Enviro-Globalists Are The New Mayans

New on my Substack

Don't miss this one.

THE 97 PERCENT LIE: The myth of the 97 percent global warming consensus

By Roy Spencer, Ph.D., principal research scientist in the Earth System Science Center. Prior to joining The University of Alabama in Huntsville, Dr. Spencer was a senior scientist for climate studies at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center.

Nothing helps raise public awareness like a good meme, and at least on that score, the "97 percent of scientists agree" meme has been wildly successful in convincing people that the science of global warming is settled. But as we shall see, the statistic - even if it were true - tells us nothing particularly useful regarding the global warming debate.

The 97 percent number comes from a 2013 paper that was published by John Cook in Environmental Research Letters and that claimed to review about 12,000 published scientific papers on global warming and climate change. Now, for those of us who work in climate change research, it is well known that "climate change" is widely assumed to be mostly human-caused, despite the fact that very few published studies have actually attempted to demonstrate this to be the case.

Again, it is simply assumed.

CLIMYDIA MELTDOWN: 9 Funniest Memes

Hey, just because Hillary Clinton demanded to ride on a separate private jet than Michelle Obama's doesn't mean that global warming isn't real. It just means that they don't have to suffer with the economic devastation that the climate scam entails for regular Americans.

Four Charts That Obliterate the Climate Change Scam

By Anthony Watts

Skeptics often get asked to show why they thinks climate change isn’t a crisis, and why we should not be alarmed about it. These four graphs from Michael David White are handy to use for such a purpose.

THE INFILTRATOR: How George Soros Destroyed the Democrat Party

By Daniel Greenfield

It was the end of the big year with three zeroes. The first X-Men movie had broken box office records. You couldn’t set foot in a supermarket without listening to Brittney Spears caterwauling, “Oops, I Did It Again.” And Republicans and Democrats had total control of both chambers of legislatures in the same amount of states. That was the way it was back in the distant days of the year 2000.

In 2016, Republicans control both legislative chambers in 32 states. That’s up from 16 in 2000.

What happened to the big donkey? Among other things, the Democrats decided to sell their base and their soul to a very bad billionaire and they got a very bad deal for both.

BUMMER: ‘Climate Change’ Comes In Dead Last On Latest U.N. Poll

By William Teach

All these polls showing the low ranking of ‘climate change’ on lists of people’s concerns is getting rather repetitive, wouldn’t you say?

(No Tricks Zone) Over the last few years, the United Nations has been conducting an online poll, asking the world’s citizens —well, those fortunate enough to have access to electrical power, a computer, and the internet — what is most important to them, what concerns them most, or what issue they view as the highest priority for action.

TOO BAD, SO SAD: Suit Alleges Al Jazeera America Lost $585 Million in Two Years

By Don Irvine

Al Jazeera America, the ratings-challenged cable news network that shut down two weeks ago, and which was owned by the Qatari government, was hit with a lawsuit by one of its former employees who alleges among other things that the network lost $585 million in 2013 and 2014.

According to The New York Times, Anand Gupta, the former executive vice president of finance, filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in Manhattan charging the network with denying him a promised promotion and salary increase because of racial discrimination.

The Real Climate Crisis that the Global Warming Scammers are Ignoring

By Karl Denninger

No, folks, it's not "globull warming."

I know, I know, we're all going to drown if we don't "stop" it.  Of course this means forcing India and China to cut carbon emissions, since they're the largest emission growth engines and will be for the foreseeable future, following by sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of the world that are yet to become industrialized nations.

That is never going to happen without the use of force -- that is, killing people -- and for good reason too, because if you live in a straw hut you'd probably like to do better, and to do better you need energy.

The real reason to impose carbon taxes and similar nonsense is to disadvantage the west and our modern society for the purpose of control while giving huge sums of money to favored people to redistribute under the guise of "leadership."  What it really amounts to is theft at gunpoint used for "global welfare payments."

Nothing more or less. Further, it gets (much) worse.

TREE RING BOY HARDEST HIT: Climate Fraud Implodes as Slight Order-of-Magnitude-Sized Math Error Discovered

By Karl Denninger

Now about those so-called "scientists" that want those who do not believe the "climate narrative" prosecuted -- can we go after them under 42 USC 1983 and 18 USC 242 for attempting to deprive persons of their rights under color of law?

A MATHEMATICAL discovery by Perth-based electrical engineer Dr David Evans may change everything about the climate debate, on the eve of the UN climate change conference in Paris next month.

A former climate modeller for the Government’s Australian Greenhouse Office, with six degrees in applied mathematics, Dr Evans has unpacked the architecture of the basic climate model which underpins all climate science.

He has found that, while the underlying physics of the model is correct, it had been applied incorrectly.

He has fixed two errors and the new corrected model finds the climate’s sensitivity to carbon dioxide (CO2) is much lower than was thought.

It turns out the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has over-estimated future global warming by as much as 10 times, he says.

Do you know why science requires (1) the publication of your raw data, (2) the publication of all the manipulations, constants, formulas and other transformations you do to your data, (3) the publication of your methods (that is, your means of collection of data, how you decided what data to collect, etc) and your analytical process?

These 20 Scientists Want to Make it A Crime to Disagree with Them

By Coyote Blog

I think it is important to publicize these names far and wide:

• Jagadish Shukla, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
• Edward Maibach, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
• Paul Dirmeyer, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
• Barry Klinger, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
• Paul Schopf, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
• David Straus, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
• Edward Sarachik, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
• Michael Wallace, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
• Alan Robock, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ
• Eugenia Kalnay, University of Maryland, College Park, MD
• William Lau, University of Maryland, College Park, MD
• Kevin Trenberth, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO
• T.N. Krishnamurti, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL
• Vasu Misra, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL
• Ben Kirtman, University of Miami, Miami, FL
• Robert Dickinson, University of Texas, Austin, TX
• Michela Biasutti, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY
• Mark Cane, Columbia University, New York, NY
• Lisa Goddard, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY
• Alan Betts, Atmospheric Research, Pittsford, VT

These 20 people, who nominally call themselves "scientists", have written a letter to President Obama urging him to use the RICO statute to prosecute people who disagree with them on climate science, essentially putting scientific agreement in the same status as organized crime. If they can't win the scientific debate with persurasion, they will win it with guns. From the letter:

One additional tool – recently proposed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse – is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change.

Of course "deceive the American people" is defined by these folks in practice as "disagreeing with us".

Hat tip: BadBlue 24x7 Financial News
 

FOUNDER OF GREENPEACE: Why I am a Climate Change Skeptic

By Dr. Patrick Moore

I am skeptical humans are the main cause of climate change and that it will be catastrophic in the near future. There is no scientific proof of this hypothesis, yet we are told “the debate is over” and “the science is settled.”

My skepticism begins with the believers’ certainty they can predict the global climate with a computer model. The entire basis for the doomsday climate change scenario is the hypothesis increased atmospheric carbon dioxide due to fossil fuel emissions will heat the Earth to unlivable temperatures.

In fact, the Earth has been warming very gradually for 300 years, since the Little Ice Age ended, long before heavy use of fossil fuels. Prior to the Little Ice Age, during the Medieval Warm Period, Vikings colonized Greenland and Newfoundland, when it was warmer there than today. And during Roman times, it was warmer, long before fossil fuels revolutionized civilization.

The idea it would be catastrophic if carbon dioxide were to increase and average global temperature were to rise a few degrees is preposterous.

"Anthropogenic Global Warming: Why I left the Religion"

Superb post at Small Dead Animals by Dr. Kyla Dillard, who explains in layman's terms why she abandoned her belief in man-caused global warming (or AGW). Some key graphs (emphases mine):

Because as a scientist, I can do the math. How do you explain the 18 years of zero temperature increases, when CO2 levels have continued to rise?

The computer model predictions have all failed, every single one of them.

I recommend Watts Up With That You can read the studies, they give all the links and analysis there.

Please don't Google 'deniers' & run back to me saying that it is not a credible site, go see the studies, the math, & the manipulation of data for yourself. Because there are literally trillions of dollars at stake, so of course there is a vested interest in keeping this thing going. If you disagree with something I say, quote me exactly which sentences you disagree with, then show me the actual research that contradicts what I have said.

Follow the money [and] you will see where the truth lies. Say it were true: If you believe that humans cause climate change, how does moving vast quantities of money help that? Exactly how would a carbon tax help and exactly when would we see the verification of that?

Australia's carbon tax was to take $139 billion out of the pockets of the taxpayers. Had it been successful, it was supposed to reduce CO2 from the atmosphere from 412 parts per million (ppm) all the way down to 411.87 ppm.

That would have been a reduction of 13/100 of a part per million. It is imperceptible The computer model predictions have ALL failed, yet people want other people, poor people, to die today due to lack of cheap energy and clean water.

...If there were no harm associated with the "green" policies, then it would not matter, but people are actually being harmed right now by energy poverty. People in Germany are illegally cutting wood in the historic Black Forest, just to heat their homes and stay alive. People are being forced to decide between heat and food, due to the massive increases in energy prices in Ontario, so that we can pay 15x the market rate for wind electricity and be forced to pay the Americans to take our excess electricity. Meanwhile, the only true green energy in Canada; hydroelectric power, has to be shut down to keep from destabilizing the grid when the wind is blowing. That's right, water is diverted from the turbines at Niagara Falls, so you can pay 15x the rate to subsidize big green. Don't lie to yourself, those are not wind farms, they are not farming the wind, they are farming the subsidies and taking money out of your pocket by theft.

WARMAL COLDING TODAY: Anyone seen Al Gore lately?

Your local global cooling denier could not be reached for comment.

Remember all of those "2014 was the hottest year on record" stories we saw at the end of the year?

I know you'll be shocked, but the media were lying.


Hat tip: Michael.

White House: Don’t Mention Temperature When Discussing Global Warming

By Michael Bastasch

First rule about global warming: don’t talk global warming.

The White House quietly released a draft guidance telling federal agencies to consider the impact more carbon dioxide emissions will have on the environment, but only in terms of how much more carbon dioxide will be emitted.

When conducting environmental impact analyses on rules and projects, federal agencies should only talk about carbon dioxide emissions increases — not things like potential increases in temperature, precipitation, storm intensity and other environmental impacts that scientists warn about.

“In light of the difficulties in attributing specific climate impacts to individual projects, [Council on Environmental Quality] recommends agencies use the projected [greenhouse gas] emissions and also, when appropriate, potential changes in carbon sequestration and storage, as the proxy for assessing a proposed action’s potential climate change impacts,” the White House wrote in its guidance federal regulatory agencies conducting environmental reviews.

Why is that? Federal environmental assessments will likely show regulations have a negligible impact on the environment in terms of temperature rises, sea level rises and such — indeed if every industrialized country stopped emitting carbon dioxide tomorrow, temperatures would only be reduced 0.21 degrees Celsius by 2100.

BUT... BUT... WARMING: NASA photo captures U.S. record breaking cold and snow from space

Anthony Watts relays this stunning photograph from NASA (yes, the same group fully invested in promoting the global warming fraud) that illustrates the record freeze currently embracing most of the United States.

NASA’s Terra satellite captured an image of the snow-covered eastern U.S. that looks like the states have been sitting in a freezer. In addition to the snow cover, Arctic and Siberian air masses have settled in over the Eastern U.S. triggering many record low temperatures in many states.

On Feb. 19 at 16:40 UTC (11:40 a.m. EST), the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) instrument that flies aboard NASA’s Terra satellite captured a picture of the snowy landscape. The snow cover combined with the frosty air mass made the eastern U.S. feel like the inside of freezer. The MODIS image was created at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.

On the morning of Feb. 20, NOAA’s Weather Prediction Center (WPC) noted, “There were widespread subzero overnight lows Thursday night (Feb. 19) extending from Illinois to western Virginia, and numerous record lows were set. Bitterly-cold arctic air is setting numerous temperature records across the eastern U.S. and will keep temperatures well below normal on Friday (Feb. 20).”

If anthropogenic global warming happened to be true (hint: it's not), it would be a good thing since it appears we face a new and impending Ice Age.

GLOBAL WARMING EMERGENCY: Hundreds of locations reach or exceed 120-year low temperature records

I call the climate kooks "global cooling deniers", because that's what they are.

Some highlights:

• Siberian Express Grips Midwest, Northeast, South; Four Cities Set All-Time Record Lows
• Record cold continues; next week could be colder
• Great Lakes “likely to have the most ice since records began,” says meteorologist

Hat tip: Drudge.

3 of the Best Global Warming Images Ever

Spotted at Stormfax:

Related:
  • 'This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow...'
  • Al Gore and his UN global warming profiteers
  • Let Them Eat Dirt

WARMAL COLDING STRIKES BACK: ‘Shocking’ damage from massive summer snowstorm says Calgary Mayor

Was Al Gore looking for a new mansion to purchase in Calgary?

Commuters needed hours to get to work, snow-laden tree branches groaned and snapped and thousands of people were without power Wednesday after a second major taste of winter hit Calgary with 10 days to go before summer’s end...

Trees were uprooted and roads clogged with broken branches.

The power outages, which at one point affected up to 30,000 homes and businesses, also caused traffic lights to go out.

According to Enmax, 26,000 customers are currently without power, with outages concentrated in western Calgary.

...“We are going to see some real damage and that is an extraordinary shame,” said Mayor Naheed Nenshi, who spoke at the city’s emergency operations centre... “Rush hour will be brutal, so help us spread it out by leaving work earlier or later than normal. Maybe catch a post-work movie?” he wrote on Twitter.

The amount of damage has not been assessed, he said, but he warned the cleanup wasn’t going to happen overnight.

“We don’t have a sense of it yet, but certainly, depending on the part of the city you’re in … I was shocked at the damage,” he said.

Michael "Liar, Cheat, Falsifier and Fraud" Mann (which is the nickname he prefers, I hear) could not be reached for comment at press time.


Hat tip: BadBlue News.

NO GLOBAL WARMING FOR 17 YEARS, 11 MONTHS: Crazed Sex Poodle* Hardest Hit

So reports Christopher Monckton:

The Great Pause has now persisted for 17 years 11 months. Indeed, to three decimal places on a per-decade basis, there has been no global warming for 18 full years. Professor Ross McKitrick, however, has upped the ante with a new statistical paper to say there has been no global warming for 19 years.

Whichever value one adopts, it is becoming harder and harder to maintain that we face a “climate crisis” caused by our past and present sins of emission...

...This is the longest continuous period without any warming in the global instrumental temperature record since the satellites first watched in 1979. It has endured for half the satellite temperature record. Yet the Great Pause coincides with a continuing, rapid increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration.

The RSS satellite records shows no global warming at all for the 215 months from October 1996 to August 2014. That is more than half the entire 428-month satellite record.

* The term "crazed sex poodle" was first used to describe Al Gore by a Denver masseuse who alleged the infamous climate grifter had "fondled and groped her".

Hat tip: BadBlue News.

COLOR ME SHOCKED: Chevy Volt Resale Values Plummet as Lease Returns Hit Market

By Mark Modica

It has been two years since General Motors admitted that there was little demand for the Chevy Volt (as reported here) due to there being "no plug-in market." Their answer was to "create market" to drive sales for the politically popular but economically-nonviable Volt. GM manipulated sales for the Volt through the use of subsidized leases at a time when President Obama's favorite, green wonder-car was being criticized for low sales as it failed to live up to the early hype.

GM was able to use taxpayer money in the form of electric vehicle tax credits to help drive down costs to lessees. Taxpayers chipped in $7,500 for each Chevy Volt placed on the road for terms as low as two years. The taxpayer subsidies, along with inflated residual values and other GM incentives, provided for low monthly lease payments and led to a full two-thirds of all Volt "sales" being attributed to leases. That's about three times the lease rate for the overall industry.

So, what happens to resale values of vehicles with little mass appeal that are forced upon the public with subsidies and manipulated leases? The result was predictable; those leased vehicles are now being returned and resale values are plunging. Having won many awards in the past, the Chevy Volt is now the front-runner to be the recipient of the highest depreciating vehicle award.

A search on the Manheim auction site, a primary indicator of vehicle wholesale value, shows that 81 Chevy Volts, model year 2012, were sold at auction for the week ending August 2^nd. The average price was $14,871 for vehicles that are only two or three years old, primarily coming off of the manipulated leases. That equates to an absurd loss of values for Chevy Volts of about 65% in only two or three years.