 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
Posted on 10/13/2009 7:27:57 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
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.
The informed members of the media read those polls and know the global warming scare is over, too. Andrew Revkin, The New York Times reporter entrusted with the global warming scare beat, has for months lamented “the public’s waning interest in global warming.” His colleague at The Washington Post, Andrew Freedman, does his best to revive public fear, and to get politicians to act, by urging experts to up their hype .......
(Excerpt) Read more at network.nationalpost.com ...
In case you haven't seen the thread on Al Gore and the Polar Bears see #49 for a link supplied by Potlatch.
I may have to get that book...
Very Nice....
.
The .gif that never stops being updated or created in different versions
I’d love to see that at the end of a FNC show - as Brit Hume used to do
*******************************************************
| What happened to global warming? ^ |
||
|
10/09/2009 3:36:31 PM PDT · by neverdem · 41 replies · 1,369+ views BBC News ^ | 2009/10/09 | Paul HudsonClimate correspondent, BBC News 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? Climate change sceptics, who passionately and consistently argue that man's influence on our climate... |
||
|
|
||
| What happened to global warming? ^ |
||
|
10/10/2009 8:47:59 AM PDT · by mtrott · 42 replies · 787+ views BBC News ^ | Friday, 9 October 2009 | Paul HudsonThis 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. |
||
|
|
||
| What Happened to Global Warming? ^ |
||
|
10/13/2009 5:29:42 AM PDT · by Kaslin · 25 replies · 661+ views Townhall.com ^ | October 13, 2009 | Debra J. Saunders"What happened to global warming?" read the headline -- on BBC News on Oct. 9, no less. Consider it a cataclysmic event: Mainstream news organizations have begun reporting on scientific research that suggests that global warming may not be caused by man and may not be as dire and eminent as alarmists suggest. Indeed, as the BBC's climate correspondent Paul Hudson reported, the warmest year recorded globally "was not in 2008 or 2007, but 1998." It's true, he continued, "For the last 11 years, we have not observed any increase in global temperatures." At a London conference later this month,... |
||
|
|
||
| What happened to global warming? ^ |
||
|
10/10/2009 8:08:19 PM PDT · by School of Rational Thought · 34 replies · 886+ views BBC News ^ | October 9, 2009 | Paul HudsonThis 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. |
||
|
|
||
| What happened to global warming? ^ |
||
|
10/11/2009 4:37:15 AM PDT · by marvlus · 19 replies · 655+ views BBC ^ | 10/9/2009 | Paul HudsonThis 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. |
||
|
|
||
| Whatever happened to global warming? How freezing temperatures are starting to shatter climate... ^ |
||
|
10/13/2009 4:42:58 PM PDT · by neverdem · 54 replies · 1,236+ views Daily Mail (UK) ^ | 13th October 2009 | NAHow freezing temperatures are starting to shatter climate change theory Snowfall: Two mongrels enjoy today's fresh snow in Austria - the earliest snow since records began In the freezing foothills of Montana, a distinctly bitter blast of revolution hangs in the air. And while the residents of the icy city of Missoula can stave off the -10C chill with thermals and fires, there may be no easy remedy for the wintry snap's repercussions. The temperature has shattered a 36-year record. Further into the heartlands of America, the city of Billings registered -12C on Sunday, breaking the 1959 barrier of -5C.... |
||
|
|
||
| Global Warming? What Global Warming? Update: Gore Questioned, Organizers Shut Off Microphone ^ |
||
|
radioviceonline.com ^ | October 12, 2009 | Wyndeward What global warming? Riddle me this, boys and girls — what was the hottest year on record? 2008? 2007? Try 1998. “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, just to reiterate,... |
||
|
|
||
| Hot air on warming (Boston Herald: "dubious threat of disastrous global warming") ^ |
||
|
10/04/2009 5:42:51 PM PDT · by neverdem · 22 replies · 817+ views Boston Herald ^ | October 4, 2009 | Editorial StaffIn their global warming bill, Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) have delivered to Congress an incomplete script. It’s like “Hamlet” without the prince. The 821-page aggregation of environmentalist dreams, rhetoric and directives would mandate grants and demonstration projects galore, and set up targets right and left. It would even grant a few unrelated favors, such as authority for cities to set their own mileage standards for taxicabs. (That the bill wouldn’t solve the cabbies’ basic problem of having to buy and insure new hybrids seems not to bother the senators.) The cap-and-trade scheme by which large emitters... |
||
|
|
||
| Global Warming is Neither ^ |
||
|
engerytribune ^ | 10/6/2009 | Art Horn We have heard the dire predictions from many different sources. Magazine articles have warned that in the coming years the Earth will warm rapidly. Television shows portray dramatic and alarming images of rising sea levels and animal extinctions. Network news programs report the latest scary forecasts from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. These predictions are said to be undeniable and are believed by most climate scientists. Studies from major colleges and universities say burning of fossil fuels will produce “tipping points” and after reaching these points there will be no turning back the heat. Coastal cities will... |
||
|
|
||
| Global Warming? NOT so much... ^ |
||
|
foundingfatherscry.com ^ | 10/08/2009 | RowdyFFC http://www.youtube.com This video found on michellemalkin.com is a good example of how propaganda comes out of our academia....^^^ To understand all these scientific and social FACTS that come at us from our learned and so-called intellectual eschelon, you have to understand the POLITICS of academia. As a young student striving for an education/poli-science degree, I worked at the university in the school of engineering as assistant to the dean . Our professors were HOT on anything to do with NASA at the time, because it meant mega-bucks from federal grants for the space program. It was required that our professors... |
||
|
|
||
| Al Gore's First (and Probably Last) Q&A (ON GLOBAL WARMING) ^ |
||
|
10/13/2009 7:19:27 AM PDT · by dennisw · 13 replies · 904+ views wall street journal ^ | OCTOBER 12, 2009, 1:21 P.M. ET | JOHN FUNDMr. Gore has been strangely reluctant to answer questions or debate the more controversial parts of his work. But over the weekend, he deigned to take few questions during meeting of the Society of Environmental Journalists in Madison, Wisconsin. Irish documentary filmmaker Phelim McAleer was in the line. A former Financial Times journalist, his new film, "Not Evil, Just Wrong," is direct refutation of Mr. Gore's thesis and warns that rushing to judgment in combating climate change would threaten the world's poor. When his turn came, Mr. McAleer asked Mr. Gore about a court case in Britain in which a... |
||
|
|
||
| A Few Questions on Global Warming ^ |
||
|
09/28/2009 7:03:40 AM PDT · by Shout Bits · 10 replies · 452+ views Shout Bits Blog ^ | 9/28/09 | Shout BitsI would like to see a show of hands. How many of you believe global climate change is a serious threat and caused by human activity? – Carolyn Washburn During the December 2008 GOP primary debate Ms. Washburn asked the presidential hopefuls if they "believed in global warming." Aside from being a classic gotcha question rooted in media bias against the GOP, the question revealed some of the true nature of global warming alarmism. The question implied that one must adhere to the entire global warming doctrine or be a non-believer. A system of commonly held beliefs whereby believers are... |
||
|
|
||
| Trees may cause global warming. ^ |
||
|
09/28/2009 10:35:43 AM PDT · by meatloaf · 46 replies · 1,205+ views ecofriendlymag.com ^ "A team of researchers from the US, Denmark and New Zealand have discovered a process through which a prevalent biogenic nonmethane hydrocarbon compound emitted by trees—isoprene—forms atmospheric particulate matter (i.e., secondary organic aerosol). The results are published in the 7 August issue of the journal Science. Aerosols impact human health, due to their ability to penetrate deep into lungs, and impact Earth’s climate through the scattering and absorption of solar radiation and through serving as the nuclei on which clouds form, noted co-author Prof. John Seinfeld from Caltech. “So it is important to know where particles come from.” Emissions of... |
||
|
|
||
| Global Warming is a Hoax ^ |
||
|
10/07/2009 11:47:03 AM PDT · by red meat conservative · 15 replies · 512+ views Red Meat Conservative ^ | Oct. 6, 2009A Man Made Hoax Chilling the Hot Air of Global Warming When I was a young boy I used to debate my little brother over a wide array of issues ranging from food to sports. After a while I became really frustrated at his constant changing views. He was a moving target, impossible to debate. He seemed to contradict himself every day. It was even more frustrating that whenever I would categorically annihilate his premise he would proceed to cover his ears and shout me down. He would repeat his obsession over and over again and tie everything into his... |
||
|
|
||
| Global Warming 'Science' ^ |
||
|
09/27/2009 4:45:35 AM PDT · by Scanian · 15 replies · 537+ views The American Thinker ^ | September 27, 2009 | John McLaughlinIt was a startling admission. Prior to passage of "Cap-and-Trade" legislation by the House of Representatives, Mr. Henry Waxman (D, CA), House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman and co-sponsor of the bill, in responding to a question from Mr. Joe Barton (R, TX) at a May 22 hearing, admitted the following: "I certainly don't claim that I know everything that's in this bill. I know we left it to ....we relied very heavily on the scientists on the IPCC and others and the consensus they have that there is a problem with global warming, it's having an impact, and that... |
||
|
|
||
| The great global warming scam (ctd) ^ |
||
|
Spectator Blogs (U.K.) ^ | October 2, 2009 | Melanie Philips Yet another scientific scandal has come to light which knocks another whopping crater in the already shattered theory of anthropogenic global warming. Eight peer-reviewed studies, which for years have played a significant supporting role behind the IPPC’s claims of AGW, have been shown to be fraudulent. As Andrew Orlowski reports in The Register, the issue is the use of tree rings as a temperature proxy in order to ‘reconstruct’ past temperatures. The papers in question incorporated data from trees at the Yamal Peninsula in Siberia: This dataset gained favour, curiously superseding a newer and larger data set from nearby. The... |
||
|
|
||
| The Twisted reality of Global Warming ^ |
||
|
10/13/2009 7:55:06 AM PDT · by Alaphiah123 · 17 replies · 309+ views Creating Orwellian Worldview ^ | 10/13/09 | alaphiahI can’t believe that any rational intelligent person can still believe in Global warming. The proponents of this fallacy even changed the name of Global warming to Climate Change to obfuscate the fact that the Earth really wasn’t warming and the Carbon induced warming which they original claimed would destroy the world was all based on false science. What is most disturbing is that against a preponderance of evidence, no carbon induced warming since 1999, colder global temperatures in spite of elevated carbon in the atmosphere, these fanatics persist in their attempts to change the very essence of human existence... |
||
|
|
||
| An inconvenient truth about global warming ^ |
||
|
09/16/2009 8:33:57 PM PDT · by neverdem · 31 replies · 1,716+ views BBC ^ | 16 September 2009 | Tom FeildenThe global warming narrative - that mankind's addiction to burning fossil fuels is rapidly changing the climate - may be about to go seriously off message. Far from suggesting the planet will get warmer, one of the world's leading climate modellers says the latest data indicates we could be in for a significant period of steady temperatures and possibly even a little global cooling. Professor Mojib Latif, from the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences at Kiel University in Germany, has been looking at the influence of cyclical changes to ocean currents and temperatures in the Atlantic, a feature known as... |
||
|
|
||
| (Vanity) Global Warming a Bust ^ |
||
|
10/07/2009 5:34:26 AM PDT · by ThunderSleeps · 17 replies · 555+ views Self | 10/7/09 | Thunder.SleepsLoveland Ski Resort opens today! |
||
|
|
||
| The Great Global Warming Swindle ^ |
||
|
10/12/2009 9:25:34 AM PDT · by FromLori · 12 replies · 490+ views
|
||
ping!
The global warming consensus cools
*******************************EXCERPT INTRO*******************
"What happened to global warming?" read the headline - on BBC News on Oct. 9, no less. Consider it a cataclysmic event: Mainstream news organizations have begun reporting on scientific research that suggests that global warming may not be caused by man and may not be as dire and eminent as alarmists suggest.
Indeed, as the BBC's climate correspondent Paul Hudson reported, the warmest year recorded globally "was not in 2008 or 2007, but 1998." It's true, he continued, "For the last 11 years, we have not observed any increase in global temperatures."
At a London conference later this month, Hudson reported, solar scientist Piers Corbyn will present evidence that solar-charged particles have a big impact on global temperatures.
Western Washington University geologist Don J. Easterbrook presented research last year that suggests that the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO) caused warmer temperatures in the 1980s and 1990s. With Pacific sea surface temperatures cooling, Easterbrook expects 30 years of global cooling.
Libertarian Group To Sue Administration for Failing to Disclose Global Warming Docs
*********************************EXCERPT INTRO*********************************
Posted on Thu 01 Oct 2009 02:58:09 AM PST by markomalley
A libertarian non-profit organization in Washington today announced it was filing suit against the Obama administration for failing to adequately disclose global warming documents.
As we reported two weeks ago the Competitive Enterprise Institute deemed inadequate the Treasury Department's response to a Freedom of Information Act request for documents on cap-and-trade.
Months after the FOIA request, Treasury responded by giving CEI five documents and emails, when the group had expected 50.
"Your response fails any reasonable test for compliance with FOIA and constitutes an effective denial of our request," CEI's Christopher Horner stated in the notice of appeal filed with Treasury today.
Moreover, Treasury redacted portions of the documents. One internal memo on cap-and-trade said that "given the administration's proposal to auction all emission allowances, a cap-and-trade program could generate federal receipts on the order of $100 to $200 billion annually," but the Department blacked out the $100 billion-$200 billion figure. Horner said Treasury redacted the figure because it was "highly embarrassing" for the administration.
Days later, Treasury re-released the same documents without any portions redacted.
Real Scientist Uncover Serious Flaw In Global Warming Data
*****************************EXCERPT INTRO************************************
The statistical models used by the High Priests of Global Warming are using a newly identified and specific data set which wrongly produces decades of warming where none exists in the raw temperature data 0r other data sets. (snip)
Since all other data around the world is apparently showing little to no warming during the last few decades of increased CO2 production, then this revelation scientifically proves CO2 is NOT warming the planet.
The Dog Ate Global Warming - Interpreting climate data can be hard enough. What if some key data...
*************************************EXCERPT INTRO*******************************
September 23, 2009, 4:00 a.m.
The Dog Ate Global Warming
Interpreting climate data can be hard enough. What if some key data have been fiddled?
By Patrick J. Michaels
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.
In the early 1980s, with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy, scientists at the United Kingdom’s University of East Anglia established the Climate Research Unit (CRU) to produce the world’s first comprehensive history of surface temperature. It’s known in the trade as the “Jones and Wigley” record for its authors, Phil Jones and Tom Wigley, and it served as the primary reference standard for the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) until 2007. It was this record that prompted the IPCC to claim a “discernible human influence on global climate.”
Putting together such a record isn’t at all easy. Weather stations weren’t really designed to monitor global climate. Long-standing ones were usually established at points of commerce, which tend to grow into cities that induce spurious warming trends in their records. Trees grow up around thermometers and lower the afternoon temperature. Further, as documented by the University of Colorado’s Roger Pielke Sr., many of the stations themselves are placed in locations, such as in parking lots or near heat vents, where artificially high temperatures are bound to be recorded.
So the weather data that go into the historical climate records that are required to verify models of global warming aren’t the original records at all. Jones and Wigley, however, weren’t specific about what was done to which station in order to produce their record, which, according to the IPCC, showed a warming of 0.6° +/– 0.2°C in the 20th century.
Now begins the fun. Warwick Hughes, an Australian scientist, wondered where that “+/–” came from, so he politely wrote Phil Jones in early 2005, asking for the original data. Jones’s response to a fellow scientist attempting to replicate his work was, “We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?”
Reread that statement, for it is breathtaking in its anti-scientific thrust. In fact, the entire purpose of replication is to “try and find something wrong.” The ultimate objective of science is to do things so well that, indeed, nothing is wrong.
thanks, bfl
Damn! Just as Lindsey “Goober” Graham jumped on the bandwagon, too.
Could somebody please notify our #$%$head president and congresspeople about this before they do more harm to the economy?
In a fix (Anthropogenic nitrogen pollution - the next crusade!)
**********************************EXCERPT********************************
Scientists are also targeting the end consumer. For example, Galloway, Erisman and colleagues are developing a web-based 'nitrogen footprint model' called N-Print, the nitrogen equivalent of the carbon footprint.
The scare may be over but that is not going to stop the Democrats from voting for Cap And Trade,Climate Change is just beginning even if Global warming is done
Thanks Ernest. Here’s one you’re gonna love (with thanks to neverdem):
In a fix (Anthropogenic nitrogen pollution — the next crusade!)
Chemistry World | October 2009 | Staff Editorial
Posted on 10/13/2009 10:19:29 PM PDT by neverdem
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2361977/posts
No. It means now we have to worry about Carol Browner, [D-Commie] at EPA who has just declared CARBON a pollutant.
I guess that she does not realize that we are all carbon based life forms.
Of course, maybe she isn't a carbon based life form at all.
|
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
Al will be at the head of the line. He's already there.
...thereby re-inforcing to your 7th grader the idiotic message received by the idiotic teacher.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.