Tag Archives: Global warming

Looking Beyond The Hype To Find The Reason

Posted on by

On Wednesday, John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog detailing the reason for 2023 being one of the warmest years on record. Oddly enough, it wasn’t the result of anything people did!

The article reports:

Warmists were ecstatic over the 2023 increase, which they attributed to “climate change.” (It makes no sense to say that a change was caused by change, but put that aside for the moment.) As to the subsequent decline, they were almost entirely silent.

It seemed obvious to me that the most likely explanation was the extraordinary eruption of the Hunga Tonga underwater volcano in January 2022. That eruption, unprecedented in recorded history, sent vast quantities of water vapor into the atmosphere. Water vapor is, of course, the principal greenhouse gas.

The article quotes an article posted at WattsUpWithThat on December 30:

We have been fortunate to witness the largest climate event to occur on the planet since the advent of global satellite records, and possibly the largest event since the eruption of Mount Tambora in 1815. It is clearly a naturally occurring, externally forced climate event. However, mainstream climate scientists are not treating it appropriately. This is because climate science does not function like other sciences and is subject to strong confirmation bias. The first step to learning from the 2023 event is accepting its exceptional nature, which many fail to do.
***
According to Occam’s razor, a climatic event of unparalleled magnitude in modern records requires an exceptional cause. The factors responsible for normal climate variability are insufficient. The only extraordinary factor preceding the 2023 event was the explosion of the Hunga Tonga underwater volcano.
***
For anyone who is not committed to the explanation of climate change due to the radiative properties of greenhouse gases, the Hunga Tonga eruption is currently the best explanation for the 2023 climate event. In July 2025, I analyzed that “if Hunga Tonga is responsible for the 2023-24 warming event, a clear prediction is that we should observe most of this warming disappear in 3-5 years.“[21] This projection does not arise from any of the other considered causes. By December 2025, four years after the eruption, this prediction had come true: the ocean temperature anomaly in November was only 0.05°C higher than in November 2021, before the eruption. 90 % of the ocean warming from the 2023 climate event has disappeared.

Sorry to disappoint, but man is simply not important enough in the grand scheme of things to change the earth’s climate. We have a responsibility to take care of the earth, but we also have a responsibility to do what we can to create civilized societies. Balance is the key.

More Data That Upends The Theory Of Global Warming

Posted on by

On Friday, BizPacReview posted an article about rising CO2 levels and melting polar ice. The former is working toward man’s benefit, and the latter is not happening.

The article reports:

The world is told daily that rising CO2 levels are melting polar ice, shrinking crop yields, and pushing humanity toward extinction. “Institute radical decarbonization or we’re all dead!” is the cry of our enlightened overlords, as if swapping incandescent bulbs for LEDs and banning gas cars would spare us from their predicted apocalypse. They demand immediate economic hara-kiri to avoid weather predictions based on pseudoscience and outright deception.

Real-world data – from Brazil’s record harvests to the rebound of Antarctica’s ice – expose the climate crusade for the baseless hysteria that it is.

Brazil’s agricultural triumph

The Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics projects cereals, legumes, and oilseeds to reach more than 325 million metric tons of production this year, an 11% increase over 2024.

Production of soybeans, another cornerstone crop of global food security, is expected to hit 161 million metric tons in Brazil, a 6% jump from the previous year, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service. Brazil’s National Supply Corporation forecasts total grain production to be more than 322 million metric tons, up over 8% from the prior harvest, as rice leads with an increase of nearly 10% in planted area.

What does this mean for you? These numbers are evidence of a thriving agricultural sector that feeds millions worldwide. Brazil’s success challenges dire warnings from the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of rising CO2 and temperatures disrupting agriculture.

Warmer climates and higher CO2 levels are enhancing plant growth, as warmth extends growing seasons and CO2 acts as a natural fertilizer, facts that are evident across the globe.

…Far south of Brazil, in the freezing landscape of Antarctica, another climate myth is derailed. A poster child of climate disaster forecasts, Antarctica is adding to its inventory of ice for the first time in decades. Recent data reveal that Antarctica’s ice sheet is growing. Between 2021 and 2023, Antarctic ice gained mass at a rate of approximately 108 metric gigatons per year, driven by anomalous precipitation accumulation.

In March 2016, I posted the following from Investor’s Business Daily:

If they were honest, the climate alarmists would admit that they are not working feverishly to hold down global temperatures — they would acknowledge that they are instead consumed with the goal of holding down capitalism and establishing a global welfare state.

Have doubts? Then listen to the words of former United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer:

“One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole,” said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.

So what is the goal of environmental policy?

“We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy,” said Edenhofer.

That is the bottom line.

Stopping Green Energy 

Posted on by

Author:  R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D.  

The re-election of Donald Trump provides an opportunity to correct the devastating agenda of the green new deal extremists.  Inexpensive and ample supplies of energy are essential to the progress of our economy.  Solar and wind will never produce sufficient reliable energy to fuel a modern society.  Impossible, as the Europeans have found out.

It is very discouraging to realize that many of our elected Republicans believe the man-made climate change hoax and are therefore willing to support things like carbon neutrality.  There is no reliable scientific evidence that man’s consumption of fossil fuels has altered the environment!  The environmental extremists base their scare tactics about manmade global warming on computer models generated by their fellow believers.  The truth is that the earth’s temperature has varied substantially long before there were enough human beings to impact the CO2 levels.  There have been at least eight ice age/warming periods over the earth’s history going back several million years.  We are now in a global warming cycle from the last ice age that occurred over 10,000 years ago.  So the first thing we need to do is to ensure that our lawmakers are not taken in by the climate change extremists.  We also need to stop indoctrinating our children with the man-made climate hoax.

As President Trump has advocated, we need to “drill baby drill” for oil and natural gas, both of which we are fortunate to have an abundant supply.  We also need to return to coal burning plants since we have the technology to ensure that coal is burned efficiently and cleanly;  instead of shipping our coal to China, which is greatly expanding their coal fired plants and doing so with little concern for the environment.  President Trump’s recent announcement of our withdrawal from the globalist so-called Paris Accords which are detrimental to America is a step in the right direction.  Remember, that cheap and abundant energy will enhance our ability to compete with other countries in manufacturing.

All government subsidies and tax incentives for solar, wind and electrical vehicles need to be stopped immediately.  Wind farms off our coast are an environmental hazard that only enriches China.  A recent study conducted by the conservative John Locke Foundation estimates that continued movement towards wind and solar will produce an enormous increase in energy prices in our country.  Not only are wind and solar expensive and produce unreliable energy, but due to their intermittent energy production, extensive battery storage capacity (or more likely backup fossil fuel plants) will still be needed.  Experts have recently predicted that a full implementation of Artificial Intelligence will require a threefold electrical capacity increase nationwide.

The final solution to energy production is nuclear power.  Due to the environmental extremists scare tactics and excessive regulation, there has not been a nuclear power plant built in North Carolina since the Shearon Harris plant near Raleigh was completed in 1987.  This despite the improved safety and ability to produce nuclear power plants of smaller size, which could be located closer to customer demand.  The European Union is planning on increasing their nuclear plants due in large measure to the ineffectiveness of wind and solar.  Currently, France generates over 70% of their electricity from nuclear reactors.

The bottom line is that we need to do away with the move towards wind and solar and go back to the common sense approach of relying on fossil fuels and nuclear power.  If we do not, we will be unable to maintain our economy and grow for the future.  Our conservative lawmakers need to make this happen.

What Global Warming Is Really About

Posted on by

On Friday, Issues & Insights posted an article about global warming. The article includes a number of statements by people who claim to be alarmed at global warming that might cause you to question their motives.

The article reports those statements:

  • Christiana Figueres, one-time executive secretary of United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the climate activists’ agenda is not to protect the environment but to break capitalism. The task ahead, she said in 2015, is “to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”
  • The late Rajenda Pachauri was the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Chairman until 2015. He openly conceded “the protection of planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems” was “more than a mission” to him. It was his “religion” and “dharma.”
  • Activist and influential author Naomi Klein once wondered if the fearmongering was “the best chance we’re ever going to get to build a better world?” The world must “change, or be changed,” she says, because an “economic system” — our free and open markets — has caused environmental “wreckage.”
  • Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said almost five years ago that Miami will not exist “in a few years” due to the effects of global warming. She of course had a plan, not to deal with the changes, but to pass Democratic Party policies. “The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all,” former Ocasio-Cortez chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti said, according to the Washington Post Magazine. “Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Chakrabarti asked an aide to Washington Gov. Jay Inslee while the pair met at a Washington, D.C. coffee shop in May. “Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”

The free market will always provide a cleaner environment than government regulation. It should also be noted that many of those complaining about the carbon footprint of our cars are flying around the world in private jets. If they truly believed climate change was an existential crisis, would they be doing that?

 

 

Good News For Those Of Us Who Emit CO2

Posted on by

On Tuesday, wattsupwiththat posted an article about increased levels of CO2.

The article reports:

One of the more commonly-stated concerns linked to “global warming” is that sweltering heat will parch the terrestrial landscape (browning), limit vegetation growth, and foment water shortages – even widespread drought.

However, a new study suggests the Earth’s rising CO2 concentration has the exact opposite effect in the real world.

In their extensive trend analysis spanning the last few decades, the scientists determined elevated CO2 was the single most “dominant driver” (accounting for 45% of the correlation) when assessing the link between reducing vegetation water demand and improved water use efficiency.

Compared to CO2, temperature and precipitation, for example, play a far less significant role (10-11% of the correlation) in influencing the trend in improved vegetation growth and water use efficiency.

“The CO2 fertilization effect has benefits for both vegetation growth and water use efficiency (WUE).”

“…elevated CO2 concentrations could indirectly enhance water availability by improving [water use efficiency]…reducing vegetation water demand.”

Please follow the link to the article. The science here is way above my pay grade, but I will say that I have heard other scientists say this. As CO2 levels rise, there will be more than enough food to feed the planet as long as man and politics get out of the way.

When Green Energy Meets Practicality!

Posted on by

It’s going to be hot in Paris during the summer Olympics. Athletes need to be well-rested to perform at their best. But Paris, in the interest of global warming, cooling, or whatever, will not be air conditioning the Olympic Village. So what is an athlete supposed to do?

On Sunday, WattsUpWithThat reported:

The 2024 Paris Olympics are shaping up to be an event filled with athletic prowess and, unsurprisingly, a hefty dose of virtue signaling. The recent announcement that air conditioning will not be provided at the Olympic venues is a prime example. In a bid to flaunt their environmental consciousness, the organizers have decided to rely on “sustainable” cooling methods, leaving teams to fend for themselves in the sweltering Parisian summer. And fend they did! Teams are now bringing their own portable air conditioners, making a mockery of the original intent and highlighting the absurdity of the decision.

Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo has been quite vocal about her commitment to making the 2024 Olympics an exemplar of environmental responsibility. The decision to forgo traditional air conditioning in favor of passive cooling techniques is touted as a major step toward reducing the event’s carbon footprint. According to Hidalgo, “These Games will be the first ones with a positive contribution to the climate” and are committed to “innovative solutions that are carbon neutral”​​.

But let’s be clear: sustainability, as currently promoted, is a nebulous concept that often amounts to nothing more than vapid virtue signaling. It’s an easy catchphrase, with no real objective definition for politicians and organizers who want to appear forward-thinking. The idea that passive cooling could sufficiently counteract the summer heat in Paris is more of a fanciful notion than a feasible plan.

Instead of applauding this so-called innovation, teams are responding with pragmatism. The U.S. teams, for instance, have decided to bring their own portable air conditioning units to ensure their athletes perform at their best. This reaction not only makes sense but also underscores the glaring disconnect between the idealistic aspirations of the organizers and the on-ground realities of hosting a global sporting event.

Common sense has overruled absurdity!

That Didn’t Go As Planned!

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The American Thinker posted an article about the latest scientific research on global warming. It doesn’t show what it was expected to show.

The article reports:

A team of “high-powered NASA scientists” has just stumbled upon a very inconvenient truth, and no, I don’t mean that they’ve found new evidence to support the Al Gore fear porn flick, but instead, they’ve discovered that 80% of “global warming” in the last ten years has not been caused by man’s use of natural renewable resources like gas and oil, but “draconian fuel shipping regulations” ostensibly “designed to help prevent global warming.”

From a report by Chris Morrison at The Daily Sceptic:

The world of climate science is in shock following extraordinary findings from a team of high-powered NASA scientists that suggest most of the recent global temperature increases are due to the introduction of draconian fuel shipping regulations designed to help prevent global warming.

Well, well, well, the “cure” is worse than the disease… except there was no disease. Now, I don’t contend that the “cure” is all that bad either, as long as we’re speaking only in the context of the environment; a relatively warm planet (of course, I’m talking within reason here) isn’t a bad thing because it means surviving is easier. But, they think it’s bad, which just goes to show you how ill-equipped these climate “scientist” bureaucrats are at deciding on policy.

Obviously we need to go back to drilling in America and driving cars with gasoline engines!

The article concludes:

“It’s also important to keep in mind that man cannot create atoms. All carbon contained in coal and oil (and wood and anything else which burns) was originally atmospheric CO2 plants split into C and 2 O, using the C for themselves and releasing the Os into the atmosphere. Hence, it’s physically impossible to increase the level of atmospheric CO2 beyond what it was at some point in time in the past where life on this planet already existed.”

Can these greens please stop wrecking literally everything? They love to tell us that “there is no Planet B” and we’re at the precipice of an “existential” crisis…which is half true. It’s not a looming climate disaster though for the majority of the world, but a financial and political disaster—so for the love of all that is good, please step away from the pen of government policy and bureaucracy.

The Next Big Climate Scare

Posted on by

In America (and in some other places) we just aren’t paying enough attention to our impending doom due to global warming, global cooling, or whatever climate change is currently fashionable. Therefore, it is time to raise the stakes to get our attention. Brace yourself, we are about to start hearing about deaths due to climate change. How you actually calculate that is a mystery, but that hasn’t stopped the propagandists yet.

On Thursday, wattsupwiththat reported:

The next big climate scare is on the way. Advocates of measures to control the climate now propose that we begin counting deaths from climate change. They appear to believe that if people see a daily announcement of climate deaths, they will be more inclined to accept climate change policies. But it’s not even clear that the current gentle rise in global temperatures is causing more people to die.

In December, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke at COP28, the 28th United Nations Climate Conference, and mentioned climate-related deaths.

“We are seeing and beginning to pay attention and to count and record the deaths that are related to climate,” she said. “And by far the biggest killer is extreme heat.”

According to Ms. Clinton, Europe recorded 61,000 deaths from extreme heat in 2023, and she estimated that about 500,000 people died from heat across the world last year.

Global temperatures have been gently rising for the last 300 years. Temperature metrics from NASA, NOAA, and the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom estimate that Earth’s surface temperatures have risen a little more than one degree Celsius, or about two degrees Fahrenheit, over the last 140 years. But are these warmer temperatures harmful to people?

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, most cases of influenza occur during December to March, the cold months in the United States. Influenza season in the southern hemisphere takes place during the cold months there, April through September. The peak months for COVID-19 infections tended to be the cold periods of the year. More people usually get sick during cold months than in warm months.

More people also die during winter months than summer months, according to many peer-reviewed studies. For example, Dr. Matthew Falagas of the Alfa Institute of Medical Sciences and five other researchers studied seasonal mortality in 11 nations. The research showed that the average number of deaths peaked in the coldest months of the year in all of them.

It’s easier to stay healthy when the weather is warm–the sun provides Vitamin D, and as long as you don’t overdue it, fresh air and sunshine are healthy.

Please follow the link to the article. It includes some very interesting charts, including the one below:

 

Numbers don’t lie.

Creating An Energy Crisis In America

Posted on by

The last real energy crisis America experienced was in the 1970’s. It was then that the country discovered that there was a price to be paid for not being energy independent. We have forgotten that lesson.

On Friday, Red State reported:

In a Friday morning announcement, the White House and Department of Energy (DOE) revealed their next target — and it’s enormous.

The White House is halting the permitting process for several proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal projects over their potential impacts on climate change, an unprecedented move environmentalists have demanded in recent months.

[T]he pause [will] occur while federal officials conduct a rigorous environmental review assessing the projects’ carbon emissions, which could take more than a year to complete. Climate activists have loudly taken aim at LNG export projects in recent weeks, arguing they will lead to a large uptick in emissions and worsen global warming.

The article concludes:

Chatterjee (former Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chair Neil Chatterjee) was right— but here’s the thing. Facts, data, and science only matter to Democrats when they support the left’s narratives. We saw it with COVID-19. When facts don’t support the left’s narratives, they are to be dismissed, lied about, or outright ignored. (See: “Anthony Fauci.”)

Finally, House Speaker Mike Johnson released a statement following the White House announcement, warning that Biden is playing into Russian President Vladimir Putin’s hand.

This announcement by President Biden is as outrageous as it is subversive. Stalling LNG export terminals, like Calcasieu Pass 2 in Louisiana, not only prevents America’s economic growth, it empowers our adversaries like Vladimir Putin.

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began, American petroleum producers have increased LNG shipments to our partners in Europe to prevent a catastrophic, continent-wide energy crisis and to provide an alternative to Russian energy exports.

It is outrageous that this administration is asking American taxpayers to spend billions to defeat Russia while knowingly forcing allies to rely on Russian energy, giving Putin an advantage. 

This policy change also flies in the face of the commitments made when the White House announced the joint US-EU Task Force less than two years ago to reduce Europe’s dependence on Russia and strengthen energy security.

Nailed it. The question is, whether Biden is capable of understanding the gravity of the Speaker’s statement. The answer is no doubt chilling.

The Bottom Line

If the environmental alarmist crowd came out today and announced it has changed its position on natural gas, Joe Biden would be singing its praises before he eats his pudding cup and goes nighty-night.

Pleas follow the link to read the entire article. We are committing economic suicide.

Is Increased Artic Ice A Sign Of Global Warming?

Posted on by

On Monday, PJ Media posted an article about global warming.

The article reports:

One of climate alarmists’ favorite predictions is that the Arctic is losing its ice due to global warming, something elites have claimed for decades. New data shows, however, that Arctic ice is actually increasing! 

Climate has always changed and will continue to do so until the real apocalypse (not the fake one climate alarmists have been predicting as imminent for decades). With more than 50 years of failed climate change predictions behind them and a track record of consistent and total untrustworthiness, you’d think that the doom prophets would have given up. Then again, climate change is a convenient way for the greedy to enrich themselves (like former Vice President Al Gore) and for power-hungry politicians to take away rights and liberties while claiming a moral and physical necessity.

The article concludes:

It is interesting that last year’s data showed eight years of a global cooling trend rather than warming. Right about this part of winter, I wouldn’t mind a little warming, but many of us in America are instead facing a harsh cold snap. Of course, it’s not encouraging that some entities (including our federal government) aim to engage in geoengineering to manipulate weather and supposedly save the planet from warming. These entities who want to reduce global temperatures ignore the fact that the world isn’t about to go up in flames and that the Arctic is not becoming ice-free.

The real threat isn’t climate apocalypse; it’s leftist ideologues who have the power to weaponize pseudo-scientific propaganda against us and our liberties.

Obviously, I am not in favor of pollution. However, I am in favor of balance and of a free market. India and China are largely exempt from the energy restrictions that recent climate ‘treaties’ have placed on America.

A December 2023 article at NBC News reported:

This year, the burning of fossil fuel and manufacturing of cement have added the equivalent of putting 2.57 million pounds of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every second.

If China and India were excluded from the count, world carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels and cement manufacturing would have dropped, Friedlingstein said.

In 2023 the world increased its annual emissions by 398 million metric tons, but it was in three places: China, India and the skies. China’s fossil fuel emissions went up 458 million metric tons from last year, India’s went up 233 million metric tons and aviation emissions increased 145 million metric tons.

There is also the fact that many scientists believe that a higher level of CO2 is good for the planet–good for agriculture and good for providing food for more people.

Let’s Look At The Record

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Townhall posted an article titled:

Not-So-Scary Truth About Climate Change

As you know, John Kerry came back from the climate conference with ideas that will basically destroy life in America as we know it. John Stossel decided to take a look at some of the impact global warming might actually have. It should also be noted here that there are scientists who believe we are entering a period of global cooling rather than global warming. The earth goes through climate cycles, and we are always in some phase of one of those cycles. We are NOT in control of the weather, nor will we ever be.

In his book The Democrat Party Hates America, Mark Levin lists some of the predictions about climate made in recent years. You can draw your own conclusions as to how accurate they were.

Here are some of the predictions:

  1. Harvard biologist George Walk estimated that ‘civilization will end within 15 or 30 years [by 1985 or 2000] unless immediate action is taken against problems facing  mankind.’
  2. ‘We are in an environmental crisis that threatens the survival of this nations, and of the world as a suitable place to human habitation,’ wrote Washington University biologist Barry Commoner in the Earth Day issue of the scholarly journal Environment.
  3. The day after the first Earth Day, the New York Times editorial page warned, “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.’
  4. ‘Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,’ Paul Ehrlich confidently declared in the April 1970 issue of Mademoiselle. ‘The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years [by 1980].’

…13.Paul Ehrlich wared in the May 1970 issue of Audubon that DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbons ‘may have substantially reduced the life expectance of people born since 1945.’ Ehrlich warned that Americans born since 1946…now had a life expectancy of only 49 years, and he predicted that if current patterns continues this expectancy would reach 42 years by 1980 when it might level out. (Note: According to the most recent CDC report, life expectancy in the US is 78.6 years.)

As you can see, previous doomsday predictions have not been particularly accurate. Why should we believe the current doomsday predictions? I think the climate extremists have ‘cried wolf’ one too many times.

Please follow the link to the Townhall article to discover the upside of climate change.

Follow The Science

Posted on by

On Thursday, LifeSite posted an article about some recent statements by Dr. John Clauser, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist.

The article reports:

A Nobel Prize-winning physicist has criticized alarmist climate predictions and said that he does not believe that there is a “climate crisis.”

During his speech at the “Quantum Korea 2023” event, Dr. John Clauser said, “I don’t believe there is a climate crisis,” according to a report by Seoul Economic Daily that has been translated into English by the CO2 Coalition. 

The article continues:

Clauser added that “key processes are exaggerated and misunderstood by approximately 200 times” and accused the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of spreading misinformation. 

In his keynote speech addressed to young Korean scientists and students, Clauser said that “Misinformation is being spread by those with political and opportunistic motives.” 

The article concludes:

“There is, however, a very real problem with providing a decent standard of living to the world’s large population and an associated energy crisis. The latter is being unnecessarily exacerbated by what, in my opinion, is incorrect climate science.” 

The renowned physicist has criticized President Joe Biden’s climate policies and the fact that the 2021 Nobel Prize was awarded for work done on computer models predicting “climate change.” Clauser has criticized the faulty models used by the IPCC and others that he stresses ignore important factors. 

Clauser has developed climate models that emphasize the impact of cumulus clouds reflecting sunlight, which cover around half of the Earth on average. These clouds reflect around 90% of the sunlight back into space. Sunlight that reaches the earth in areas without clouds evaporates seawater which, in turn, produces cumulus clouds. 

“It produces clouds at an increasingly abundant rate when the cloud-cover fraction is too small and the temperature is too high and vice versa when the fraction is too large,” according to the CO2 Coalition. 

These clouds, therefore, act as “a very powerful input-power thermostat” that stabilizes the earth’s surface temperature. 

Temperature changes caused by the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are “nearly two orders of magnitude smaller” than the impact of the cumulus clouds, rendering it negligible by comparison, Clauser argues. 

On March 30, 2016, I posted an article which included the following quoted from an article in Investor’s Business Daily:

If they were honest, the climate alarmists would admit that they are not working feverishly to hold down global temperatures — they would acknowledge that they are instead consumed with the goal of holding down capitalism and establishing a global welfare state.

Have doubts? Then listen to the words of former United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer:

“One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole,” said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.

So what is the goal of environmental policy?

“We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy,” said Edenhofer.

Any questions?

The Biden Administration Should Review The History Of Gypsy Moths

Posted on by

In June of 2022, I posted an article about some of the things that have occurred as a result of man trying to improve scientifically on the work of Mother Nature. I am not against science, but I think that sometimes we get way out over our skis.

The article detailed a few times mankind has tried to improve on mother nature and the results:

Over the years, men have done things in the realm of nature that have not exactly worked out as they planned. The Marine Mammals Protection Act of 1972 resulted in a dramatic increase of the seal population off off Cape Cod, Massachusetts. That was a nice gesture to save the seals, but it resulted in an influx of great white sharks in the area because of the increased food supply for the sharks. There is also the example of kudzu, which was introduced to Americans during the Philadelphia Centennial Exposition in 1876 where it was touted as a great ornamental plant for its sweet-smelling blooms and sturdy vines. From the 1930’s to the 1950’s the Soil Conservation Service promoted it as a great tool for soil erosion control and planting it was encouraged throughout the south. Kudzu is now recognized as an invasive plant and has killed multiple trees throughout the southern United States. Gypsy moths came from a scientist in Massachusetts who was trying to breed a more hearty breed of silkworm to create silk for America. A few escaped and have the resulting moths have now gone as far south as New Jersey. It’s not good to mess with mother nature.

Our track record in the area of improving the work of Mother Nature is not good.

On Sunday, BizPacReview reported the following:

The Biden administration’s fervor to radically transform America’s energy infrastructure to battle the alleged global warming apocalypse has spurred the White House to consider an idea that could have come directly out of a science fiction disaster movie, blocking out the rays of the sun, a risky scheme but one which is increasingly popular among the climate cult crazies.

In a new report that was released on Friday, the regime expressed an openness to solar radiation modification, a geoengineering theory that could reduce the effects of climate change by reflecting sunlight away from the Earth’s surface, a concept that could come with potentially dangerous consequences, not the least of which would be to trigger the climate doomsday that the hysterics are trying to prevent.

“A program of research into the scientific and societal implications of solar radiation modification (SRM) would enable better-informed decisions about the potential risks and benefits of SRM as a component of climate policy, alongside the foundational elements of greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and adaptation,” the report said. “SRM offers the possibility of cooling the planet significantly on a timescale of a few years.”

The report, titled “Congressionally-Mandated Report on Solar Radiation Modification,” was published on the White House website and lists methods of geoengineering known as “stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) and marine cloud brightening” being considered to block the sun.

However, the White House noted that the review was done according to a congressional directive and that “there are no plans underway to establish a comprehensive research program focused on solar radiation modification.”

Hang on to your hats; this could be a VERY bumpy ride.

About Those Canadian Wildfires…

Posted on by

On Saturday, Anthony Watts posted an article at wattsupwiththat about the Canadian wildfires that have polluted the east coast of America for the past week or so. Mr. Watts explains that not only are the wildfires NOT the result of global warming, but that there were notable wildfires long before the invention of the automobile and the industrialization of America and other countries.

The article includes the following graphs:

The article also notes:

Temperatures in the United States are virtually unchanged from 2005, when a new state-of-the-art climate monitoring system called the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN) was put in place by NOAA. However, this data is never reported to the news media on NOAA’s climate reports for the United States.

The scientific evidence does not support the theory of global warming. However, there is major economic and political change that can be accomplished by promoting the theory of global warming, so the theory will continue to be promoted.

 

 

The Continuing Attack On Our Food Supply

Posted on by

I am not interested in eating bugs instead of beef. I don’t care if they are easier and cheaper to grow and have less impact on the environment, I am not going to eat bugs. The idea that those of us who live in the read world will eat bugs has surfaced numerous times. Somehow I don’t expect to find bugs on the menu in the homes of the ultra rich. On Sunday, Red State posted an article about the food item next on the list of the government entities that are attacking our diet.

The article reports:

First, it was global cooling, then global warming. Now, because they don’t know what they are talking about and none of their predictions come to pass, it’s the more amorphous “climate change” (although the “climate” is always changing). They are never held accountable for being wrong, and they just move on to the next thing to push us to panic over.

It’s always about how things are about to implode — if we don’t commit more of our money to deal with it/give up our freedoms/turn over more control to the government.

Let’s listen to what Joe Biden said during his vacation in Ireland. This was before he told guests at Dublin Castle that he wanted to “lick the world.”

…We’ve seen them demonize fossil fuels. We’ve seen them go after meat — even cow farts with their methane emissions.

But an AFP News Agency tweet about what the climate cult might be targeting next had people sit up and take notice on Sunday. Because if anything underscored how anti-human the cult seems, this would be it. Guess what else is bad? Rice — that thing that most of the world survives on.

The article concludes:

Leaving aside the questionable scientific conclusions here, what are they saying here about the growth of rice? Do they truly think they’re going to eliminate or reduce rice when so much of the world relies on it? Eliminating or reducing rice would decimate people, particularly the poor. We should stop feeding them to “help” the environment? That’s a heck of a message.

Talk about hating people and wanting to throw the world into chaos; eliminating rice might just do it. They don’t want us to use energy, they don’t want us to eat meat, and now they don’t want us to eat rice. Why don’t they just come out and say it — we are the carbon units that they have a problem with and seem to want to eliminate. Is the purpose to protect life on earth or to promote control of those lives? Because it sure looks like the latter.

How about we “ignore” such idiocy? Notice in the video that China and India weren’t signing aboard any such thing because they don’t want to have their people rip them to pieces.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. I really do wonder about the motives of the people trying to alter our food supply and eating habits.

The Scam Of Green Energy

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Daniel Horowitz posted an article at Conservative Review pointing out what we should have learned from the Christmas energy crisis in America.

The article notes:

What’s the modus operandi of our dystopian government? Creating a needless deadly crisis, blocking the effective way for dealing with it thereafter, and foisting upon the world instead a dangerous and ineffective way of dealing with it. That might sound a lot like COVID, but it’s largely what officials have been planning for a long time with energy, and now that the population is primed for lockdowns, disruptions, and total authoritarian control as a result of COVID, that is what they plan to do with our energy grid. All for a lie.

This was the coldest Christmas in a half-century in much of the U.S., with many localities setting records, including those not accustomed to the cold like Tallahassee, Florida. Many of us are disgusted at those limiting our natural energy in favor of novel, ineffective energy, thereby causing a doubling or even tripling of home heating bills. But we must also realize that if they had their way, we’d have no heating in our homes at all.

Just like the supposed source of COVID and how to deal with it were lies, our energy crisis is wholly contrived and built upon the lie of global warming. Typically, you would have to make sure we are 100% correct about the “science” behind such irrevocable economic and societal changes before committing civilization suicide by destroying the only reliable sources of energy we have. But in a post-“Great Reset” world, this is par for the course. In fact, the science behind global warming is just as flimsy as the science behind lockdowns, masks, and mRNA shots.

The article notes how inaccurate past climate-change predictions have been:

During the Copenhagen climate summit in 2009, chief climate priest Al Gore asserted, “Some of the models suggest … that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years.” Predictions like this upended our lives with more expensive and more decrepit vital products and services being produced for a generation under the false pretense of taming a crisis that never existed. It turns out that since 2012, the mass of Arctic sea ice is up 31% and Greenland is gaining, not losing, ice. Meanwhile, Antarctica, which was always gaining ice during the period when the Arctic was losing ice, subsequently lost ice last decade and is now regaining it. In other words, the science behind polar ice caps seems to be rooted in the same cherry-picked timing and data as the faux science behind global warming causing either fewer or more hurricanes.

Yet somehow, we are to believe the science is all figured out on how to tamper with global temperatures, just like it was with COVID. Rather than people being more primed to believe in government control after COVID, any thinking person should be even more suspect of official climate lies and the accompanying life-altering policy changes governments want to induce based on them. And boy, would these policy changes be life-altering.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It is becoming even more apparent that the quest for green energy is not about the environment at all–it is about creating a society where a small group of people control the lives of everyone else.

Global Warming In History

Posted on by

On Monday, Townhall posted an article about climate change and the current hurricane season. The article included the following quote:

But, you know, maybe there is something to this global warming stuff after all.  As one commentator wrote, “Snows are less frequent and less deep.  They often do not lie below the mountains more than one, two, or three days and very rarely a week.  They are remembered to be formerly frequent, deep, and of long continuance.  The elderly inform me that the earth used to be covered with snow about three months every year.  The rivers, which then seldom failed to freeze over in the course of the winter, scarcely ever do now.  This changes…in the spring of the year is very fatal to fruits…I remember that when I was a small boy, say 60 years ago, snows were frequent and deep in every winter.”  Proof, if any was ever needed, that the planet is disastrously warming.

The above paragraph was written by Thomas Jefferson in 1799.

The article notes the fact that the extremely active hurricane season for 2022 has not yet materialized. Admittedly, a lot could happen in the next month or so, but August was unusually quiet.

The article reports:

The Weather Channel notified us on August 31 that “Rare Hurricane Season August Shutout Possible.” Really. “August is one of the core months of [the] Atlantic hurricane season.” But none this August. Only once since 1966 has there been a failure of a least one tropical storm to develop in the year’s eighth month. A few days prior to the publication of this article, the Weather Channel told us, “Atlantic Gets Busier; 4 Areas to Track Now.” Please! We need a hurricane to confirm that such climate disasters are indeed increasing like we say they are! A few dead bodies are imperative! But, no fear, climate activists, “the long-slumbering Atlantic Basin is finally showing signs of waking up.” “Many quiet-start seasons have ended up busy.” Hopefully, this year we’ll get a big hurricane or two yet that will smack the USA, kill a few million people, and prove those climate-deniers don’t know what they are talking about.

…Hurricane Harvey in 2017 is a prime example (have we had a disaster like that since then?). “Harvey is what climate change looks like,” Politico informed us. The Independent asked, “Will Hurricane Harvey show Trump that climate change exists?” “Climate change made Hurricane Harvey more deadly,” a climate change professor educated the peasants. Harvey was actually the first category 3 or larger hurricane that had made landfall in the US since 2005. But the hype was par for the course for the climate change religious cultists (one of whom told us, in 2012, we need to “repent” of our “sin” of “climate denial”). In 2015, “Hurricane Matthew looks a lot like the future of climate change,” CNN warned. 2012: “Superstorm Sandy is what global warming looks like,” Environment News Service echoed. 2005: “The hurricane that struck Louisiana yesterday was nicknamed Katrina by the National Weather Service. Its real name is global warming,” the Boston Globe enlightened us. In 2007, Al Gore said that the North Pole could be “ice-free by 2013.” In 2013, the earth gained a record amount of sea ice, adding the equivalent of 19,000 Manhattan Islands of ice. Gore only missed it by 920,000 square miles. Ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

Weathermen are not always accurate in their predictions for the next week, why should we believe their predictions for the next fifty years? Earth is always changing. A good meteorologist tracks cycles to see what to expect. Meanwhile, enjoy the calm, but understand that the hurricane season is not over yet.

How To Create Questionable Numbers

Posted on by

Recently wattsupwiththat posted an article about the new surface station report. Surface stations are the instruments used to measure changes in the earth’s climate. They are what the climate change cabal uses to justify creating havoc in the American economy. The other reference for this article is the actual report.

Since a picture is worth a thousand words, here are a few pictures that illustrate the problem with some of the devices that are supposed to be tracking temperature change on the earth:

The article at wattsupwiththat states:

For more information, or to speak with the authors of this study please contact Vice President and Director of Communications Jim Lakely at jlakely@heartland.org or call/text 312-731-9364.

This new report is a follow up to a March 2009 study, titled “Is the U.S. Surface Temperature Record Reliable?” which highlighted a subset of over 1,000 surveyed stations and found 89 percent of stations had heat-bias issues. In April and May 2022, The Heartland Institute’s team of researchers visited many of the same temperature stations as in 2009, plus many not visited before. The new survey sampled 128 NOAA stations, and found the problem of heat-bias has only gotten worse.

“The original 2009 surface stations project demonstrated conclusively that the federal government’s surface temperature monitoring system was broken, with the vast majority of stations not meeting NOAA’s own standards for trustworthiness and quality. Investigations by government watchdogs OIG and GAO confirmed the 2009 report findings,” said H. Sterling Burnett, director of the Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environment Policy at The Heartland Institute who surveyed NOAA surface stations himself this spring. “This new study is evidence of two things. First, the government is either inept or stubbornly refuses to learn from its mistakes for political reasons. Second, the government’s official temperature record can’t be trusted. It reflects a clear urban heat bias effect, not national temperature trends.”

There are a lot of ways to manipulate numbers to prove a point. A good statistician can actually adjust numbers to prove almost anything. When you locate your climate measuring devices near heat sources, it’s a pretty good bet that you will statistically be able to show that the earth is warming.

Something To Consider

Posted on by

On August 30, 2019, a website called Signs of the Times posted an article about climate change.

The article reports:

For more than 60 years, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has known that the changes occurring to planetary weather patterns are completely natural and normal. But the space agency, for whatever reason, has chosen to let the man-made global warming hoax persist and spread, to the detriment of human freedom.

It was the year 1958, to be precise, when NASA first observed that changes in the solar orbit of the earth, along with alterations to the earth’s axial tilt, are both responsible for what climate scientists today have dubbed as “warming” (or “cooling,” depending on their agenda). In no way, shape, or form are humans warming or cooling the planet by driving SUVs or eating beef, in other words.

But NASA has thus far failed to set the record straight, and has instead chosen to sit silently back and watch as liberals freak out about the world supposedly ending in 12 years because of too much livestock, or too many plastic straws.

In the year 2000, NASA did publish information on its Earth Observatory website about the Milankovitch Climate Theory, revealing that the planet is, in fact, changing due to extraneous factors that have absolutely nothing to do with human activity. But, again, this information has yet to go mainstream, some 19 years later, which is why deranged, climate-obsessed leftists have now begun to claim that we really only have 18 months left before the planet dies from an excess of carbon dioxide (CO2).

The truth, however, is much more along the lines of what Serbian astrophysicist Milutin Milankovitch, after whom the Milankovitch Climate Theory is named, proposed about how the seasonal and latitudinal variations of solar radiation that hit the earth in different ways, and at different times, have the greatest impact on earth’s changing climate patterns.

The below two images (by Robert Simmon, NASA GSFC) help to illustrate this, with the first showing earth at a nearly zero orbit, and the second showing earth at a 0.07 orbit. This orbital change is depicted by the eccentric, oval shape in the second image, which has been intentionally exaggerated for the purpose of showing the massive change in distance that occurs between the earth and the sun, depending on whether it is at perihelion or aphelion.

Even the maximum eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit – 0.07 – it would be impossible to show at the resolution of a web page,” notes the Hal Turner Radio Show. “Even so, at the current eccentricity of .017, the Earth is 5 million kilometers closer to Sun at perihelion than at aphelion.”

The biggest factor affecting earth’s climate is the SUN

Quite frankly, this is way over my head. The reason I am posting it is to illustrate that man-made global warming is not ‘settled science.’ If settled science were possible, we would not have accepted the fact that the earth revolves around the sun (although there are some among us who believe the earth revolves around them). Any loss of freedom imposed on Americans is not the result of science–it is the result of bureaucrats hungry for more power. Remember that when you are told that the earth is ending in six months (or whatever the current figure is).

Meanwhile, please follow the link to the article, it is very interesting.

 

Things That Make You Doubt People Who Scream Global Warming

Posted on by

We have  listened to some scientists, some political leaders, and some celebrities scream for years about global warming. In 1985, many of those same people were screaming about global cooling. Basically in both cases, the word was give up your lifestyle or die in five years. Meanwhile, many of the people screaming about global warming continued to fly around in private jets, buy oceanfront property, and expand their own carbon footprint while asking the rest of us to reduce our carbon footprint.

On July 4th, Breitbart posted an article about some of the recent behavior of the corporate elite regarding global warming.

The article reports:

The Financial Times (FT) reports spending by U.S. companies on private jets for personal use by chief executives and chairs hit the highest level for a decade last year as many businesses relaxed restrictions on using them because of the coronavirus pandemic.

Spending on airborne luxury rose 35 percent to $33.8mn among S&P 500 groups in 2021 — the highest since 2012, according to ISS Corporate Solutions, a division of investment adviser Institutional Shareholder Services.

The business elites have seemingly grasped the appeal long ago recognised by Hollywood, tried it and have no intention of going back to their old ways as everyday fliers are forced to in crowded commercial airports.

…Who is enjoying the corporate travel stakes? The FT sets that out:

Among the biggest spenders were Facebook parent Meta and aerospace group Lockheed Martin as many companies eased rules on using private jets because of fears over contracting Covid-19 on commercial flights. Meta spent $1.6mn on private jets for chief executive Mark Zuckerberg, while Lockheed spent $1.1mn on flights for boss James Taiclet.

Lockheed Martin said it broadened its private jet spending last year ‘in light of the Covid-19 pandemic’.

This included $353,303 for Taiclet’s personal travel as well as for commutes to his home out of state and deadhead flights, when an aircraft is used for a one-way charter, Lockheed said in a regulatory filing this year.

I don’t begrudge anyone who can afford it the luxury of flying around in private jets. However, I think it’s a bit hypercritical to fly around in a private jet with a huge carbon footprint and lecture the rest of us about global warming.

The Science Isn’t Working

Posted on by

On Friday, Townhall posted an article that should (but won’t) give pause to the global warming advocates.

The article reports:

Global warming is not a serious topic. No one cares, but the left wants us all to suffer in order to drop the Earth’s temperature by less than a degree or whatever. 

Let’s cannibalize future economic growth, curb population growth while we’re at it, and declare war on burgers. 

These are the most miserable people on Earth. The problem is fighting back against their climate lies is hard when you have the shield of Big Tech there to flag and censor stories that shred their narrative. Before that crackdown, we used to torch the climate change crew. I’ll do so again. 

The Earth is warming so rapidly that it caused a Norwegian cruise ship to hit an iceberg that shouldn’t even exist under these harsh conditions (via NY Post)

There are some other inconvenient truths noted in the article:

…The accumulation of sea ice was documented here several years ago. Scientists had trouble reaching their research stations in Antarctica in 2015 due to the amount of ice. In fact, in 2013, some 19,000 Manhattan-sized islands of sea ice were created. It’s been noted for its resilience in these heated times. 

In that same year, the Arctic Ice Cap was supposed to be gone. By 2013, no more ice cap, right? It grew by over 533,000 square miles. These people are wrong. They were wrong in the 1970s when global cooling was the t-shirt of the week. Global warming is such a non-threat that the CIA’s operation and research into it were terminated in 2015. 

Should we be concerned about conservation? Sure—that’s an entirely different thing. Hunters are very keen on this subject as well. That’s not what the green warriors want, however. 

Notice how all these global warming policies center on controlling the means of production. They’re not even hiding it anymore, folks. 

The earth’s climate is always changing. Evidence of plant life has been discovered under the ice cap in Greenland. That plant life could not exist there today. I believe in doing what we can to keep the air clean and the earth unpolluted, but I also believe in allowing people to eat what they want, stay warm in winter, stay cool in winter, and be relatively free from government control. I am not sure many of the people running around with their hair on fire because the earth is warming understand what is actually behind the movement.

 

The Sky Is Falling…Maybe

Posted on by

On April 6th, Issues & Insights posted an article about the latest alarm about climate change.

The article reports:

We’ve heard so many declarations that our “last chance” to avoid global warming has arrived that we’ve lost count of the number of times the world has ended. But the sirens continue to wail, the latest from a United Nations grandee who says humanity has to act “now or never” to avoid overheating its host planet. Pardon us while we yawn.

According to Jim Skea, a European academic who co-chairs the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Group III, “it’s now or never, if we want to limit global warming” to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Keeping Earth’s temperatures in check “will be impossible,” he said, “without immediate and deep emissions reductions across all sectors.”

Skea’s comment arrived wrapped up in Working Group III’s just-released report on global warming mitigation, part of the IPCC’s sixth climate assessment. The media, which loves to breathlessly report the demise of the world caused by human carbon dioxide emissions, says the 1.5-degree limit “is recognized as a crucial global target because beyond this level, so-called tipping points become more likely. These are thresholds at which small changes can lead to dramatic shifts in Earth’s entire life support system.”

OK, then. But let’s back up a moment. Or maybe 13 years. That’s when Prince Charles said, with a deep, trust-me earnestness, that our world had only “100 months to act” before we had done so much damage that the effects of global warming would become irreversible.

Then last year, about 150 months after his previous doomsday prediction, the prince said that the upcoming climate summit in Glasgow was “quite literally … the last chance saloon” to stop the scourge of warming.

None of the people who continually yell that the sky is falling are willing to note that there was an extended period of global warming during the Middle Ages. During that time crops flourished, and people survived. It should also be noted that plant fossils have been found under the Greenland ice cap. At some point, green things grew in Greenland. The earth’s climate is continually changing. Man’s impact on that change, if at all, is minimal. I support clean air and clean water. I don’t support authoritative governments trying to steal the wealth of successful democratic countries and give it to poorer countries ruled by tyrants.

Priorities?

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Daily Caller posted an article by Victor Davis Hanson that provides some perspective on the current war in Ukraine.

The article notes:

Thousands are dying from Russian missiles and bombs in the suburbs of Ukraine.

In response, the Biden administration’s climate change envoy, multimillionaire and private-jet-owning John Kerry, laments that Russian President Vladimir Putin might no longer remain his partner in reducing global warming.

“You’re going to lose people’s focus,” Kerry frets. “You’re going to lose big-country attention because they will be diverted, and I think it could have a damaging impact.”

“Impact”?

Did the global moralist Kerry mean by “impact” the over 650 Russian missiles that impacted Ukrainian buildings and tore apart children?

The article also asks the obvious question:

But how will the Biden administration square the circle of its own ideological war against oil and natural gas versus handing the advantage to our oil- and gas-producing enemies, as Russia invades Ukraine?

Or put another way, when selfish theory hits deadly reality, who loses? Answer: the American people.

President Joe Biden lifted U.S. sanctions on the Russian-German Nord Stream 2 pipeline designed to provide green Germany with loathsome, but life-saving, natural gas.

But first Biden canceled the Keystone XL pipeline in the United States. He has no problem with pipelines per se, just American ones.

While Biden doesn’t like the idea of Germany burning carbon fuel, or Putin reaping enormous profits from Berlin’s self-created dependency, or Germans importing liquified natural gas from America, Biden also does not like the idea of forcing German families to turn off their thermostats in mid-winter when there is Russian-fed war not far from Germany’s borders.

Here at home, Biden gets even crazier. As our enemies around the world reap huge profits from record high oil and gas prices, did Biden ask Alaska, North Dakota or Texas to ramp up production?

In other words, did he ask Americans to save fellow cash-strapped Americans from a self-created energy crisis, in the way he assured the Germans that during war reality trumps theory?

The article concludes:

Biden also has beseeched the once sanctioned, terrorist Iranian government. He wants Tehran to help us out by upping the very oil and gas production that America has tried to curtail for years. In return, Iran is demanding a new “Iran Deal” that will soon ensure the now petro-rich theocracy the acquisition of nuclear weapons.

On the eve of the Russian invasion, Biden begged Putin to pump even more oil to supplement its current Russian imports to the United States.

Did Putin see that surreal request as yet another sign of American appeasement that might greenlight his upcoming planned invasion? In Russian eyes, was it more proof of American weakness and craziness after the humiliating flight from Afghanistan?

Biden has blasted the human rights record of Saudi Arabia’s royal family. Now he is begging the monarchy to pump more of its despised carbon-spewing oil to make up for what his administration shut down at home. Is that why the Saudi royals refused to take his call?

The moral of Biden’s oil madness?

Elite ideology divorced from reality impoverishes people and can get them killed.

Because we have given up American energy independence (and the ability to supply Europe with energy), we are funding Russia’s war on Ukraine. Until our leaders are willing to acknowledge that fact, I don’t see the war in Ukraine ending or the war on American energy ending.

Blacklisting In The Scientific Community

Posted on by

Climate change seems to be an issue that will not die. Even when science refutes it, the call for crippling our economy in the name of the environment continues. Climate change enthusiasts seem to overlook the fact that America has reduced its carbon footprint significantly in the past few years. Meanwhile, the march toward green energy that so far is unworkable continues.

Today Issues and Answers reported the following:

“A climate advocacy group called Skeptical Science hosts a list of academics that it has labeled ‘climate misinformers,’” Pielke recently wrote in Forbes. “The list includes 17 academics and is intended as a blacklist.” 

Pielke says we know this through a Skeptical Science blogger “named Dana Nuccitelli.” According to Pielke, Nuccitelli believes that Judith Curry should be “unhirable in academia” based on her statements about global warming.

Nuccitelli tweeted that “Curry’s words, as documented … are what make her ‘unhirable.’” Both the blog and Nuccitelli of course deny there’s a blacklist.

The “unhirable” Curry is no crank. She is the former chair of Georgia Tech’s School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, and is a fellow of both the American Geophysical Union and American Meteorological Society. She stepped down from her position at Georgia Tech at the insistence of an administrator, she told Pielke. The Earth and Atmospheric Sciences dean had heard from “several activist climate scientists who had a very direct pipeline to” the dean’s office, and had expressed their “extreme displeasure” over Curry’s presence at the school, she said.

Curry looked into positions at other universities, interviewed for two, but was never hired. According to her headhunter, “the show stopper was my public profile in the climate debate.”

Follow the link to the article to see more examples of this blacklisting.

This is even more concerning when you consider the following the following comments about the true agenda of the climate-change movement:

Have doubts? Then listen to the words of former United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer:

“One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole,” said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.

So what is the goal of environmental policy?

“We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy,” said Edenhofer.

This quote is posted in an article at rightwinggranny on March 30, 2016. The quote was from Investor’s Business Daily.

 

Changing And Omitting Numbers To Get The Results You Want

Posted on by

The American Thinker posted an article today about how some of the conclusions on the Canadian global warming model were reached. Anyone who has ever taken at least one science class would be horrified.

The article reports:

Environment Canada, led by Justin Trudeau-appointed Environment Minister Catherine McKenna, is all-in on the hypothesis that manmade global warming is an existential threat to humanity. It is so important to hand control of energy use to the government that mere actual, historical data that might raise doubt about the extent of purported warming over time must be thrown out and replaced by “models” of what the “scientists” think the historical temperature record must have been.

In other words, the computer models Canada uses to measure and project “global warming” are themselves based on other computer models.  The expression “Garbage in / garbage out” refers to the vulnerability of all computer models to poor quality data used as the basis of their calculations.  The raises the awkward question of the quality of the models used in place of actual historical data. And it raises the question of why this scrapping of actual data and substituting of guesses (aka, models) was not made clear from the outset.

If the numbers don’t add up to the conclusion you want, make up your own numbers.

The article continues:

Ottawa-based Blacklock’s Reporter notes that in many cases the data that were scrapped indicated higher temperatures in the past:

For example, Vancouver had a higher record temperature in 1910 (30.6C) than in 2017 (29.5C).

Toronto had a warmer summer in 1852 (32.2C) than in 2017 (31.7C).

The highest temperature in Moncton in 2017 was four degrees cooler than in 1906.

Brandon, Man., had 49 days where the average daily temperature was above 20C in 1936, compared to only 16 in 2017, with a high temperature of 43.3C that year compared to 34.3C in 2017.

So what is this about?

An Investor’s Business Daily article posted on February 10, 2015 states the following:

Economic Systems: The alarmists keep telling us their concern about global warming is all about man’s stewardship of the environment. But we know that’s not true. A United Nations official has now confirmed this.

At a news conference last week in Brussels, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.

“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said.

Referring to a new international treaty environmentalists hope will be adopted at the Paris climate change conference later this year, she added: “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”

The climate is an excuse, the goal is world-wide government where the average person will be subject to the whims of the elite.