EU Refuses to Block Eurozone Integration to Reach Agreement With UK
Austrian Chancellor Werner Faymann said at the E?U summit on British membership terms that the European Union wants to reach an agreement with the United Kingdom, but it is not prepared to compromise the banking union (financial integration) or the further integration of monetary union (UK being forced to abandon the pound join the Euro?) to achieve this goal.

Afghan troops defect to Taliban in Helmand
According to news sources in Pakistan, up to sixty five Afghan soldiers, trained and armed by US and European military advisers, have defected to the resurgent Taliban, taking their weapons and equipment with them. Another 88 are reported to have been killed in heavy fighting between Taliban irregulars and government forces in the southern province of Helmand.

The Revolution Is Spreading: Now Austria Turns Against The Anti - White Leftist Elite
With Sweden's coalition of opponents, formed to deny a place in government to the anti - immigration, pro - Swedish culture party The Sweden Democrats a place in government that was their democratic right, falling apart; with France's Front National, led by Marine Le Pen topping polls and other parties opposed to mass immigration and the destruction of European culture riding high elsewhere, Austria has become the latest nation where voters have turned their backs on the consensus politics of Cultural Marxism.

Paris Climate conference: Scientists Debunk Global Warming Scaremongering
As national leaders and self interested science whore collaborated to impose of the world a United Nations “climate regime” based on the vile and authoritarian Agenda 21 agreement, at the COP21 global-warming summit, a group of internationally respected scientists and environmentalists from various fields presented research at a separate conference in Paris that ridiculed the climate change hysteria.

Fellow Slams The Royal Society as Nothing But a Lobby Group for Climate Change.
Another respected scientist comes out and denounces the science behind the climate change scare as a fraud. The whole thing has been a scam to justify punitive taxes on fuel and enable the rich to make fortunes trading carbon credits. Again it shows what a sack of rogues the climate science community really are.

What if man-made climate change is all in the mind?
If our view of reality is shaped by the mind and our perceptions of information, how successful are attempts to manipulate the perceptions of the whole populations through manipulated data, spin and assertions of authority likely to be. As scientists and politicians moan that the public no longer take sertiously climate change scare stories, we have to conclude, not very.

Meteorologists Begin To Admit To Climate Engineering
The freethinkers and Libertarians of New Media have been questioning the pseudoscientific certainties of the global warming lobby for a long time. During that often acrimonious process (because the Global Warming lobby are ever bit as organised and as driven by blind hatred of those who question them as the Bearded Queens In Bridal Gowns lobby) and most of us have been accused of infanticide, genocide and worse. At last the respectable climate scientists (the ones who didn't sell their arse for the corporate dollar) are speaking, and the media are listening.

Mad Scientists Now In A Race To Create Human - Animal Hybrids
Scientists all over the world are busy creating extremely bizarre human-animal chimeras. Once again The Daily Stirrer has to say "We told you so". There is something very creepy and sinister embedded in the typical scientists desire to play God. It is a complete, psychopathic disregard for moral boundaries. If we can do it that ...

UK Offshore Windfarms Produce More Rust and CO2 Than Electricity
A private case going through a British court of arbitration at the moment involves two very large supply organisations. Unfortunately the case is being heard away from the prying eyes and radar like ears of the media. A 1996 Act Of Parliament enabled such things as a way to free up Court time taken up by complex technical disputes…. And, perhaps, to keep embarrassing truths away from ...

Green Policies Will Not Save The Planet But Are Costing Poor Families The Earth>
Politicians bleat sabout the plight of the poor then press on with their clean, green, sustainable energy policies which include stealth taxes to subsidise expensive and inefficient wind turbine and solar panel power generators. Can they not see it is the green agenda that is driving up inflation ...[Environment]

Solar Storm Armageddon: Will This Be What Makes Warmageddonists Shut T F UP
An eruption on the surface of the sun, aka solar storn will send a flood of highly charged particles towards earth. Satellite communications and other technology might suffer sone disruption but the best thing about it is from here in the north of England we will be able to see the Aurora.

The Danish Experience - Problems With Wind Power And The Truth About Turbines
The truth about wind turbines, their real efficiency as opposed to the hyperbolic claims of clean sustainable energy firms and their lobbyists, politically correct politicians and green activists and how wind farm operators have been given a licence to pick the pockets of taxpayers

Statistics, Graphs and Hockey Sticks
A poem about the famous hocvkey stick graph and the science scam it was a frony for. Posted now as a valedictory celebration because US climate monitoring agncies NASA and NOAA have at last admitted the global average temperature has risen only marginally over the past few decades.

Climate Change - The Edge Of The Abyss
Media and government reports still say we are staring into the abyss because carbon emissions are too high. But have they ever though we would have to shut down all economic activity in the developed world to change things.

We Might As Well Ask The CRU climate scientists to forcast the economic trends
As our finance expert John de Roe digests today's economic statement by Chancellor George Osborne we advise readers to ignore gloomy economic forecasts from supra national bodies with close political ties to the "New World Order". Both the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) and the OBR (Office for Budget Responsibility) along with numerous other thinky tanky type thingies published their latest economic forecasts ahead of the Chancellors statement. These forecasts which are invariably gloomy and predict ...

Renewable Energy: So Useless That Even Green Loons At Google Have Given up on it

Apart from the science related problems, this happens more often that greenies care to admit.

The sandal wearing, tree hugging, bearded puritans of the Watermelon tendency (green on the outside, red on the inside) call it "renewable energy", the zealots of the Church Of Scienceology cal it sustainable energy, those with smarter heads on their shoulder call it "alternative energy" because that's what it really is: an alternative to energy that actually works (eg nuclear and anything made from cabon-rich fuel from organic matter laid down in pre-history and left to brew for a few hundred million years.)

I'm sure the Warmageddonists will set up a right scream after reading that paragraph, but a pair of top boffins hired at enormous expense by infra-green Google's research department have reached the same conclusion.

In The Register, Lewis Page reports Ross Konigstein and David Fork, both Stanford PhDs (aerospace engineering; applied physics) were employed on a Google research project which sought to enhance renewable technology to the point where it could produce energy more cheaply than coal. But after four years, the project was closed down. In this post at IEEE Spectrum they tell us why.

Why is renewable energy such a total fail? Because, as the Google team explain to The RegisterThe Register explains in this report on the same project, it is ludicrously inefficient, obscenely expensive that if ever we were so foolish as to try rolling it out on a scale beyond its current boutique levels, it would necessitate bankrupting the global economy. Where Lewis does no go in that report from The Register, is the enormous environmental damage done by 'cleaan, green energy'. The huge rafts of concrete required as foundations for 2MW wind turbines disrupt natural drainage patterns and make areas susceptible to flash floods, while covering vast acreages in mirrors for solar power while scientists are screaming (falsely) about the need to switch to Genetically Modified crops to feed the world's hungry.

Let's deal with the fallacies in left wing propaganda there. In fact we do not need GM crops because a) they don't produce significantly greater yields without massive irrigation (in a world where water shortage is increasingly a problem) and expensive special fetilizers (which third world farmers can't affort) and b) North American and European governments have for decades been paying farmers not to grow food; anyone remember the European Union butter and grain mountains or the milk lake and olive oil lake? Or the character in Joseph Heller's Catch 22 whose father had grown rich from what the government paid him to not grow certain crops?

But one insanity at a time, back to renewable energy which in a nutshell, is uneconomical because so much equipment is needed to make it work - steel, concrete, copper, glass, carbon fibre, neodymium, shipping and haulage - that it very likely uses up more energy than it actually produces. It is also unreliable because as I keep explaining to the Warmageddonists, Wind Turbines cannot generate power when the wind does not blow and solar panels cannot generate power when the sun is down (on average, over the course of a year, 12 hours a day, anywhere on the globe.

Yet still our political class and the scientific whores who serve them (science was ever fascism's whore) remains committed to the fantasy that the emperor's new green clothes are absolutely wonderful. Earlier this week, for example, the British government chucked £720 million of taxpayers' money into an EU / United Nations fronted cesspit labelled the Green Climate Fund.

In theory this initiative is supposed to help Third World countries cope with the effects of climate change. In reality, all it will do is force on their struggling economies more of the costly, intermittent renewable technologies (wind turbines; solar; etc) which have proved such a disaster for the advanced Western economies (Germany, Netherlands, Spain and Denmark have now abandoned their plans to switch totally to green energy. Spain is reliant on France's nulclear power stations, Denmark relies on Germany's coal generating plants while Germany is dangerously dependent on Russian gas for a nation involved in Obama's economic war on Russia.

Fellow Slams The Royal Society as Nothing But a Lobby Group for Climate Change.
Another respected scientist comes out and denounces the science behind the climate change scare as a fraud. The whole thing has been a scam to justify punitive taxes on fuel and enable the rich to make fortunes trading carbon credits. Again it shows what a sack of rogues the climate science community really are.

Climate Change: CO2 Is Less Significant Than An Ant's Fart

by Arthur Foxake - 9 November, 2014

I believe it was in the BBC TV wildlife programme Life in the Undergrowth (2005 - still available on DVD) in which the saintly David Attenborough reveals that the world's termites emit 1500 times as much CO2 as the entire human race including all industry. Surely it would be easier to wipe out 0.06% of the termites to balance things up and finally prove the Warmageddonists wrong.

Sorry folks, global warming like everything today, is a political played simultaneously at national, international, inter-religion, intra-religion, inter-bloc, inter-racial and more. The prize is control. When Mr ban Ki Moon, loking bewildered as usual, reads words written for him by globalist bureaucrats, he is just acting as a front man for the game's sponsors. Let's stop all these useless conferences and simply agree to respect this planet that gives us food, water, and all we need and supplies a few fun items too.

The goal of We The People should be to live good lives and leave behind us a place that, if not better, is at least as good as the one we inherited from our ancestors. Life is not about being profit centres for commerical organisations. If we ignore all the rhetoric, propaganda and advertising puff, we will discover that eralier generations managed quite well without the internet, iPads, Smartphones, Plasma TVs and all the rest of the bollocks that is supposed to have improved our lives. In fact such evidence as is available from the era before public opinion polling was around to tell people what their opinions were, people were actually happier and more fulfilled.

It is time to tell the bankers and businessment, the political leaders and the armies of academics, public relatioins consultants and assorted 'experts' who advise them, including religious heads, bewildered international bureaucrats and other elitists that time is running out for them.

Still, fair play to the Warmagedonists and their junk science. They do not give up and never let little things like empirical evidence or reality get in the way of their evangelical desire to plunge us all back into a world of medieval technology. And now the ignorant arrogant idiots think they can challenge nature, they are our modern day King Canutes, fraudsters and charlatans the lot of them, I'll give them a simple challenge to show if they are right or wrong, exactly how much snow will the UK get over the next 6 months, if their models are correct they should be able to give us an answer within several cm's and gain our confidence.

Even if it were all true, Britain only contributes 1% of the world's carbon emissions, but it is the ordinary British public who are suffering the most as green levies on energy bills force poor households to choose between eating and heating ( while China build 10 new coal burning power stations a year). Like that ebola crises in Africa, it is manufactured scaremongring designed to frighten us all into tolerating further attacks on our individual freedoms but in reality it has little to do with us. Our control freak government cannot bear to be left out of any globalist move to curtail the rights of the individual.

The Wonderful, Climate Science Defying Vikings

One of the most repeated lies of the whole Warmageddonist scare is that never in human history has the atmosphere been this warm before (forget the Medieval Warm Period, it was all due to peasants burning hockey sticks ... or something. And yet the 'Vikings', so often dismissed by history as ignorant, hairy, horny drunks who terrorised civilisation in Western Europe as they raided in their Longboats (A beautifully designed vessel), raping, pillaging and plundering.

The academic community stick together of course, so today's children do not hear about Vikings Eric Dorvaldsson (Eric the Red 950 to 1003AD) who set out for fabled lands to the North West of Scotland and came upon Iceland. The climate there was more benign than it is today and he established communities. He then duly set out west again, following the advice of The Pet Shop Boys song and came upon Greenland (which he dubbed Vinland). It had a lot less ice than nowadays and Erik established farming communities, remains of which have been found under the recently melted ice.

Eric used to be considered by historians as the first 'Real Estate Con Artist'. Calling his newly discovered landmass 'Greenland' to encourage settlers. The remains of the farming communities give credence to his sales glossies however. His son Leif (Eriksson), in about 1000AD, headed west again, landed in Canada and settled a colony there (Norse settlement at L’Anse aux Meadows, at the northernmost tip of Newfoundland) where they grew oats and barley and turnips. The colony did not last, leaving after about 3 years, having had a falling out (over longship parking spaces?) with the locals.

The evidence, the real evidence, not the mathematical modelling, suggests it was warmer then than now, which ties in with the conclusion I reached a few years ago while looking at the neolithic village of Scara Brae, the ancient (3000BC) Stone Age Settlement in Orkney. Rain lashed across the site and an icy wind blew in from The Atlantic, having not encountered so much as a small hill or even a clump of trees on its way from The North Pole.

Anyone who lived there for any length of time would need more fortitude than I and probably you possess. A similar conclusion reached by Simon Schama in his 'History or Britain' DVD Series which toured the site. It may be accepted that our ancestors were considerably more durable that modern generations but even so, to not only survive but manage to successfully begin cultivating crops in these hostile environments without the aid of modern energy generation, technology and clothing would have been almost impossible unless the climate was considerably warmer at the time.

Global Warming therefore does not appear directly related to the current pronouncement of the UN, Greenhouse Gas Content being the highest in the last 800,000 years.

Science Fraud And The Climate Perpetual Motion Engine

Xavier Connolly

The IPCC claims are baseless. The clue is Figure 2.5 of Houghton's 'Physics of Atmospheres'. For the surface to be part of the radiation transfer chain in the atmosphere, it would have to be significantly warmer than the local atmosphere.Using 0.75 atmospheric absorptivity, 16 deg C surface, to transfer 160 W/m^2 by IR to the local atmosphere, it must be just below 0 deg C. In reality, it is kept very near surface temperature by convection maintaining lapse rate.

Bottom line: according Houghton's grey body atmosphere assumption, there is near zero, nada, zilch IR energy transfer from the surface to the atmosphere. This disproves the most basic claim of the IPCC's pseudoscience! The IPCC co-founder supports its fake science when he published the real science in 1977.

This stinks: pass it on so we can get an official investigation.

The real atmosphere is semi-transparent; hence 63 W/m^2 net IR transfer from the surface, 40 to Space, 23 weakly-absorbed H2O bands ~2 km absorption depth.

No professional pysicist or engineer accepts the Perpetual Motion Machine of the 2nd Kind in the IPCC models, nor the final cheat GISS hid from you for 33 years! The PMM is easily proved. To imaginary 333 W/m^2 'back radiation' is added 238.5 W/m^2 Solar energy. 238.5 W/m^2 leaves as Outgoing Long Wave Radiation. As modellers assume OLR comes from a separate -18 deg C zone, radiating up and down, the '2-stream' thermal balance is 238.5 + 333 - 238.5 = 333 W/m^2.

The 40% extra, 94.5 W/m^2 is supposed to go mainly into oceans, slight increase of Sea Surface Temperature heating the atmosphere. More evaporation, higher humidity, absorbs more surface IR, giving more 'back radiation'; amplification.

But more evaporation requires higher SST than real. They fixed this by using in 'hind-casting' to past temperatures about 35% more low level cloud albedo than reality. This makes the underneath of clouds cooler. Evaporation is non linear, the models pretend average temperatures are correct but much more evaporation in the sunlit regions gives the imaginary increase in humidity.

Whoever programmed this cheat was clever because with correct IR physics, there is no net surface IR in the main GHG bands, no amplification; atmospheric processes make residual CO2-AGW near zero. There is no problem from warming or ocean acidification; they coped with 12x present [CO2] levels in the past.

The evidence is no lower atmosphere warming for 18 years; no 'missing heat'. The person who caused this mess was Carl Sagan who misled US atmospheric Science. Over here, Houghton whose treatise 'Physics of Atmospheres', Fig. 2.5. shows why Sagan was wrong to believe Arrhenius, has pushed that scam by his support for the IPCC. The bottom line: Climat science alarmists are fraudsters.

Anyone who bothers to look at the real world data on climate would never suspect that CO2 has ever played a role in changing Earth's climate over geologic time.

The IPCC continues to sound the same old boring climate alarmism based on climate models. But there is actually no real evidence to support a coming climate catastrophe. Natural climate variability has always been responsible for Earth's changing climate.

The slight increase in global average temperature since the 1800s is in line with natural climate variability. It is absolutely impossible for human-activity CO2, which is only responsible for about 0.12% of the greenhouse effect, to be causing dangerous global warming or to be the key driver of climate change. It is simply incompatible with the overwhelming body of scientific literature on natural climate variability.

Climate Science Fraud: Feynman Said ...

by Godel's New best Friend

The physicist Richard Feynman said that it doesn't matter how smart or powerful you are, if your hypothesis is contradicted by the empirical data, you need a new hypothesis. The anthropogenic global warming (AGW) hypothesis claims that the increasing level of carbon dioxide (co2) due to human activities causes global warming. However, there is no evidence linking co2 increase to global warming. During the past few decades, as co2 continually increased, there have been both cooling and warming periods. In fact, with co2 at its highest level in a very long time, there’s been no additional increase in global temperature for almost two decades. The co2 level has been steadily increasing since the mid 1800s. Also, the science is clear that co2 ability to contribute to warming diminishes as its level increases. An old experiment which showed increased temperature by adding more co2 to an enclosed container is hardly adequate for making assumptions about weather related activities in the open atmosphere.

Take the lie, "The "seas are rising!". The seas have been rising for the past 18,000 years, since the last (real) ice age began melting (except possibly for a few hundred years of reversal during the more recent Little Ice Age). Sea level has risen 400+ feet. The current annual sea level rise is a miniscule 1 to 3 mm per YEAR! (1 mm = .0393701 inches.) The rate of increase has been diminishing for the past several thousand years.

Some perspective helps. There have been 13 ice ages in the past 1.3 million years, average duration of each being 90,000 years. Each ice age was followed by a warming period, (commonly called an interglacial period, such as the one we now enjoy) average duration 10,000 years. When there is no further increase in sea level and when glaciers are no longer shrinking, it’s a good bet that the next ice age or, at least a Little Ice Age, is underway. (Neither is desirable, even for the very adaptable human species.)

Actual data clearly demonstrates that extreme weather events (typhoons, hurricanes, tornados, floods, droughts) have been less frequent and less severe during the past few decades. The only conclusion which can be drawn from this is that weather is more pleasant when the earth is warmer. Even most scientists who otherwise back AGW are embarrassed by the un-informed folks who continue to blame these common weather events on human-caused global warming. The UN’s IPCC, (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) in its most recent report, admitted there is no indication that co2 level has any impact on our climate insofar as bizarre weather events.

The IPCC has also now finally recognizes (once again !) that our global temperature is a record level over the past 800 years. That declaration is a back-handed admission that the Medieval Warming Period (MWP) was both a global event and warmer than now. No surprise, since there have been numerous studies from around the globe confirming this. If there is some ambiguity between the IPCC actual report and its “summary” report, keep in mind that funding for the IPCC would instantly disappear if it had identified our current warming as merely natural climate variation.

Clearly human activity was not responsible for climate during the MWP. At that time the co2 level was constant (and lower, around 280 ppmv.) What’s more, the earlier warming periods during this interglacial, before the MWP, were at even higher temperatures. So our current warming is well within the bounds of natural climate variation.

The beginning of our current warming (such as it is) is invariably associated with the beginning of the industrial revolution (mid 1800s) and the associated rise in co2 level. But there is no justification for that cherry-picked start-date. Our current warming actually began, by definition, at the bottom (the low temperature) of the Little Ice Age, which took place during the mid 1600s. That implies two centuries of natural warming BEFORE the industrial revolution and before co2 began to increase.

The only known correlation between global temperature and co2 variation is over geologic periods and during that era temperature variations always occurred first, and were reflected hundreds of years later, by similar variations in co2 level. That is the carbon cycle at work. Because of oceans’ much greater heat capacity than the atmosphere oceans cool and warm much more slowly. Oceans outgas when warmer, and absorb gas when cooler. Notice that the two recent periods of cooling or flat temperature both cover significantly longer durations than was needed for alarmists to claim the warming is due to human activity. Nonetheless those same alarmists now argue that two decades of temperature “hiatus” is not long enough to refute the AGW hypothesis. There is no indication that increasing co2 has ever had any impact on global temperature, and in the more distant past co2 has been 10 to 20 times higher than now. Co2 has also been much higher during two ice ages and going into once ice age, so neither does there appear to be any nearby “trigger”.

Is the greenhouse gas theory applicable to our atmosphere? The barriers in a real greenhouse confine heat much more effectively than our open atmosphere and satellite measurements show that heat is escaping to space.

All the computer models projecting global warming assume that the real greenhouse gas culprit is water vapor. Water vapor, according to the models’ authors, supposedly provides a positive feedback, bringing on temperature increases 2 to 3 times greater than was brought on by increasing co2. But the feedback assumption is speculative at best because NO ONE yet understands climate feedbacks. In fact, cloud cover, one aspect of water vapor, likely provides a negative (offsetting) feedback. Sufficient time has now passed to show that practically every imaginable computer model scenario has grossly over-estimated actual temperature increase. In any case, computer model output is NOT evidence of anything apart from demonstrating the understanding, and agenda or confirmation bias of its authors!

Co2 is a trace gas, and represents 4/100 of one percent, by volume, of the atmosphere. This is also referred to as 400 parts per million by volume (ppmv), or .0004. The recent average annual increase in co2 is about 2 ppmv (.000002). The administration is promising to reduce US emissions by 17% over the next several years. But the economic analysis, using the alarmists’ own numbers, indicates that the cost to our economy (which does not take into account the impact on other countries) would be enormous, and, even assuming success, would have an impact on temperature too miniscule to even measure. Such a policy is likely to lead to a massive disruption - hundreds of billions (if not trillions) in cost and NO IMPROVEMENT! This has to be obvious to everyone but rent-seekers.

There has not been even one coherent attempt at rebuttal of the issues raised herein In fact, many of the alarmists still deny that global temperature has stalled or that bizarre weather is still natural climate variation. So far the only response to questions or criticism of AGW involve circular logic, name-calling, "appeals to authority" (hardly relevant when it is “authority” which is in question), “consensus” claims, or that the science is “settled”. Michael Mann (infamous "hockey stickgraph" author) responds to scientific criticisms by ignoring the facts presented, and instead asks whether the reader prefers to have their gall bladder taken out by a dentist rather than a surgeon. Science is never settled and certainly not decided by votes. The “consensus” claims are invariably based on completely debunked surveys. In any other situation such ‘consensus” studies would have long-since been exposed as major embarrassments for both the authors and the involved institutions.

It is clear that human activity is contributing to the increase in carbon dioxide. However, some perspective, again, is needed. By 2099 the co2 level is projected to reach 600 ppmv (this assumes a continuation of the annual increase of 2ppmv per year). A crowded gym with poor venting is likely to be at 1,000 ppmv. Submarine crews work, for months, in atmospheres of 3,000 to 5,000+ ppmv. Plants LOVE the increased co2 level and, in that environment, require less water and will provide more oxygen. Scientists have also acknowledged that lifeforms not unlike our own survived in co2 levels which were many times higher than now. Some scientists have concluded that the optimum level for co2 would be about 4 times higher than it is now.

Skeptics of these alarmist claims are at least as interested in saving the planet as the alarmists – we have grandchildren too. There is time, and technology will likely come up with sensible solutions long before the co2 level becomes a problem. In the meantime, we will all enjoy a healthier environment. Invoking the “precautionary principle” to address an implausible hypothesis would likely bring on catastrophic economic results. Do not permit the politicians and alarmists to foist this hobgoblin on us!

RELATED POSTS:
Back to Contents table

Climate Change Scam: Green energy costs 'far higher than ministers admit'
How long have our family of blogs and websites been telling you Global Warming / climate change was a scam, a load of pseudo scienfific scaremongering generated by charlatans in the service of their political clients and a globalist agenda. It seems almost every day now we are reporting another reputable scientist or organisation coming over to our side. A new report published today exposes government . academic lies about the cost of green power ...

Will New German Study End Global Warming Hysteria? Although evidence that the global warming scare has been a massive scam in which exponents of various typoes of dodgy science lumped together under the label of climate science, in order to justify massive taxes on everything (because everything in the modern economy involves oil or electricity at some stage) and create a $1trillion per year market for Inventment Bankers and Dr. Evil types such as Al Gore could steal more money from ordinary people, politicians, media contributors and of course science academics have stuck to the narrative.

Elsewhere: [Boggart Blog]...[Little Nicky Machiavelli]...[Scribd]...[Wikinut] ... [Boggart Abroad]

Bad News for the alarmists: 'Missing Heat' from Non-Existent 'Global Warming' isn't Hiding in the Ocean After All

by Xavier Connolly - 7 October, 2014

Stranded? Eff off - I'm looking for the missing heat the climate models say is here" (Source)

The already mortaly wounded cause of climate taxes alarmism has bean dealt another blow in a new study published by a NASA research project carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, USA.

Satellite observations and empirical measurements gathered by Argo temperature probes enabled the NASA team to calculate temperature variations and thermal expansion in ocean waters over 6000 feet deep.

They found that contrary to the 'scientific consensus' that global warming apparently stopped 18 years ago because the missing heat predicted by computer models had been absorbed by the deep oceans, according to the new study the depths have not warmed significantly for ten years.

This presents zealots for the religion of virtual reality with a big problem; the "missing heat" was, they assured us, hiding in the deep oceans, because their infallible mathematical models of the ecosphere said it must be somewhere. This has been their favourite get out when presented with scientificlly rigourous proof that the real world global mean temperature ("global warming") has been static the past 18 years.

Climate Change is Not Our Fault, So Let’s Just Deal With It, says California Professor

Once again its time to say I told you so. Sciencology cult followers will no doubt say "Once report does not prove your case. That is exactly what they have said in response to all the hunreds of other properly set up scientific studies that have said the same. All I can say to them is if one repost does not prove our case, how come one hockey stick is supposed to prove theirs?

Climate Is Changing, And Some Parks Are Endangered, But Humans Aren't The Cause - Daniel Botkin

Climate change is happening – but not because of human activity, Daniel Botkin, professor Emeritus in the Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology at University of California Santa Barbara has said. Moreover, the focus on man-made global warming is detracting attention from real environmental disasters to nature’s detriment, he has argued.

Botkin challenges the conclusions reached by the Union of Concerned Scientists in their paper National Landmarks at Risk, How Rising Seas, Floods, and Wildfires Are Threatening the United States’ Most Cherished Historic Sites, not least because they’ve taken the standard reports from the IPCC and others, “treating them as accurate and true,” and then used those results to look at the possible outcome for various national parks.

“The point of the report, its opening theme and its major conclusion, is that these historic places are in trouble and it’s our fault, we have been the bad guys interfering with nature and therefore damaging places we value,” Botkin says, before methodically knocking down each assertion as demonstrably false.

Climate models linking human CO2 output to rising temperatures are unreliable, he writes. “Conclusion: our addition of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere does not appear to be increasing Earth’s temperature. Whatever is happening to Earth’s climate does not seem to be our fault.”

However, he does acknowledge that climate change is happening. Taking sea level as an example, he says: “the sea level has been rising since the end of the last Ice Age, starting about 14,000 years ago as the continental and mountain glaciers have melted and sea water has expanded with the overall warming. The average rate has been about a foot or two a century”.

The question he poses is: what to do about it? Rather than spending time arguing over the causes of climate change, Botkin advocates simply rolling up our sleeves and dealing with the outcome, harking back to Frederick Law Olmstead, who in the mid 1800s, created the Back Bay Fens on Boston’s shoreline as a way to manage both ocean floods, deal with waste water for the city, and create a recreational area for city dwellers.

“Confronted with the combined problems of ocean surges and flooding from river runoff inland, Olmsted did not waste his time complaining about whether or not people have caused the problem. He just set out and solved it.”

However, he saves his most damning criticism for the UCS’s treatment of wildfire frequency. The report claims two national park sites are at particular risk of damage from increasingly frequent wildfires, despite the fact that the evidence shows no increase.

“Furthermore”, he writes, “it is well-established that most major wildfires that occur these days are from the failure to allow much more frequent, and therefore light fires, to burn. The 20th century policy dominated by Smokey Bear — “only you can prevent forest fires” — and the belief, ill-founded, that all forest and grassland fires are bad and must be prevented — have had a damaging effect.”

‘Damaging’ is an understatement – in fact, the policy caused the extinction of Kirtland’s warbler, a bird which nests in young jack pines, which only regenerate after a fire.

Meteorologists Begin To Admit To Climate Engineering
The freethinkers and Libertarians of New Media have been questioning the pseudoscientific certainties of the global warming lobby for a long time. During that often acrimonious process (because the Global Warming lobby are ever bit as organised and as driven by blind hatred of those who question them as the Bearded Queens In Bridal Gowns lobby) and most of us have been accused of infanticide, genocide and worse. At last the respectable climate scientists (the ones who didn't sell their arse for the corporate dollar) are speaking, and the media are listening.

Climate activists Claim US Deep Freeze Is Due To Global Warming

As 44 US states brace for snow in the coming week, multiple “climate change” articles have been published recently which attempt to attribute the record cold – or any change in climate for that matter – to “global warming.”

An op/ed published yesterday, for example, suggested the freezing temperatures throughout the U.S. are an “indirect result of the world getting warmer.”

“Global warming could be making parts of the world colder,” the author claimed, even though the phrase “global warming” refers to the entire world getting warmer, not just specific parts of it.

The author even attributed the record-level ice in Antarctica to “global warming.”

“Warmer temperatures are not only causing more snowfall in Antarctica, scientists believe, but could also be producing more sea ice,” he stated.

The op/ed did not resonate well with readers.

“These so called experts haven’t a clue what is going on, but politicians know exactly what is happening – the greatest opportunity to control the masses ever presented,” one reader, Steve Nosympathy, commented. “Never before has such an opportunity presented where the government can steal huge amounts from the public by instilling fear.”

A similar article published today by The Energy Collective blamed “global warming” for “extreme weather.”

“Global warming is worsening,” the article harked. “It seems that new reports appear with increasing frequency emphasizing the worsening of global warming due to increased accumulation of manmade greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere.”

“They show that extreme weather or climate events already appear to be more severe and/or frequent than in the past, and will continue to worsen.”

Of course, none of this corresponds to what the largest proponent of global warming, Al Gore, has said in the past.

“…Science is warning us that if we do not quickly reduce the global warming pollution that is trapping so much of the heat our planet normally radiates back out of the atmosphere, we are in danger of creating a permanent ‘carbon summer,’” Gore proclaimed during his Nobel Lecture in 2007.

He also famously predicted the North Pole would be ice-free by 2013, but instead ice sheets expanded to record levels that year.

“Satellite photos of the Arctic taken by NASA in August 2012 and August 2013 show a 60 percent increase in the polar ice sheet, more than half the size of Europe, despite ‘realistic’ predictions by climate scientists six years ago that the North Pole would be completely melted by now,” reported CNS News.

It’s hilarious that climate activists claim the “science is settled” and “global warming is real” yet over and over again their predictions are proven patently false.