Alt-science climate activists

“It’s the flavor of the season: how outraged you manage to be is proof how wrong/evil your opponent is.”

“The same establishment makes a deafening racket every time there is an El Niño. In fact, climate activists actively hope for El Niño warm periods so they can hyperventilate about ‘record temperatures’ and advance their policy goals.”

Spot-on Shub.

Excellent post demonstrating the vicious rage emanating from climate change alarmists following the recent *record* drop in global temperatures!

As usual, the Left using the 101 tactic of – “Playing the man (Breitbart/Dellers), rather than the ball (evidence)”.

This is more evidence for mine that “Global Warming” aka “Climate Change” is the ultimate social(ist) issue that plays to many of the Left’s elitist agendas – power, control, money, virtue and misanthropy. After all, shouldn’t “Global Warming” alarmists be celebrating and cheering the *record* drop in global temps?! (albeit expected after a super El Niño).

Rather telling.

Shub Niggurath Climate

The US House Science committee tweeted a link to a James Delingpole article on the drop in atmospheric temperatures of the Na Nina that is underway.

Look at the climate alarmist and intelligentsia response:

Science writer Deborah Blum:

The articulate British scientist Doug McNeall:

PhD scientist Bob Ward:

Former journalist Leo Hickman:

Climate activist ‘Climate Truth’

View original post 488 more words


Corals survived massive Caribbean climate change – likely to do so again

Corals evolved during the Cambrian era when atmospheric CO2 levels were at 6,000-7,000 ppm, around 4,000 percent or 20 times higher than today’s “CO2-starved” environment of 400 ppm. Temps were also 10 times higher then today…

It’s no wonder corals have survived millions of years of dramatic and “massive” climate change.

Watts Up With That?

From the SMITHSONIAN TROPICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Half of all coral species in the Caribbean went extinct between 1 and 2 million years ago, probably due to drastic environmental changes. Which ones survived? Scientists working at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI) think one group of survivors, corals in the genus Orbicella, will continue to adapt to future climate changes because of their high genetic diversity.

Orbicella, a genus of reef-building corals, may be able to survive future climate change. CREDIT Monica Medina, NMNH Orbicella, a genus of reef-building corals, may be able to survive future climate change. CREDIT Monica Medina, NMNH

“Having a lot of genetic variants is like buying a lot of lottery tickets,” said Carlos Prada, lead author of the study and Earl S. Tupper Post-doctoral Fellow at STRI. “We discovered that even small numbers of individuals in three different species of the reef-building coral genus Orbicella have quite a bit of genetic variation, and therefore, are likely to adapt to big changes in their…

View original post 548 more words


‘Unreliable’ Power Australia – Steven Marshall Should Have Listened And Blown Up A Wind Farm

“Blowing up the Playford station was Labor saying yes to wind farms and the country’s highest power prices, and saying yes to the country’s highest unemployment, too.

The world sure got that message: South Australia is closed for investment in heavy industry, and so, soon, will be the rest of Australia if we don’t learn from its madness.”

Spot-on column, by Bolt, on Australia’s green energy insanity. Read on…

PA Pundits - International

Bolt New 01By Andrew Bolt ~

It was three years ago that I advised South Australia’s Liberal Party Leader to get himself a stick of gelignite and blow up a wind generator.

Yes, we were at a party but, no, I wasn’t drunk.

I told the startled Steven Marshall this was the best way to cut through with a great message and win the election.

“Put the clip on YouTube and you’d tell the world South Australia would be open for business,” I said.

No to more wind farms. Yes to cheaper power. Message sent.

I even helpfully mimed pushing the plunger, but Marshall backed off hastily and never took my advice.

Clements Gap wind plant in South AustraliaClements Gap wind plant in South Australia

And, of course, he lost the election a year later to Labor’s Jay Weatherill, the guy you now see on TV desperately pretending his state’s huge wind farms didn’t cause South Australia to…

View original post 1,032 more words


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 :


Smoking Gun That The NOAA US Climate Extremes Index Is 100% Fraudulent

 

  • Data Tampering. A criminal disgrace.
  • Millions of working families suffering to pay electricity bills and find jobs. All because Climate Change alarmists with their snouts in the climate gravy-train trough promulgate the global warming scare with fraudulent data to keep the grant money flowing and their precious, elite reputations in tact.
  • The mainstream media no better. Keeping NOAA, NASA, GISS, USHCN blatant data tampering under wraps ~ Exposing a government data tampering scandal clearly wouldn’t be in the best interests of Gaia.
  • Meanwhile the punters keep paying climate guilt money to Obama, Australia’s Labor/Green alliance and all the other western Governments heavily invested in the biggest scientific hoax and fraud ever perpetrated on humanity.
  • So Wrong.

 

  • For more on data tampering, see also:
  1. Spectacularly Poor Climate Science At NASA
  2. Tracking Climate Fraud
  3. Data Tampering At USHCN/GISS
  4. Hottest year ever? Skeptics question revisions to climate data
  5. Thermometer Magic
  6. EPA Throws Their Hat Into The Temperature Fraud Arena

Real Science

The NOAA US Climate Extremes Index shows that 2012 maximum summer temperatures were tied for the highest on record.

ScreenHunter_07 Aug. 07 07.39

Extremes | U.S. Climate Extremes Index (CEI)

This is utter nonsense. According to GHCN US data, the summer of 2012 had the 21st hottest maximum temperatures, was more than 1C cooler than 1936, and was cooler than most of the years in the 1930s.

ScreenHunter_08 Aug. 07 07.39

 

Index of /pub/data/ghcn/daily/hcn/

The next graph overlays the HCN data on the CEI data. The match isn’t too bad until about the year 2000, when NOAA started fabricating data to pump the numbers up.

NOAA shows the summer of 2006 as being 7th hottest on record, when in fact it was the 82nd hottest.

ScreenHunter_09 Aug. 07 07.44

The EPA says that summers in the 1930s were much hotter than any summers prior to 2009. Why does NOAA think they can get away with lying about this?

Heat waves occurred…

View original post 22 more words


Life In The Dark Ages

HOW GLOBAL WARMING (alarmism) IMPACTS THE GRID:

  • Green Logic Fail

Real Science

Global warming will impact the power grid

Published: August 3, 2013

ScreenHunter_248 Aug. 05 13.58

a new report released by the Department of Energy in July, says that our electrical grid will be impacted due to the effects of global warming. Over the last century, air and ocean temperatures have continued to increase and droughts have become more prolonged. Both of these conditions have produced a seemingly never-ending fire season across the Western United States. July 2012 was the hottest month ever recorded in the United States and 2012 was the warmest year overall.

Global warming will impact the power grid | John Lindsey | SanLuisObispo.com

More like a seemingly endless bullshit season from climate alarmists. Droughts have not gotten worse.

ScreenHunter_246 Aug. 05 13.49

Climate at a Glance | Time Series

Hansen wrote this in 1999 :

Empirical evidence does not lend much support to the notion that climate is headed precipitately toward more extreme heat and…

View original post 106 more words