the purpose intended, and who benefited from that money. The problem at hand seems to be that there may have been more than a little “double dipping” going on with that grant money as Steve McIntyre pointed out in Shukla’s Gold: "
Remember how some climate scientists wanted to give up debating science and potentially jail skeptics instead? These were the 20 “scientists” who reasoned by looking for “tobacco tactics” in opponent’s arguments. They called for a RICO investigation — a the kind of racketeering investigation done on the mafia. I pointed out their team used more “tobacco tactics” against skeptics than anything the skeptics did, but looks like that may have been only the minor part of their projection of their own flaws.
It turns out that the scientist driving the letter, along with his wife and daughter, has made over $5m above his university salary, and now questions are being raised in Congress about his “double dipping”. The National Science Foundation is very unhappy about scientists who blur the line between their university and their outside consulting, and earn twice for doing the same job. I hear people have been jailed for this sort of thing.
Have a look at how well the leader of the group-of-20 has been doing: meet Jagadish Shukla, professor of climate dynamics at George Mason University, who must now be wishing he hadn’t called for an investigation."
For those of you who are die-hard puzzle solvers here to spar about cutting edge research: good news, here’s where we begin the long awaited update to Dr David Evans’ climate research. There are a few surprises, sacred cows, we did not expect we would need to challenge, like the idea of “forcings”.
Government science is stuck in a rut, strangled – trying to capture the creative genius of discovery and force it through a bureaucratic formula, like it can work to a deadline or be judged by the number of papers, or pages, or citations, or by b-grade officials. Blogs are new, but this form of independent scientific research, done for the thrill of discovery, outside institutions and funded by philanthropists, is the way science was mainly done before WWII."