One graphic $ays it all: Who actually paid in to the Paris Green Climate fund?

Hard-earned US taxpayer funds diverted to third-world countries (often run by tin-pot dictators) via the unelected bureaucratic behemoth – the United Nations. What possibly could go wrong?!

Donald J Trump – protecting US incomes with accountability and transparency for its careful use where needed. And yet Trump’s the bad guy?!

Watts Up With That?

Yeah, this is why President Trump said 

“We will cease honoring all non-binding agreements”, and “we will stop contributing to the green climate fund”.

“I can not in good conscience support a deal that harms the United States”.

“The bottom line is that the Paris Accord is very unfair to the United States”.

“This agreement is less about climate and more about other countries getting a financial advantage over the United States”.

The United States contributed $1 billion to the global Green Climate Fund, but the world’s top polluters contributed nothing, David Asman reported.

via Fox news here

View original post

Advertisements

Californian Climate Madness: Committed to Moving Forward, Ignoring Warnings From Business

The eco-militant EPA’s own figures note that slashing America’s CO2 emissions, will prevent less than 0.03 degrees Fahrenheit of global warming 85 years from now!

All that pain – destroying jobs and impairing human welfare – for such little gain!

Virtue-signalling politicians “riding their eco-friendly flying pigs” – a far more dangerous threat to life on earth than any minuscule and arguably beneficial, ‘global warming’ could ever be!

Eco-insanity on stilts.

Watts Up With That?

Costs are rising for Californian Renewable Energy Consumers Costs are rising for Californian Renewable Energy Consumers

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Breitbart; California has committed to moving forward with its job destroying climate policies, regardless of vocal complaints from business leaders.

California, at Forefront of Climate Fight, Won’t Back Down to Trump

“California can make a significant contribution to advancing the cause of dealing with climate change, irrespective of what goes on in Washington,” Mr. Brown said in an interview. “I wouldn’t underestimate California’s resolve if everything moves in this extreme climate denial direction. Yes, we will take action.”

When California enacted its climate reduction standards last year, it drew fierce criticism from state business leaders.

The bills “impose very severe caps on the emission of greenhouse gases in California, without requiring the regulatory agencies to give any consideration to the impacts on our economy, disruptions in everyone’s daily lives or the fact…

View original post 261 more words


Aussie Carbon Pricing is Back

I have been a rusted-on Liberal Party voter my entire life, with family members holding various administrative positions within the party over many decades.

Outside of family ties, my support for the Liberal party has always been based on its conservative policies and views.

With the knifing of Tony Abbott, a true statesman and representative of those trusted conservative Liberal party values, by Malcolm Turnbull, a man whose ideals and views are best described as of the extreme left, the Liberal Party has now 100% lost my vote.

It is by no means an exaggeration to comment that the Australian Labor Party (the Left-Wing opposition) is in my mind now a more conservative opposition to the Turnbull led Libs! Or perhaps just, ‘better the devil you know’.

As a condition of support for Turnbull toppling Abbott, he promised the conservative arm of the Lib/Nat coalition that he would not lurch to the left on climate.

He lied. And he will pay dearly, just like every other leader or opposition leader who has swallowed the great global warming scare and force-fed economy destroying climate policies to the wised-up Australian public.

Watts Up With That?

Aussie Environment Minister Greg Hunt, author Commonwealth of Australia, source Wikimedia Aussie Environment Minister Greg Hunt, author Commonwealth of Australia, source Wikimedia

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Remember back when Australian voters thought they were electing a government which was committed to abolishing carbon taxes? The following are the words of Australia’s Environment Minister Greg Hunt, who under former Prime Minister Tony Abbott vigorously opposed carbon pricing;

Environment Minister Greg Hunt says he will likely allow the purchase of international carbon credits despite backbench anger over the weekend’s Paris climate agreement.

We have to set in place a mechanism to allow us [reach new targets], in particular to look at the question of international units and I expect we probably will take on board international units and that will give us the flexibility as we head into 2020 to re-pledge if needed,” Mr Hunt said.

The Australian Industry Group, which has been calling for Australia to allow the…

View original post 213 more words


Yes, there is a pause, and the Washington Post now admits it. UPDATE: But not Obama

Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to 
know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” – UN IPCC 
Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itohan award-winning PhD environmental physical
chemist.

“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of 
scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” – U.S Government
Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of
NOAA.

“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” – Nobel Prize Winner for
Physics, Ivar Giaever.

via The Herald Sun – Andrew Bolt Blog :

Yes, there is a pause, and the Washington Post now admits it. UPDATE: But not Obama

 

Filed Under : Global warming – dud predictions

If even the Washington Post can admit to the pause, how much longer can The Age hold out in denying the science?


The recently-released National Climate Assessment (NCA) from the U.S. government offers considerable cause for concern for climate calamity, but downplays the decelerating trend in global surface temperature in the 2000s, which I document here.

Many climate scientists are currently working to figure out what is causing the slowdown, because if it continues, it would call into question the legitimacy of many climate model projections (and inversely offer some good news for our planet).

An article in Nature earlier this year discusses some of the possible causes for what some have to referred to as the global warming “pause” or “hiatus”.  Explanations include the quietest solar cycle in over a hundred years, increases in Asian pollution, more effective oceanic heat absorption, and even volcanic activity. Indeed, a peer-reviewed paperpublished in February estimates that about 15 percent of the pause can be attributed to increased volcanism. But some have questioned whether the pause or deceleration is even occurring at all.

You can see the pause (or deceleration in warming) yourself by simply grabbing the freely available data from NASA and NOAA. For the chart below, I took the annual global temperature difference from average (or anomaly) and calculated the change from the prior year. So the very first data point is the change from 2000 to 2001 and so on. One sign of data validation is that the trends are the same on both datasets.  Both of these government sources show a slight downward slope since 2000:

image

You can see some of the spikes associated with El Niño events (when heat was released into the atmosphere from warmer than normal ocean temperatures in the tropical Pacific) that occurred in 2004-05 and 2009-10. But the warm changes have generally been decreasing while cool changes have grown.

To be sure, both sets of data points show an overall rise in temperature of +0.01C during the 2000s. But, if current trends continue for just a few more years, then the mean change for the 2000s will shift to negative; in other words, the warming would really stop. The current +.01C increase in temperatures is insufficient to verify the climate change projections for major warming (even the low end +1-2C) by mid-to-late century. A peer reviewed study in Nature Climate Change published in 2013 drew the same conclusion: “Recent observed global warming is significantly less than that simulated by climate models,” it says. 

Read on. Meteorologist Matt Rogers addresses all the usual denialist objections.

(Via Watts Up With That, which has been making the same case for years.)

UPDATE

Respect the consensus that says Barack Obama is lying about the science.

The US Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works held a hearing this week on global warming and invited as witnesses four former heads of the Environmental Protection Agency. Senator Jeff Sessions asks:

The President on November 14th 2012 said, ‘The temperature around the globe is increasing faster than was predicted, even ten years ago.’ And then on May 29th last year he also said – quote – ‘We also know that the climate is warming faster than anybody anticipated five or ten years ago.’

So I would ask each of our former Administrators if any of you agree that that’s an accurate statement on the climate. So if you do, raise your hand.

The fun begins at 1:20:


See Also :

Climatism Related :


How Did The IPCC’s Alarmism Take Everyone In For So Long?

Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to 
know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” – UN IPCC 
Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itohan award-winning PhD environmental physical
chemist.

“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of 
scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” – U.S Government
Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of
NOAA.

“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” – Nobel Prize Winner for
Physics, Ivar Giaever.

Screen Shot 2014-04-07 at , April 7, 10.47.44 pm

Award winning author and Telegraph reporter Christopher Booker sums up the great global warming hoax, and how we have been so ingeniously suckered in by that strange body, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which..will be recognised as having never really been a scientific body at all, but a political pressure group.

via The Telegraph :

How did the IPCC’s alarmism take everyone in for so long?

Climate scaremongers are still twisting the evidence over global warming

4:16PM BST 05 Apr 2014

When future generations come to look back on the alarm over global warming that seized the world towards the end of the 20th century, much will puzzle them as to how such a scare could have arisen. They will wonder why there was such a panic over a 0.4 per cent rise in global temperatures between 1975 and 1998, when similar rises between 1860 and 1880 and 1910 and 1940 had given no cause for concern. They will see these modest rises as just part of a general warming that began at the start of the 19th century, as the world emerged from the Little Ice Age, when the Earth had grown cooler for 400 years.

They will be struck by the extent to which this scare relied on the projections of computer models, which then proved to be hopelessly wrong when, in the years after 1998, their predicted rise in temperature came virtually to a halt. But in particular they will be amazed by the almost religious reverence accorded to that strange body, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which by then will be recognised as having never really been a scientific body at all, but a political pressure group. It had been set up in the 1980s by a small band of politically persuasive scientists who had become fanatically committed to the belief that, because carbon dioxide levels were rising, global temperatures must inevitably follow; an assumption that the evidence would increasingly show was mistaken.

Five times between 1990 and 2014 the IPCC published three massive volumes of technical reports – another emerged last week – and each time we saw the same pattern. Each was supposedly based on thousands of scientific studies, many funded to find evidence to support the received view that man-made climate change was threatening the world with disaster – hurricanes, floods, droughts, melting ice, rising sea levels and the rest. But each time what caught the headlines was a brief “Summary for Policymakers”, carefully crafted by governments and a few committed scientists to hype up the scare by going much further than was justified by the thousands of pages in the technical reports themselves.

Each time it would emerge just how shamelessly these Summaries had distorted the actual evidence, picking out the scary bits, which themselves often turned out not to have been based on proper science at all. The most glaring example was the IPCC’s 2007 report, which hit the headlines with those wildly alarmist predictions that the Himalayan glaciers might all be gone by 2035; that global warming could halve African crop yields by 2050; that droughts would destroy 40 per cent of the Amazon rainforest. Not until 2010 did some of us manage to show that each of these predictions, and many more, came not from genuine scientific studies but from scaremongering propaganda produced by green activists and lobby groups (shown by one exhaustive analysis to make up nearly a third of all the IPCC’s sources).

Most of the particularly alarmist predictions came from a report by the IPCC’s Working Group II. This was concerned with assessing the impact on the world of those changes to the climate predicted by the equally flawed computer models relied on by Working Group I, which was charged with assessing the science of climate change. The technical report published last week was its sequel, also from Working Group II, and we can at once see, from its much more cautious treatment of the subjects that caused such trouble last time, that they knew they couldn’t afford any repeat of that disaster.

 

Looking at the Summary for Policymakers, however, we see how the scaremongers are still playing their same old game. On pages 12-14, for instance, they are still trying to whip up fears about extreme weather events, killer heatwaves, vanishing tropical islands, massive crop failures and so on, although little of this is justified by the report itself, and even less by the evidence of the real world, where these things are no more happening as predicted than the temperature rises predicted by their computer models.

This latest report has aroused markedly less excitement than did its hysterical predecessor in 2007. They have cried wolf once too often. The only people still being wholly taken in, it seems – apart from the usual suspects in the media – are all those mindless politicians still babbling on about how in Paris next year they are finally going to get that great global agreement which, if only we put up enough wind farms and taxes, will somehow enable us to stop the climate changing.

They can dream on. But alas, the rest of us must still pay the price for their dreams.

Continue Reading »

•••

See also : 

Related :

Agenda of the United Nations and the Political Elite :

Climatism Related :


Obama: My Plan Makes Electricity Rates Skyrocket

Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the
industrialized civilizations collapse?
Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about
?”
– Maurice Strong,
founder of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP)

“Climate change is real. Not only is it real, it’s here,
and its effects are giving rise to a frighteningly new
global phenomenon: the man-made natural disaster.

– Barack Obama,
US President

•••

UPDATE : Washington Post Slams Kerry For Pushing Obama’s Climate BS | Real Science

See also :

Obamaclimate Related :

H/t to Al Zore


81 Years Ago Today : Severe Global Warming Strikes West Australia

Screen Shot 2014-02-05 at , February 5, 10.19.01 pm

07 Feb 1933 – SEVERE HEAT WAVE. West Australia Swelters. PERTH…

The forecast for Perth today (with CO2 at 398 ppm) is a milder 36°C or 96.8°F.

Sending the United Nation’s $700 million of the $7 billion collected from Australia’s Carbon Tax last FYI, is paying dividends.

•••

See also :