Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    December 2025
    S M T W T F S
     123456
    78910111213
    14151617181920
    21222324252627
    28293031  
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘global warming’

Celebrate technology tonight

Posted by Richard on March 29, 2008

Tonight, the people who hang on Al Gore's every word and love feeling smugly self-righteous about their environmental consciousness are participating in another one of those stupid, meaningless gestures that's just one step above World Jump Day. It's called Earth Hour:

On March 29, 2008 at 8 p.m., join millions of people around the world in making a statement about climate change by turning off your lights for Earth Hour, an event created by the World Wildlife Fund.

Earth Hour was created by WWF in Sydney, Australia in 2007, and in one year has grown from an event in one city to a global movement. In 2008, millions of people, businesses, governments and civic organizations in nearly 200 cities around the globe will turn out for Earth Hour. …

We invite everyone throughout North America and around the world to turn off the lights for an hour starting at 8 p.m. (your own local time)–whether at home or at work, with friends and family or solo, in a big city or a small town.

Join people all around the world in showing that you care about our planet and want to play a part in helping to fight climate change. Don’t forget to sign up and let us know you want to join Earth Hour.

I plan to do my part to fight this nonsense. I'm going to celebrate technology tonight. From 8 to 9, I'll turn on every light in the house and both TVs, crank up the sound system, and open the front and back doors.

My ancestors didn't survive the Black Plague and Dark Ages, create the Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution, and bring about the past two hundred years of astonishing scientific and technological progress so that we could huddle in the dark.

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Climate news, good and bad

Posted by Richard on March 23, 2008

There is both good news and bad news regarding global warming (which are bad news and good news, respectively, if your goal is to move us toward a command-and-control economy in which we're all poorer). First, the bad news: According to a Princeton study reported by National "Progressive" Radio, biofuels such as ethanol release huge amounts of greenhouse gases (emphasis added):

"The simplest explanation is that when we divert our corn or soybeans to fuel, if people around the world are going to continue to eat the same amount that they're already eating, you have to replace that food somewhere else," Searchinger says.

Searchinger and his colleagues looked globally to figure out where the new cropland is coming from, as American farmers produce fuel crops where they used to grow food. The answer is that biofuel production here is driving agriculture to expand in other parts of the world.

"That's done in a significant part by burning down forests, plowing up grasslands. That releases a great deal of carbon dioxide," Searchinger says.

In fact, Searchinger's group's study, published online by Science magazine, shows those actions end up releasing huge amounts of carbon dioxide. The study finds that over a 30-year span, biofuels end up contributing twice as much carbon dioxide to the air as that amount of gasoline would, when you add in the global effects.

"Right now there's little doubt that ethanol is making global warming worse," Searchinger says.

But the good news is it may not matter much, climate-change-wise, because the world's oceans haven't warmed at all in the last five years and have actually cooled slightly, according to another NPR report (emphasis added):

Some 3,000 scientific robots that are plying the ocean have sent home a puzzling message. These diving instruments suggest that the oceans have not warmed up at all over the past four or five years. That could mean global warming has taken a breather. Or it could mean scientists aren't quite understanding what their robots are telling them.

Oh, dear — I thought the science was "settled."

In fact, 80 percent to 90 percent of global warming involves heating up ocean waters. They hold much more heat than the atmosphere can. So Willis has been studying the ocean with a fleet of robotic instruments called the Argo system. The buoys can dive 3,000 feet down and measure ocean temperature. Since the system was fully deployed in 2003, it has recorded no warming of the global oceans.

"There has been a very slight cooling, but not anything really significant," Willis says. So the buildup of heat on Earth may be on a brief hiatus. "Global warming doesn't mean every year will be warmer than the last. And it may be that we are in a period of less rapid warming."

Describing slight cooling as "less rapid warming" is even more dishonest than referring to a recession as "a period of negative growth." 

But if the aquatic robots are actually telling the right story, that raises a new question: Where is the extra heat all going?

Kevin Trenberth at the National Center for Atmospheric Research says it's probably going back out into space. The Earth has a number of natural thermostats, including clouds, which can either trap heat and turn up the temperature, or reflect sunlight and help cool the planet.

That can't be directly measured at the moment, however.

"Unfortunately, we don't have adequate tracking of clouds to determine exactly what role they've been playing during this period," Trenberth says.

Gee, I guess that means those fancy computer models that "prove" anthropogenic global warming is taking place can't be accurately modeling the role that clouds are playing, can they?

It's also possible that some of the heat has gone even deeper into the ocean, he says. Or it's possible that scientists need to correct for some other feature of the planet they don't know about. It's an exciting time, though, with all this new data about global sea temperature, sea level and other features of climate.

So the science is settled, and we should all get used to the fact that we have to reduce our standard of living. But the planet seems to have stopped warming, the scientists have no idea why, they admit there are many significant aspects of global climate that they aren't able to measure and don't understand, and there may even be "features of the planet" that they don't know about at all. 

Yeah, it's an exciting time for these scientists all right. More grants! More research! Just don't question their conclusions and policy prescriptions, because those have already been "settled." 

Meanwhile, more and more ethanol is being burned instead of poured over ice. A tragedy.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 4 Comments »

Global cooling

Posted by Richard on February 28, 2008

In several previous posts about the global warming issue, I've pointed out that we're due for an ice age and that maybe we should intensify our efforts to warm the globe in order to offset this impending catastrophe. See, for instance, this post (and the wonderful dialog I had with Fred Bortz in the comments) and especially this post, where I pointed to evidence that the cooling may come rapidly:

I knew that the last ice age ended about 12,000 years ago, and that we're about due for another. But I didn't know about the correlation between ice ages and CO2 levels:

As for that dreaded greenhouse gas, CO2, atmospheric levels of which now exceed 400 parts per million (ppm), it is important to note that paleological records show that every time CO2 levels have exceeded 300 ppm there has been an ice age. Every time — without exception.

I also didn't know that the current interglacial warm period might end quite suddenly:

In 1979, Genevieve Woillard, a pollen specialist in France, concluded from detailed studies that the shift from a warm, interglacial climate to ice age conditions at the beginning of the last ice age, some 100,000 years ago, took "less than 20 years."  …

As I noted in a comment to the first post linked above, "A hundred years from now, as the ice sheets begin edging southward, people living north of the Mason-Dixon line may wish we'd cranked out more carbon dioxide." Now, there is preliminary evidence that we may not even have to wait a hundred years.

The Earth actually stopped warming around the turn of the century. And now, the people tracking global temperatures all agree that the Earth has cooled dramatically in the past year (emphasis added):

Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile — the list goes on and on.

No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C — a value large enough to wipe out most of the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year's time. For all four sources, it's the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.

Check out the fine commentary by Mike at Monkey Tennis Centre and by Doug Ross, who offered a slightly snarky speculation:

And I wonder how long Al Gore's carbon-offset bunko scam is going to last when penguins start freezing to death.

BTW, speaking of anecdotal evidence: Those of you inclined toward skiing and snowboarding might want to know that the anecdotal evidence in Colorado is pretty interesting, too. Most of the major ski resorts are at or near record snowfall levels, ranging from 25 to 41 feet. Don't miss it, book your spring ski trip now — just in case I'm wrong, the new data's wrong, Gore's right, and it never happens again. πŸ˜‰

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

Wine industry hurt by insufficient global warming

Posted by Richard on January 3, 2008

Recently, as we approached the end of an unusually cold and snowy December, I scoffed at earlier scare stories about global warming destroying the Colorado ski industry. According to The Rocky Mountain News, another Colorado industry is suffering due to global warming — oh wait, it's due to not enough warming:

Unusually cold weather in late 2006 and the spring of 2007 wreaked havoc on Colorado's grape harvest, especially in Delta County. Vineyards there are planted at elevations as high as 7,100 feet.

The larger grape-growing area around Palisade and Grand Junction in Mesa County – which accounts for about 85 percent of the grapes produced – suffered losses, too.

Experts estimate the damage slashed the state's wine grape harvest by 40 percent to 50 percent last year from 2006's record harvest of 1,515 tons. A final tally will be compiled within a few months. But industry officials agreed the grape harvest took a big hit.

Yeah, I know that one cold year in one place proves nothing about global climate change — but whenever some region is temporarily hotter (or wetter… or drier…) than normal, Al Gore and his acolytes always cite it as evidence for their faith (I mean, scientific theory), so I can't resist turning the same tactic back on them.

Colorado's vintners — who produce some excellent white wines (and OK reds) — should hope the IPCC predictions come true, so that the Earth warms back up to about where it was during the Medieval Warm Period, when grain crops were grown in Greenland and wine grapes were cultivated as far north as Scotland and Nova Scotia.

The proponents of anthropogenic global warming theory dismiss the Medieval Warm Period as a "local" European phenomenon (despite a wealth of evidence that it was global). But they can't have it both ways. If they insist that the retreat of Greenland's ice fields a thousand years ago had nothing to do with global climate change, then they shouldn't point to a similar retreat in recent years as evidence of global warming today.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

What consensus?

Posted by Richard on December 23, 2007

A minority report from the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee provides further evidence that there is no "consensus" among scientists regarding anthropogenic global warming. The report names and quotes over 400 prominent scientists (several of whom have won Nobel Prizes in their fields) who dissent from the IPCC climate claims, and especially from the even more absurd predictions made by Al Gore.

The number of dissenters from the "consensus" view who are willing to speak out has grown significantly in the past year:

Even some in the establishment media now appear to be taking notice of the growing number of skeptical scientists. In October, the Washington Post Staff Writer Juliet Eilperin conceded the obvious, writing that climate skeptics "appear to be expanding rather than shrinking." Many scientists from around the world have dubbed 2007 as the year man-made global warming fears "bite the dust." (LINK)  In addition, many scientists who are also progressive environmentalists believe climate fear promotion has "co-opted" the green movement. (LINK)

The committee minority report makes it clear that the "consensus," such as it is, exists due to fear, intimidation, and the systematic exclusion of climate skeptics from conferences, committees, and journals (emphasis added):

Many of the scientists featured in this report consistently stated that numerous colleagues shared their views, but they will not speak out publicly for fear of retribution. Atmospheric scientist Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, author of almost 70 peer-reviewed studies, explains how many of his fellow scientists have been intimidated.

"Many of my colleagues with whom I spoke share these views and report on their inability to publish their skepticism in the scientific or public media," Paldor wrote. [Note: See also July 2007 Senate report detailing how skeptical scientists have faced threats and intimidationLINK]

The report also points out that small elites in control of the scientific organizations supposedly backing the anthropogenic global warming theory created the "consensus" (emphasis added):

The over 400 skeptical scientists featured in this new report outnumber by nearly eight times the number of scientists who participated in the 2007 UN IPCC Summary for Policymakers. The notion of "hundreds" or "thousands" of UN scientists agreeing to a scientific statement does not hold up to scrutiny. (See report debunking "consensus" LINK) Recent research by Australian climate data analyst Dr. John McLean revealed that the IPCC's peer-review process for the Summary for Policymakers leaves much to be desired. (LINK )

Proponents of man-made global warming like to note how the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the American Meteorological Society (AMS) have issued statements endorsing the so-called "consensus" view that man is driving global warming. But both the NAS and AMS never allowed member scientists to directly vote on these climate statements. Essentially, only two dozen or so members on the governing boards of these institutions produced the "consensus" statements. This report gives a voice to the rank-and-file scientists who were shut out of the process. (LINK)

I've read barely a fraction of the 400-odd scientists' statements included in the report — basically just skimmed a few, slowing down when something caught my eye. If you're interested, but not obsessed, I recommend either that approach or searching repeatedly for "IPCC" — that will take you to some really interesting statements. And I recommend reading "Attachment Number 1" (search for that) near the end. It's the Dec. 13 open letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon signed by over 100 prominent scientists, and it pulls no punches. Here's the first paragraph (emphasis added):

It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages. Geological, archaeological, oral and written histories all attest to the dramatic challenges posed to past societies from unanticipated changes in temperature, precipitation, winds and other climatic variables. We therefore need to equip nations to become resilient to the full range of these natural phenomena by promoting economic growth and wealth generation.

I'll toss out one more quote that caught my eye (emphasis added):

Finally, Rancourt asserted that in a warm world, life prospers. "There is no known case of a sustained warming alone having negatively impacted an entire population," he said, adding, "As a general rule, all life on Earth does better when it's hotter: Compare ecological diversity and biotic density (or biomass) at the poles and at the equator." Rancourt added, "Global warming is strictly an imaginary problem of the First World middle class." (LINK)

The notion that temperatures at some point in the recent past (like 1970, when scientists thought an ice age was coming?) were just right strikes me as absurd on its face. The notion that a degree or two of warming from that "proper" level will be profoundly catastrophic strikes me as bordering on mental illness.

(HT: Doug Ross @ Journal)

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Funniest Christmas greeting ever

Posted by Richard on December 19, 2007

Besides being bright, articulate, and consistently pro-freedom, John Caldara, the president of Colorado's Independence Institute, is one heck of a funny guy. He's the one who came up with the idea for the most politically incorrect event you can imagine, the annual Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms bash.

This year's Independence Institute Christmas card cracked me up. The front shows a snowman and snow-woman in Hawaiian shirts on a beach. The message inside is: 

Promoting global climate change
by wishing you the warmest holiday wishes.
And may your carbon footprint grow in 2008.

Merry Christmas from your
Freedom Fighters at the Independence Institute

 

I'm guessing either Caldara came up with that, or his wicked sense of humor has rubbed off on those around him. And I love having someone wish me a bigger carbon footprint — what a nice thought!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Meshugganeh about global warming

Posted by Richard on December 11, 2007

It is to laugh! I almost missed this incredible story from last week:

Just when you thought that global warming lunatics couldn't descend any deeper into their morass of absurdity, they proceed to pioneer new realms of insanity.

Their latest target? Nothing less than the traditional Jewish Hanukkah menorah. We couldn't make this up.

As reported this week by the Jerusalem Post, a group of Israeli environmental extremists calling themselves the "Green Hanukkia" campaign is sanctimoniously instructing Jews across the world to light one fewer candle in their Hanukkah menorahs this year in order to slow global warming.

According to the campaign's founders, each menorah candle can produce – hold your breath – a mind-boggling 15 grams of carbon dioxide. Multiplying this amount by the estimated 44 million candles that Israeli households will light during the eight-day Hanukkah holiday, they assert that "it adds up."

If environmental extremists can descend to this degree of shameless triviality, there is no telling what harmless human tradition they will target next. For instance, will Green Hanukkia create a subsidiary organization named "Green Birthday" and seek to eliminate birthday candles?

People like these won't be happy until we're all freezing in the dark. Actually, since many of them believe the current human population is far above the "proper" level, they won't be happy until most of us are dead.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

Another greenhouse threat

Posted by Richard on November 30, 2007

Recently, Honda began running a TV commercial for their new hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle, the FCX Clarity. The ad touts the fact that the fuel-cell car is completely pollution-free, emitting "only water vapor." That got me thinking.

See, I remember when CO2 wasn't considered a pollutant. In school, I was taught that our atmosphere is made up of nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide, water vapor, and traces of other stuff. I was taught that carbon dioxide is essential to plant life. Nowadays, we're told that carbon dioxide is a horrible pollutant because it's a "greenhouse gas" fueling dangerous global warming, and that we have to reduce CO2 levels to save the planet.

But CO2 isn't the only, or even the most important, greenhouse gas — that's water vapor. And some atmospheric scientists have been warning us that water vapor levels have risen in recent decades. Their computer models (which are so much sexier than boring old empirical data) blame humans for at least some of the increase.

So I wonder how long it will be before NASA, the IPCC, and Algore demand "serious action" to control water vapor emissions and point accusing fingers at the millions of fuel cell vehicles that will soon be eagerly embraced by the environmentally conscious.

Apparently, I'm not the only one to wonder. Some have raised the question seriously. Others took a different approach:

(Washington, DC) The Environmental Protection Agency is seeking to classify water vapor as a pollutant, due to its central role in global warming. Because water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, accounting for at least 90% of the Earth's natural greenhouse effect, its emission during many human activities, such as the burning of fuels, is coming under increasing scrutiny by federal regulators.

You'll have to read the whole thing before it all becomes clear. πŸ™‚ Check out some of the "MOST POPULAR STORIES" in the left sidebar, too.

Anyway, you might as well just give up — it seems that everything is caused by global warming.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

A manufactured crisis

Posted by Richard on November 9, 2007

John Coleman, founder of The Weather Channel:

I do not oppose environmentalism. I do not oppose the political positions of either party. However, Global Warming, i.e. Climate Change, is not about environmentalism or politics. It is not a religion. It is not something you “believe in.” It is science; the science of meteorology. This is my field of life-long expertise. And I am telling you Global Warming is a non-event, a manufactured crisis and a total scam. I say this knowing you probably won’t believe a me, a mere TV weatherman, challenging a Nobel Prize, Academy Award and Emmy Award winning former Vice President of United States. So be it.

I have read dozens of scientific papers. I have talked with numerous scientists. I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct. There is no run away climate change. The impact of humans on climate is not catastrophic. Our planet is not in peril. I am incensed by the incredible media glamour, the politically correct silliness and rude dismissal of counter arguments by the high priest of Global Warming.

 As oil climbed toward $100 per barrel, Investor's Business Daily noted that: 

By falsely demonizing oil in the debate over global warming, we assure an energy-impoverished future.

The real problem behind soaring oil prices — a lack of supply — hasn't been addressed at all. Today we have what economists call a "demand shock." It's a result of the greatest global economic boom in history — a result of more poor people in more countries being pulled out of poverty than ever, thanks to fast-growing economies and free trade.

As Weather Channel founder John Coleman said this week, global warming is "the greatest scam in history." Literally thousands of reputable climatologists agree with this.

Yet fear of warming is giving rise to all kinds of bad ideas that will cost hundreds of billions of dollars and deliver very questionable benefits. These ideas include "carbon" taxes on all of us and "windfall" profit taxes on oil companies, bans on drilling for new oil in Alaska and off our coasts, and expensive new mandates — such as higher fuel economy for cars — to reduce "carbon footprints."

Crude mismatchAs the chart shows, our failure to replace our depleted domestic oil reserves has left us with a serious mismatch of supply and demand. We use more oil each year, but supply less of it ourselves.

That makes us vulnerable. We send hundreds of billions of dollars overseas each year to the Middle East, Africa and South America, helping fund terrorism and prop up some nasty regimes.

As Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, notes, if we had started drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in 1995 — when President Clinton nixed the idea — we'd be pumping millions more barrels today. Ditto if we had more vigorously pursued our offshore reserves.

But would that matter? According to the American Petroleum Institute, we have at least 131 billion barrels of oil and more than 1,000 trillion cubic feet of natural gas that we can get at now, with current technology. It's just waiting for us to find and pump it. But Americans — cowed into submission by aggressive global warming propaganda — are afraid to do so.

This is where Congress could be of help. Right now, we have an oil-based economy. We can't escape it — we need more oil.

If lawmakers stopped dithering and acted, we could turn our energy future around — feeding our need for oil in the short term, while spinning out new technologies like hydrogen fuel cells, clean coal and modern nuclear power plants over the long term.

That, however, would take vision and courage — two traits that today's leaders in Washington conspicuously lack.

So what else is new? Sigh.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Stossel on global warming

Posted by Richard on October 31, 2007

ABC's 20/20 recently featured another great segment by John Stossel. This time, Stossel had some questions about global warming and Al Gore's claim that "the debate's over." In a related column available at The Atlasphere, Stossel noted:

If you must declare a debate over, then maybe it’s not. And if you have to gussy up your agenda as “our greatest opportunity to lift global consciousness to a higher level,” then it deserves some skeptical examination.

Stossel pointed out that Gore's film overstates the predicted sea level rise by an order of magnitude or more, that polar bear populations aren't threatened, as Gore claims, but stable or increasing, and that Gore's dramatic picture of an historic correlation between CO2 levels and temperature concealed the fact that warming always came before a rise in CO2 levels. He had other questions, too:

If it’s all man’s fault, why did the Arctic go through a warm period early last century? Why did Greenland’s temperatures rise 50 percent faster in the 1920s than they are rising now?

The media rarely ask such questions.

Stossel wanted to ask Gore these and other questions, but the Goracle refused.  

Stossel also spoke with some of the scientists who've been marginalized by Gore and his acolytes, ignored by the press, and in some cases even threatened. They made it clear that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) isn't the impartial body of scientists that it's portrayed to be by the media. Members were carefully selected by the governments involved, and many aren't even scientists, they're activists.

If you've looked into this issue as I have, none of this is news to you. But Stossel does a fine job of briefly and clearly raising these issues in a way that may cause open-minded viewers to question some of the conventional wisdom. The 8-minute video is well worth watching and sharing with your friends and family: 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Convenient falsehoods

Posted by Richard on October 11, 2007

A British judge identified 11 specific ways in which Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth is inaccurate or misleading and ruled that the government (which wants the film shown in every school in the country) can distribute the film only if it complies with certain restrictions (emphasis added):

In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers to make clear that 1.) The Film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument. 2.) If teachers present the Film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination. 3.) Eleven inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children.

The High Court decision was only a partial victory for truck driver and New Party member Stewart Dimmock, who sued to have the film banned from schools completely as "irremediable" propaganda, but Justice Burton's ruling left no doubt that it was a victory (emphasis added):

Awarding Mr Dimmock two thirds of his estimated legal costs of more than £200,000 against the government, the judge said: "I conclude that the claimant substantially won this case by virtue of my finding that, but for the new guidance note, the film would have been distributed in breach of sections 406 and 407 of the 1996 Education Act."

These sections ban the political indoctrination of schoolchildren and require political views to be presented in a balanced way.

Of course, that didn't keep two of Britain's most prestigious news organizations from putting a somewhat different spin on it. Here are a couple of the results from a Google News search (emphasis added):

Guardian Unlimited, UK – 5 hours ago
A parent has failed in his legal action to prevent Al Gore's climate-change documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, being shown in schools in England.
Judge backs Gore film in schools
BBC News, UK – 6 hours ago
Secondary schools in England are free to show the climate change film by former US Vice-President Al Gore, a High Court judge has confirmed.

If you follow the link to the BBC story, you'll see that they've subsequently retitled it to the more neutral, but nonsensical "Judge rules on Gore schools film" — what's a "Gore schools film"? The Guardian story is the source of the quote saying Dimmock "substantially won," but you don't learn that Dimmock hasn't really "failed" until you're 13 paragraphs in. 

At least British mainstream media reported the story. The only major U.S. outlet to mention it, according to Google News, was Fox News. The New York Times mentioned it, but only in their "notes on the news" blog, The Lede

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 3 Comments »

More climate change chicanery

Posted by Richard on October 3, 2007

Let's say you're writing a children's book about global warming and you want to scare them with your good friend Al Gore's impending doom scenario. A graph showing that increased CO2 levels caused global temperature increases would help, wouldn't it? But what do you do if the graph shows exactly the opposite — that for the past 650,000 years, increases in temperature have always preceded increases in CO2 levels? Well, you could just mislabel the graph and misrepresent the data:

Sept. 1 saw the release of "The Down-to-Earth Guide to Global Warming," co-authored by Al Gore acolyte and "Inconvenient Truth" co-producer Laurie David and former advertising copywriter and environmental activist Cambria Gordon.

On page 18 of the David-Gordon book, the authors present a graph of the relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and global temperatures for the last 650,000 years.

The graph is accompanied by text that reads, "The more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the higher the temperature climbed. The less carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the lower the temperature fell. You can see this relationship for yourself by looking at the graph on the left …

"What makes this graph so amazing is that by connecting rising carbon dioxide to rising temperature, scientists have discovered the link between greenhouse gas pollution and global warming."

"What really makes [the David-Gordon] graph 'amazing' is that it's dead wrong," says a new report from the Science and Public Policy Institute.

"In order to contrive a visual representation for their false claim that carbon dioxide controls temperature change, David and co-author Cambria Gordon present unsuspecting children with an altered temperature and carbon dioxide graph that falsely reverses the relationship found in the scientific literature," says the SPPI report.

"The actual temperature curve in the chart was switched with the actual carbon dioxide curve. That is, the authors mislabeled the blue curve as temperature and the red curve as carbon dioxide concentration."

The publisher, Scholastic, acknowledged the "error" and agreed to correct the graph — but only the graph, not the accompanying text. Because correcting the text would destroy the whole premise that our CO2 emissions are driving global warming, and would thus undermine their agenda. So they'll leave the youngsters bewildered by a graph that doesn't seem to match the words accompanying it (encouraging them to conclude, erroneously, that the corrected graph is actually mislabeled). 

Fortunately, as Steve Milloy noted in the above story, there's another book about climate change for children, The Sky's Not Falling! Why It's OK to Chill About Global Warming, that could help calm kids who are increasingly fearful about the future. Unfortunately, it's written by an academic, not by the wife of a big-shot Hollywood producer and a former ad writer and "activist." And it's not going to be promoted to a fare-thee-well by its publisher, the media, and the education establishment, like the David-Gordon book. 

So — like Michael Mann's bogus "hockey stick" graph, which manipulated out of existence the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age in order to persuade people that 20th-century warming was unprecedented — the false claim that atmospheric CO2 increases precede global warming will no doubt remain something that "everybody knows" among the cognoscenti.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Driving to save the planet

Posted by Richard on August 7, 2007

Do you walk or ride your bike to work or to the store? According to a leading British environmentalist and Green Party candidate for parliament, you're destroying the planet! If you really care about the environment, you ought to get in your car and drive:

Food production is now so energy-intensive that more carbon is emitted providing a person with enough calories to walk to the shops than a car would emit over the same distance. The climate could benefit if people avoided exercise, ate less and became couch potatoes. Provided, of course, they remembered to switch off the TV rather than leaving it on standby.

The sums were done by Chris Goodall, campaigning author of How to Live a Low-Carbon Life, based on the greenhouse gases created by intensive beef production. "Driving a typical UK car for 3 miles [4.8km] adds about 0.9 kg [2lb] of CO2 to the atmosphere," he said, a calculation based on the Government's official fuel emission figures. "If you walked instead, it would use about 180 calories. You'd need about 100g of beef to replace those calories, resulting in 3.6kg of emissions, or four times as much as driving.

"The troubling fact is that taking a lot of exercise and then eating a bit more food is not good for the global atmosphere. Eating less and driving to save energy would be better."

Don't go feeling smug if you're a vegetarian. Beef cattle are especially bad for the planet, according the Gaia-worshippers (although they'd change their tune if everyone gave up meat eating and cattle became an endangered species). But if you eat beans instead of beef, you're just shifting the methane production, right?

According to Goodall and other environmentalists, meat is only a small part of the "problem." There's all the shipping of produce, food processing, packaging, refrigeration, etc. Together, they mean that the food industry is responsible for a sixth of your "carbon footprint." Naturally, Goodall has a solution — we just need to go back to a pre-industrial lifestyle based on subsistence farming:

"Don't buy anything from the supermarket," Mr Goodall said, "or anything that's travelled too far."

And for crying out loud, get off that treadmill and go watch some TV! Oh, screw it. When you're growing all your own food and weaving all your own clothing (can't fly it in from China!), you'll be working sunup to sundown and won't have time for TV anyway.

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Neptune’s inconvenient truth

Posted by Richard on May 14, 2007

We've known since at least 2005 that Mars has been warming rapidly — much more rapidly than Earth. Anthropogenic climate change skeptics like Russian astronomer Habibull Abdussamatov have argued that the warming on both planets can be explained by solar radiation changes.

Defenders of the "scientific consensus" replied that Martian warming is due to wobbles in its orbit, not solar changes, and is irrelevant to the issue of the Earth warming. Meanwhile, Jupiter and Saturn have also shown evidence of warming, and evidence of warming on Triton and Pluto has existed for years.

Now, scientists have added Neptune to the list, and with a pretty strong correlation to what's happening on Earth:

Neptune is the planet farthest from the Sun (Pluto is now considered only a dwarf planet), Neptune is the planet farthest from the Earth, and to our knowledge, there has been absolutely no industrialization out at Neptune in recent centuries. There has been no recent build-up of greenhouse gases there, no deforestation, no rapid urbanization, no increase in contrails from jet airplanes, and no increase in ozone in the low atmosphere; recent changes at Neptune could never be blamed on any human influence. Incredibly, an article has appeared in a recent issue of Geophysical Research Letters showing a stunning relationship between the solar output, Neptune's brightness, and heaven forbid, the temperature of the Earth. With its obvious implications to the greenhouse debate, we are certain you have never heard of the work and never will outside World Climate Report.

According to H.B. Hammel of Boulder's Space Science Institute and G.W. Lockwood of Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, increased solar irradiation correlates 0.90 with Neptune's brightness increase and 0.89 with Earth's temperature rise.

So we know that solar energy output has increased for much of the 20th century (leveling off at the end of the century, just about when Earth's warming began leveling off), and we have evidence of warming on many other bodies in the solar system, and we have at least one model that closely correlates solar output with warming of two planets. But, hey, nobody cares because they've already arrived at a consensus — at least all the scientists who want to keep getting those nice grants have.

I haven't seen any information about Mercury's temperature, and I'm hesitant to bring up the evidence of warming on Venus. Some very smart people think Venus is an example of the "runaway greenhouse effect" that may be in our future if we ignore Al Gore. Never mind that the atmosphere of Venus is 96.5% carbon dioxide (the evil greenhouse gas), while Earth's CO2 level has risen from 0.028% to — gasp! — 0.036% (and that's a tenth of what it was a few hundred million years ago).

Gosh, practically every sizable body in the solar system seems to be getting warmer. I only have one more question, but I'm reluctant to ask it because this isn't that kind of blog.

Oh, what the heck…

Is Uranus getting hot?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 10 Comments »

“Climate of Fear”

Posted by Richard on May 2, 2007

Don't miss Glenn Beck's second "Exposed" special tonight on the Headline News Network. It airs at 7 PM, 9 PM, and midnight Eastern Time. The special report, entitled "Climate of Fear,"  examines the global warming debate, looking at causes, solutions, and in particular, at the growing efforts to silence critics and crush dissent:

"If you believe the mainstream media hype, you'd think that every time you drive your SUV, the Earth's temperature rises six degrees," Beck said. "The reality is that many respected climatologists have questions about both the problem and the solution. We should understand both positions more fully before committing to any solutions that could do more harm than good, both to our environment and our economy."

During this special report, Glenn Beck questions the accuracy of Al Gore's claims in the Oscar-winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth of 20-foot sea level rises and the disastrous effects of increased carbon dioxide levels. The program examines the criticism some esteemed scientists, climatologists and academics have faced for even raising questions about the "scientific consensus."

The special report also offers a look at the history of what Beck sees as the media hype involving the climate, recalling the "global cooling" scare of the mid-1970s and the transition to the latest round of warnings about global warming.

Finally, Glenn Beck considers solutions and examines the Kyoto Treaty, a current guiding principle for the nations of the world to fix the problem of global warming. Beck himself offers his own ideas suggesting innovation – not government regulation – is the answer to solving this problem.

I thought that Beck's first special report, "Exposed: The Extremist Agenda," was an excellent look at Islamofascists' goals presented in their own words. If this one is of similar quality, it will be well worth watching. It's likely to be considerably lighter and more entertaining. Beck can be pretty funny.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »