Unbelievable! NYTs: 'Green' Energy Increasing Fuel Prices, Hunger

Hard to believe, but the liberal NYTs is actually (FINALLY) saying the truth: the stupid, fruitless "green fad" is killing our country and the world FOR ZERO BENEFIT. It's WAY past time for the global warming myth to die.

But with food prices rising sharply in recent months, many experts are calling on countries to scale back their headlong rush into green fuel development, arguing that the combination of ambitious biofuel targets and mediocre harvests of some crucial crops is contributing to high prices, hunger and political instability.

[From Food Prices Stir Concern About Biofuels Mandates - NYTimes.com]

Record Winter Storm Slams Eastern U.S. (Caused by Humans, Of Course)

Empirical evidence mounts each winter, even in the face of dire "record warm" predictions. But don't worry folks; the global warming pipe dream is still alive. The New York Crimes says so. No matter what the weather...it's caused by warming. Scam protected.

WASHINGTON (AP) - A band of frigid weather snaking its way up the East Coast on Sunday threatened to bring blizzards and a foot of snow to New York City and New England, while several states made emergency declarations as the storm caused crashes on slick roads.

Airlines grounded hundreds of flights Sunday along the Northeast corridor in anticipation of the storm, affecting major airports including New York's JFK and Newark. Airlines said more cancellations were likely as the storm progressed. Travel misery began a day earlier in parts of the South, where a rare white Christmas came with reports of dozens of car crashes.

[From Snow storm bears down on Mid-Atlantic, Northeast]

NYT: Record Cold Caused by Warming (They're Serious)

I've been saying this for years, but try not to swallow your tongue anyway. These guys in the media (and the leftist "thinking" establishment) can't accept that they've been completely bamboozled by a climate cartel intent on global governance and global economic control. That's all this bullshit is. Average Americans know it. But the so-called 'smartest among us' are apparently the greatest morons. Every recent winter has been record setting in terms of COLD and the summers HAVE NOT been record setting in terms of WARMTH, despite predictions to the contrary! So, the shift has been to blame the cooler climate on warming in both summer and winter. Can anyone else see the imbecility of this crap besides me?!!!!

All of this cold was met with perfect comic timing by the release of a World Meteorological Organization report showing that 2010 will probably be among the three warmest years on record, and 2001 through 2010 the warmest decade on record.

How can we reconcile this? The not-so-obvious short answer is that the overall warming of the atmosphere is actually creating cold-weather extremes. Last winter, too, was exceptionally snowy and cold across the Eastern United States and Eurasia, as were seven of the previous nine winters.

For a more detailed explanation, we must turn our attention to the snow in Siberia.

Annual cycles like El Niño/Southern Oscillation, solar variability and global ocean currents cannot account for recent winter cooling. And though it is well documented that the earth’s frozen areas are in retreat, evidence of thinning Arctic sea ice does not explain why the world’s major cities are having colder winters.

[From Bundle Up, It’s Global Warming - NYTimes.com]

Al Gore Emerges From Hiding (sort of)

Al Gore has been keeping a low-profile ever since the mounting climate scandals that occurred before and after Copenhagen, where he was embarrassed by a typical alarmist exaggeration that was, once again, exposed as a lie by climate skeptics (a.k.a., "deniers"). He's been challenged for years to debate credible authorities and scientists on CO2's role in climate warming, but he usually manages to elude any forum that isn't tightly controlled by his thugs and political operatives.

He was shredded by Apple's stock holders just the other day for his global warming orthodoxy in the face of all these scandals, even though he was reelected to Apple's board (no surprise there...Apple is run by left-leaning folks out on the Left Coast).

So, feeling the need to respond to all the criticism, what does Al Gore do? He writes an OP-ED piece for the liberal New York Times, of course. Since no one can answer him directly in an opinion piece, I will take this opportunity to respond to his bullshit (trite and repetitive) below, point-by-point. And there's no way I could do a better job than some of the great skeptical scientists out there. But here goes...

But unfortunately, the reality of the danger we are courting has not been changed by the discovery of at least two mistakes in the thousands of pages of careful scientific work over the last 22 years by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In fact, the crisis is still growing because we are continuing to dump 90 million tons of global-warming pollution every 24 hours into the atmosphere — as if it were an open sewer.

[From Op-Ed Contributor - We Can’t Wish Away Climate Change - NYTimes.com]

Just two mistakes? Careful scientific work? Carbon is global warming pollution that's making our atmosphere into a sewer? Sorry, Al, but you're ignoring the mound of scandals recently revealed. There weren't just a few mistakes. There were many, along with multiple instances of unethical scientific practices.

But the scientific enterprise will never be completely free of mistakes. What is important is that the overwhelming consensus on global warming remains unchanged.

Hey, thanks for finally admitting that there are mistakes and errors in the evidence that, according to you, proves "thuh duh-bate is over." What's important to examine is the nature of these "mistakes." These aren't just mistakes; they're blatant attempts to politicize a supposedly scientific report by scattering it with "evidence" that amounts to nothing more than propaganda and fear.

There's that word consensus again. That's Al Gore's (and many alarmists') favorite tactic of deflection when attempting to avoid debate. But the 'overwhelming consensus' is a lie. Even if it was true, consensus opinion has nothing to do with real science, as history has shown us again and again. The maverick in science (like Galileo) is usually proved correct when confronting the consensus's foregone conclusion.

And furthermore (if there were a consensus), does anyone out there REALLY believe this group of politically-connected believers remains UNCHANGED? The so-called consensus is running for the hills because of all the scrutiny. On the contrary, the "consensus" is QUITE changed, Al.

[The panel's scientists] probably underestimated the range of sea-level rise in this century...

That's not what this article just said. Scientists have just withdrawn some of the estimates of supposed human-induced sea-rising. More fallout from the scandals, because now people are paying attention and not just accepting what these climate fear mongers say anymore.

For example, January was seen as unusually cold in much of the United States. Yet from a global perspective, it was the second-hottest January since surface temperatures were first measured 130 years ago.

Actually, the idiots said this January was the warmest on-record...not second warmest (get your facts straight, Al). Temperature records of 130 years should be, to any scientist, a problem when discerning longterm climate patterns and using them to make predictions. First, how accurate were the records of 130 years ago? They're not even accurate today (see reasons why here). Second, it's a statistical no-no to look at such a small range of time (130 years) to pronounce climate doom, considering the climate history of Earth spans of 4.5-billion years.

Similarly, even though climate deniers have speciously argued for several years that there has been no warming in the last decade, scientists confirmed last month that the last 10 years were the hottest decade since modern records have been kept.

Really? Did the alarmist scientists confirm this assertion the same way they've unethically confirmed everything else related to global warming? We can see that they're track record of unethical behavior runs deep and goes back at least 10 years.

Since we've already inserted the obligatory, debate-avoiding word consensus, let's make sure we use the Holocaust-doubting, ad hominem rejoinder and call us climate skeptics "deniers." Yes, a certain subset of alarmist scientists did just, laughably, make the claim that 2000 through 2009 was the warmest decade "on-record." However, disgraced IPCC scientist Phil Jones (CRU scandal) recently admitted that there has been no warming in 15 years, and he even--FINALLY--admitted that there was probably a global medieval warm period and even other earlier periods of global warming in Earth's history that preceded the industrial age. Therefore, the Earth has warmed in the distant past for reasons other than those extolled by you, Al, oh great 'creator of Internet.'

...yet scientists have long pointed out that warmer global temperatures have been increasing the rate of evaporation from the oceans, putting significantly more moisture into the atmosphere — thus causing heavier downfalls of both rain and snow in particular regions, including the Northeastern United States.

This is the warming-causes-cooling-and-warming tactic used in climate revisionism, and not ALL scientists have agreed with this. There are many problems with this assertion, but let's just take one that flies in the face of something Al just said a few paragraphs ago. If increased evaporation due to warming has caused all this darn record snow (and record freezing cold), rain, and tropical cyclones we've seen, wouldn't that increased evaporation also prevent the seas from rising? (Which, itself, has already been debunked.) The problem is that you and your ilk have long used empirical evidence when it suits your propaganda needs (i.e., supposed empirical weather events that you associate with climate warming). When antithetical weather appears, you either claim that La Nina is involved (that's masking warming) or you ridiculously claim that the cold weather is being caused by warming. That's what I call climate revisionism. It's called "global warming"...not "regional warming, when it suits my theory."

Here is what scientists have found is happening to our climate: man-made global-warming pollution traps heat from the sun and increases atmospheric temperatures. These pollutants — especially carbon dioxide — have been increasing rapidly with the growth in the burning of coal, oil, natural gas and forests, and temperatures have increased over the same period. Almost all of the ice-covered regions of the Earth are melting — and seas are rising. Hurricanes are predicted to grow stronger and more destructive, though their number is expected to decrease. Droughts are getting longer and deeper in many mid-continent regions, even as the severity of flooding increases. The seasonal predictability of rainfall and temperatures is being disrupted, posing serious threats to agriculture. The rate of species extinction is accelerating to dangerous levels.

But Al...is there a such thing as a 'saturation point'? Is there a point where increasing CO2 no longer makes a difference (i.e., holds in no more heat)? There are scientists (you haven't talked with) who agree that there is such a physical state in the atmosphere. The fact is that there is no evidence that current CO2 levels (rising though they are) are contributing to warming. Even the IPCC's erroneous, award-winning report only allots that CO2 is "probably" causing observed warming. "Probably" in science DOES NOT cut it. CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas STILL, even in its presently increasing concentration. Also, our data show that tropospheric warming (i.e., in the atmosphere) has not occurred (increasing CO2 has not warmed this part of the atmosphere as predicted); all of the "warming" has been attributed to the surface level, and the temperature collection methods at the surface are problematic.

CO2 is a 'pollutant'? You're exhaling it right now with your big, fat head, Al. That means you're contaminating my atmosphere! Never mind that plants MUST HAVE CO2 to provide us with O2; even grade school science students can understand photosynthesis.

Extinctions have NOT accelerated. The last part of this bullshit paragraph falls back onto the same trite fear tactics. See the GASP! series and warmlist if you want to scare yourself to death; you can read about the THOUSANDS of ills attributed to manmade warming. Once you read them all, you'll start giggling to yourself if you have half a brain, because it's obvious how much of an overreach it all is.

The common denominator of Al's proselytizing is FEAR. Everything he writes or states is DRIPPING with fear. If you need to hear more fear on animals, read our Animal Death Watch series too.

So, where has Al Gore been? Well, just read the articles. Welcome back, Al. We DID NOT miss your stupid crap.

Al Gore won a Nobel Prize and an Oscar for his film, An Inconvenient Truth. But in the last three months, as global warming has gone from a scientific near-certitude to the subject of satire, Gore -- the public face of global warming -- has been silent on the topic.

The former vice president apparently finds it inconvenient even to answer calls to testify before the U.S. Senate. You can call him Al . . . but he won't call back.

[From FOXNews.com - You Can Call Him Al ... But Al Won't Call You Back]

Al Gore has been found. The former vice president and green guru has been MIA since the end of December, but he cropped up to be abused at the Apple stockholders meeting in Cupertino, Calif. Gore has been missing conveniently during the same period where climate scientists have come under increased scrutiny for bogus claims, doctored science and use of propaganda. Gore, the Nobel Peace Prize and Oscar winner was last seen on CBS in late December. While the TV outlets have been running archival footage of the climate advocate, he hasn’t been interviewed on air throughout the controversy.

He’s still been on the receiving end of many jokes during that time. Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., said on Twitter: “It's going to keep snowing in D.C. until Al Gore cries ‘uncle.’” GOP Sen. James Inhofe’s grandkids built an igloo on the National Mall, naming it “Al Gore’s New Home.”

Now even Apple shareholders are unhappy with the Goreacle, delivering “harsh comments about former Vice President Al Gore’s record,” according to CNET. One shareholder said Gore shouldn’t be reelected to the Apple board, saying Gore “has become a laughingstock. The glaciers have not melted,” reported CNET. Gore didn’t respond directly, but his spot in the front row indicates his hibernation may be ending.

[From FOXNews.com - Why So Silent, Mr. Gore?]

I'm Not the Only One Noticing, Al Gore

Looks like I'm not the only one noticing that Al Gore is ignoring his own stupidity...but he's doing so for the sake of his bank account, so maybe he's not so dumb after all (he hopes we are all dumb).

In a long op-ed piece for The New York Times the other day, Gore cranked up the doomsday rhetoric. Human beings, he warned, “face an unimaginable calamity requiring large-scale, preventive measures to protect human civilization as we know it.’’ His 1,900-word essay made no mention of his financial interest in promoting such measures - Gore has invested heavily in carbon-offset markets, electric vehicles, and other ventures that would profit handsomely from legislation curbing the use of fossil fuels, and is reportedly poised to become the world’s first “carbon billionaire.’’ However, he did mention “global-warming pollution’’ no fewer than four times, declaring that “our grandchildren would one day look back on us as a criminal generation’’ if we don’t move decisively to reduce it.

[From Gore still hot on his doomsday rhetoric - The Boston Globe]

NYT: Global Warming Causing Cooling and Warming

As predicted, the NYT steps into the fray to show their usual lefty colors. But they at least utter one truth—the cold, wintery, record-setting weather being experienced in the U.S. right now no more predicts cooling as the heat wave in Rio or lack of snow in Vancouver predicts warming. I wrote about this briefly the other day; unusual weather events have always occurred since record-keeping began. Just pick up an old almanac from the pre-industrial age if you don’t believe me.

So, can we finally admit that empirical data—often used by global warming alarmists when it supports their case (e.g., Gore’s hurricanes, Kerry’s tornados, heat waves, ice melts, etc.)—is useless in this discussion? Otherwise, skeptics like myself will tout cooler weather events (like those happening right now in the U.S. and other parts of the world) as antithetical arguments to prove a point; the point is that alarmists want to cherry-pick empirical observations to which the world pays attention, and that’s extremely disingenuous.

Instead, let’s look at the climate scientists in whom we’ve totally placed our trust to guide and propel MAJOR alterations in world governance, economies, politics, and energy consumption. These are the professionals who are supposed to uphold the highest ethics and give us nothing but untainted, unbiased scientific fact. However, scandal after scandal is currently rocking the main players in the climatology establishment (i.e., the U.N.’s IPCC and the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University), who are MOSTLY responsible for driving the climate hysteria through advocacy and political bias (much of their “evidence” IS NOT BASED IN FACT at all). Al Gore himself was recently caught in a whopper about ice melts, and it was shown that he just made that prediction up out of thin air; this is the messiah of global warming to whom the world exalts as an ultimate purveyor of climate truth, and he’s a liar.

Curious in the second story that the NYT is near collapse (as well as most other liberal news outlets), while more centrist-to-conservative outlets are doing just fine.

Skeptics of global warming are using the record-setting snows to mock those who warn of dangerous human-driven climate change — this looks more like global cooling, they taunt.

Most climate scientists respond that the ferocious storms are consistent with forecasts that a heating planet will produce more frequent and more intense weather events.

But some independent climate experts say the blizzards in the Northeast no more prove that the planet is cooling than the lack of snow in Vancouver or the downpours in Southern California prove that it is warming.

[From Climate-Change Debate Is Heating Up in Deep Freeze - NYTimes.com]

NEW YORK, Feb 10 (Reuters) - The New York Times Co (NYT.N) warned on Wednesday that print newspaper advertising will continue to decline, sending shares down nearly 9 percent, even as the company slashed costs to reach a higher-than-expected fourth-quarter profit.

The results, like that of other U.S. newspaper publishers, show that revenue declines are easing as the economy improves and advertisers are taking ginger steps back into the market. Even so, they are reducing what they spend on print media anyway, keeping newspapers' long-term futures uncertain.

[From UPDATE 3-New York Times ad outlook dim, shares fall | Reuters]

Climate Science Fiction of 1970s

Many of us skeptics have seen the Newsweek, Time, and the New York Times stories about the coming ice age from the mid-1970s. Just so you know, that wasn't just media-fed fear. Government-connected climate scientists were saying the same things then and wrote a textbook about it. LOL! Are we really all this dumb? Apparently so. It looks like it took an email leak to bring this Goliath down.

Many of you are too young to remember, but in 1975 our government pushed "the coming ice age."

Random House dutifully printed "THE WEATHER CONSPIRACY … coming of the New Ice Age." This may be the only book ever written by 18 authors. All 18 lived just a short sled ride from Washington, D.C. Newsweek fell in line and did a cover issue warning us of global cooling on April 28, 1975. And The New York Times, Aug. 14, 1976, reported "many signs that Earth may be headed for another ice age."

OK, you say, that's media. But what did our rational scientists say?

In 1974, the National Science Board announced: "During the last 20 to 30 years, world temperature has fallen, irregularly at first but more sharply over the last decade. Judging from the record of the past interglacial ages, the present time of high temperatures should be drawing to an end…leading into the next ice age."

***

Remember how Galileo recanted his preaching about the earth revolving around the sun? He, of course, was about to be barbecued by his leaders. Today's scientists merely lose their cash flow. Threats work.

[From The Fiction Of Climate Science - Forbes.com]

Lying Scientist Told To Resign: Climategate

It keeps coming: Every day there's another story (and usually from the U.K. media) about this scandal. The American liberal press is refusing to acknowledge that this ever happened; how could they? NBC has completely invested itself in being the "Green Network," fully buying into the climate fad, lock-stock-and-barrel.

Moronic leftwing journalists must be completely confused at this point...they bought into all this BS and never asked questions. Whatever happened to the days when reporters questioned everything instead of just accepting what supposed smart people told them? Frankly, our press will have to admit IT HAS BEEN HAD if it really reports on the facts in these stories, or else the stories prove their culpability in the hoax (no one should be surprised at the NYT's dismissal of Climategate).

Meanwhile, Thulsa Doom Obama carries on as if nothing has happened. We're still heading for certain climate doom in his estimation.

George Monbiot, a leading environmentalist, said Phil Jones should resign from the Climatic Research Unit over leaked emails that appear to show researchers suppressed scientific data.

More emails came to light yesterday, including one in which an American climatologist admitted it was a travesty that scientists could not explain a lack of global warming in recent years.

[From Scientist in climate change 'cover-up' storm told to quit | Mail Online]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama will go to Copenhagen for a U.N. climate change meeting on December 9, hoping to add momentum to an international process despite slow progress on a domestic bill to cut carbon emissions.

[From Obama to attend beginning of U.N. climate meeting | Politics | Reuters]

NYT Covers Denying Princeton Scientist

Finally, a liberal, Obama-loving scientist who is standing up for REAL science! He’s speaking truth, and he’s made Dr. Hansen mad (so good on him). Maybe we’re finally starting to see a turn; this is when the liberal NYT actually gives a prestigious denying scientist a significant article to state some of the things most of us have been saying all along. I’ve highlighted some key paragraphs below, but I highly recommend that you follow the link and read the WHOLE article.

The Civil Heretic

But in the considered opinion of the neurologist Oliver Sacks, Dyson’s friend and fellow English expatriate, this is far from the case. “His mind is still so open and flexible,” Sacks says. Which makes Dyson something far more formidable than just the latest peevish right-wing climate-change denier. Dyson is a scientist whose intelligence is revered by other scientists — William Press, former deputy director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory and now a professor of computer science at the University of Texas, calls him “infinitely smart.

***

Dyson seems to see the world as an interdisciplinary set of problems out there for him to evaluate. Climate change is the big scientific issue of our time, so naturally he finds it irresistible. But to Dyson this is really only one more charged conundrum attracting his interest just as nuclear weapons and rural poverty have. That is to say, he is a great problem-solver who is not convinced that climate change is a great problem.

Dyson is well aware that “most consider me wrong about global warming.” That educated Americans tend to agree with the conclusion about global warming reached earlier this month at the International Scientific Conference on Climate Change in Copenhagen (“inaction is inexcusable”) only increases Dyson’s resistance. Dyson may be an Obama-loving, Bush-loathing liberal who has spent his life opposing American wars and fighting for the protection of natural resources, but he brooks no ideology and has a withering aversion to scientific consensus. The Nobel physics laureate Steven Weinberg admires Dyson’s physics — he says he thinks the Nobel committee fleeced him by not awarding his work on quantum electrodynamics with the prize — but Weinberg parts ways with his sensibility: “I have the sense that when consensus is forming like ice hardening on a lake, Dyson will do his best to chip at the ice.”

***

Climate models, he says, take into account atmospheric motion and water levels but have no feeling for the chemistry and biology of sky, soil and trees. “The biologists have essentially been pushed aside,” he continues. “Al Gore’s just an opportunist. The person who is really responsible for this overestimate of global warming is Jim Hansen. He consistently exaggerates all the dangers.”

***

Dyson says it’s only principle that leads him to question global warming: “According to the global-warming people, I say what I say because I’m paid by the oil industry. Of course I’m not, but that’s part of their rhetoric. If you doubt it, you’re a bad person, a tool of the oil or coal industry.” Global warming, he added, “has become a party line.”

Climate alarmism is in peril

Our good friend and future EU president, Vaclav Klaus, is back in the news (being predictably eviscerated by the NYT for his disbelief in global warming bullcrap).

One great thing could come from this economic downturn: The death of climate alarmism and global warming belief in a vast majority of the world's citizens (we've already seen it happen here and in the UK).

I say, "Adios!"

Beware the church of climate alarm - Miranda Devine - Opinion - smh.com.au:

As the Czech President, Vaclav Klaus, an economist, anti-totalitarian and climate change sceptic, prepares to take up the rotating presidency of the European Union next year, climate alarmists are doing their best to traduce him.

The New York Times opened a profile of Klaus, 67, this week with a quote from a 1980s communist secret agent's report, claiming he behaves like a "rejected genius", and asserts there is "palpable fear" he will "embarrass" the EU.

But the real fear driving climate alarmists wild is that a more rational approach to the fundamentalist religion of global warming may be in the ascendancy - whether in the parliamentary offices of the world's largest trading bloc or in the living rooms of Blacktown.

As the global financial crisis takes hold, perhaps people are starting to wonder whether the so-called precautionary principle, which would have us accept enormous new taxes in the guise of an emissions trading scheme and curtail economic growth, is justified, based on what we actually know about climate.

One of Australia's leading enviro-sceptics, the geologist and University of Adelaide professor Ian Plimer, 62, says he has noticed audiences becoming more receptive to his message that climate change has always occurred and there is nothing we can do to stop it.

GASP!: The health risks of global warming!

Seems the EPA has been featured in the news a lot lately, with complaints of government interference from both parties in attempting to bias the EPA’s findings either for or against global warming. However, after I read the article, it’s obvious what the EPA scientists believe: They’re all about global warming alarmism, even though incontrovertible scientific proof and recent empirical evidence have shown the stupidity of this hoax. Why? Read on.

...in the United States alone, the adult mortality rate DROPPED 11 points for males and DROPPED 35 points for females from 1990 to 2006! (source: World Health Organization)

You should be afraid, because the SCOTUS has given the EPA broad leeway in regulating CO2 as a pollutant. Yes, that’s right. CO2—that precious, naturally occurring gas that is a waste product for us but an essential requirement for plants—has become such a boogeyman via the farcical global warming alarmism campaign that your government is likely going to “manage it.” To “manage it,” the economy of the world will have to suffer, as we’ve been told by prominent Democrats. This ultimately means socialism moves ahead in its struggle against capitalism.

Okay, so what does global warming cause? Well, EVERYTHING! Let’s go right to the source; read the news articles yourself—it will take you WEEKS to read them all. If you believe these fear-mongering idiotic stories then you believe that global warming is worse than any plague that has ever beleaguered mankind, because the warmlist and the GASP! series show just how stupid the "blame game" has become with alarmist scientists and their sycophants--the media. Kidney stones, cannibalism, extinctions of all sorts, increased infections, just to name a few. The list is long and sordid. And stupid.

All of these awful things are ascribed to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Global warming is allegedly caused by increasing CO2 (still a minor greenhouse gas compared to water and methane), and anthropogenic CO2 increases have been attributed to Western-styled capitalism prevailing in the world (read “American-styled” capitalism). So, how do we cure all these ills? We hurt capitalism and all things capitalistic. Very simple solution. Harm capitalism and less CO2 is emitted; return more control to “government” to help “manage” CO2, and AGW will subside. Now you can see the truth of politics in play behind this supposed “scientific endeavor” to save the planet. So, it’s truly about politics, power, and profit (the 3 Ps), including believing scientists who need to continue their federally-funded climate research indefinitely in order demand government action. Quite a little scam they're all involved in together!

Open up epidemiological journals from 1998 (the so-called highest global mean temperature ever--which is statistically hilarious to assert) and peruse the data from then until now (a decade later). On almost all fronts, world health is IMPROVING. Mortality is not increasing; people ARE LIVING LONGER THAN EVER BEFORE. The mean lifespan for human beings is expanding, not shrinking. So how does that fact jibe with what this article is portending?

If there is warming (and there's not), it's actually IMPROVING OUR LIVES according to the epidemiological evidence. The theory espoused in this article is that the alleged period of warming (since before the "really warm" 1998)--and I do mean "ALLEGED"--has hurt human health, which is the opposite of the actual statistical evidence we have on-hand. For instance, in the United States alone, the adult mortality rate DROPPED 11 points for males and DROPPED 35 points for females from 1990 to 2006! (source: World Health Organization) That's nearly the entire decade since 1998, and as you can see HEALTH IS IMPROVING!!!

And climate history has shown that true warm periods do improve the health of populations and increase economic growth; just look at the Medieval Warm Period for your historical proof (a span of time climate alarmists would like you to forget about).

When did a real news article ever say the White House “buried” something? Is this an editorial? Oh no, wait...it’s the New York Crimes. My bad...should have known. No wonder they’re near collapse.

EPA experts detail global warming's health risks

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Government scientists detailed a rising death toll from heat waves, wildfires, disease and smog caused by global warming in an analysis the White House buried so it could avoid regulating greenhouse gases.

''Risk (to human health, society and the environment) increases with increases in both the rate and magnitude of climate change,'' scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency said. Global warming, they wrote, is ''unequivocal'' and humans are to blame.

The document suggests that extreme weather events and diseases carried by ticks and other organisms could kill more people as temperatures rise.

Allergies could worsen because climate change could produce more pollen. Smog, a leading cause of respiratory illness and lung disease, could become more severe in many parts of the country. At the same time, global warming could mean fewer illnesses and deaths due to cold.

GASP!: Salmonella-laced tomatoes caused by global warming?

Okay, be honest. How many of you saw this one coming? The recent Salmonella outbreak in tomatoes was caused by...you guessed it...global warming. And this is being perpetuated by a climate alarmist and Gore disciple—a NYT journalist (how quaint):

Thomas M. Kostigen is The New York Times bestselling coauthor of The Green Book: The Everyday Guide to Saving the Planet One Simple Step at a Time, and a veteran journalist.

He's traveled the world—from the deserts of the Middle East to the slums of India; from polluted cities in China to the jungles of Borneo; from the Arctic Circle to the Amazon; as well as many other environmental hot spots—to investigate the effect of man on the planet.

Weird how after all that traveling and investigating he didn’t correctly deduce how much of his own time he’s wasting by highlighting nothing.

Didn’t you know that nonexistent GLOBAL WARMING CAUSES EVERYTHING? Just peruse the rather incomplete list of news articles yourself and draw your own conclusions. This AGW cult is either complete and total BS or we’re all getting ready to die in a fireball. What do you REALLY think?

Salmonella happens to be one of those organisms that falls in my realm of scientific expertise, and I can ASSURE YOU THAT IT IS NOT PROPAGATED IN FOOD BY THE CLIMATE! There are thousands of food-borne illness outbreaks every year, most of which are not highlighted by the media.

Read the other GASP! series posts here, and prepare to DIE, you denying, flat-earth capitalist scum!

Rotten Tomatoes Caused by Climate Change | Discover:

The tomato scare that has sickened 170 people and is the worst food scare since the E. coli/spinach outbreak is being blamed by some environmental activists on climate change and the need for more food grown with the help of genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

EPA scientists pressured to bias their results

Still question whether politics is currently corrupting science? A usual tactic often employed by these political elements is to recognize the truth and then claim the opposite: here, the NYT is telling us that politics is corrupting science, EXCEPT that the boogeyman is portrayed as CONSERVATIVE politics that is choosing to ignore “consensus science.” (Funny, because, right now, conservative elites are jumping on the bandwagon just like liberals.)

As a non-consensus scientist, let me state this fact:

There is NO SUCH THING AS CONSENSUS IN SCIENCE! Science DOES NOT work like an L.A. street gang. (Google “Galileo” or Google “Darwin” to read about mavericks who resisted the consensus—and were RIGHT!)

This article couldn't be more poignant at pointing out how politics is currently attempting to corrupt science for its own ends; right now, the lie of manmade global warming has become the centerpiece of worldwide climate politics and environmental movements (not climate science). It's surprising to see the AP publishing this rather frank admission, when they have been guilty of propagandizing this issue themselves for years.

Basically, these EPA scientists are saying, through a survey instrument (which they were initially told not to answer), that federal politicians have been trying to coax and intimidate certain results or answers out of the scientists, so that the politicians would be free to scream “consensus science” when confronted with debate and argument over proposed U.S. and U.N. environmental policies—policies that will cost you money and will increase the power of the politicians involved. In the process, many scientists have begun to wake up and realize that they're corrupting an institution that they've been charged with protecting—the unbiased, untainted scientific search for truth.

REAL climate science is currently under attack. Radical political and environmental elements have seized an opportunity in the theory of human-induced climate change—a theory that, regardless of the way it's portrayed by Al Gore and the media, is still not proven beyond scientific doubt. On the contrary, there are many problems

GASP!: AGW will cause world wars!

Okay, so I’ve decided to create another special post series in honor of the weekly deluge of climate fear mongering articles that spew forth across the wires. The title of this series will be “GASP!” Meaning, it’s Chicken Little time again!

In our first official installment of GASP! (first unofficial installment is here and the archives will show that we’ve previously done a thorough job of discussing many apocalyptic articles), it looks like nonexistent global warming is going to send us on a path to world war.

Weird how a problem that’s not real can do that, but the media can just about urge anything into being if they bombard your brain enough each week. Problem is...nobody really believes them on this issue, especially since it hasn’t warmed in 10 years and last winter was a record breaker (and by that I mean—RECORD BREAKING COLD AND SNOW).

Steven Milloy of junkscience.com recently had some valuable insights along the GASP! line of thinking. Global warming apparently causes literally THOUSANDS of problems—deaths, extinctions, cannibalism, droughts, floods, hot, cold, bee stings, famines, tornados, hurricanes, melting ice, increased diseases, and so on; the claims are so absurd that I can’t understand why some media members haven’t started attacking this farce (well, some have and are being ignored).

Climate change 'may put world at war' - Telegraph:

Climate change could cause global conflicts as large as the two world wars but lasting for centuries unless the problem is controlled, a leading defence think tank has warned.

The Royal United Services Institute said a tenfold increase in research spending, comparable to the amount spent on the Apollo space programme, will be needed if the world is to avoid the worst effects of changing temperatures.

Animal Death-Watch: Trout

Be certain to check our previous Animal Death-Watches! By the time AGW is done with us, there'll be nothing left on Earth!!!!

As Fight for Water Heats Up, Prized Fish Suffer - New York Times:

Floods, wildfires, livestock grazing and roads only make the picture worse. Some studies project the loss of Western trout populations in some regions could be more than 60 percent, and the loss of bull trout could exceed 90 percent by 2050. Salmon will also see a decline, up to 40 percent.

End of March: more winter in the midst of "warming"

Record-breaking snow this winter season in Caribou, Maine and Canada—and it’s still coming at the dead-end of March!

I guess this empirical evidence in opposition to the evidence normally associated with global warming (e.g., a warm spell) isn’t going to be touted by the alarmists anytime soon, unless of course they use the tactic they’ve used before—everything “record-breaking” or anomalous in the weather is proof of manmade climate change, whether it’s a winter-cold/heat anomaly, a summer-heat/cold anomaly, a flood anomaly, a drought anomaly, or cyclonic storm anomaly.

We’ve always had weather anomalies; that’s why almanacs have been published—to keep a historical record of those strange weather events that HAVE ALWAYS OCCURED. However, let’s not forget what the rest of world went through this winter. The media and propagandists have tried everything they can to hold on to the pipedream of AGW; and they’re not going to give it up (even with the scientific evidence mounting out there), because there’s too much money at stake and too many reputations on the brink.

Caribou sets snowfall record:

FORT KENT, Maine — It’s official. The 2007-08 snow season in northern Maine is one for the record books. Just in time for the start of spring.

The old record of 181.1 inches of snow recorded in Caribou, set in 1955, was shattered by noontime Friday when the National Weather Service in Caribou recorded 182.5 inches of snow since the start of the season.

Tons of Snow Test a Place Where Cold Is No Stranger - New York Times:

OTTAWA — People here are divided between those longing for a few more inches of snow to set a record and others who think the 14 feet that has already landed, and mostly lingered, is more than enough.

No one needs to ask Luc Guertin his view. His front yard on a suburban street here features his personal monument to eastern Canada’s unusually prolonged, relentless and snowy winter. A snow wall, about 18 ½ feet high, 6 to 10 feet wide and 30 feet long, rises along one edge of the driveway. Standing next to a flagpole at the top, a balaclava-clad mannequin holds a snow shovel aloft in “Rocky”-style triumph. A sign, decorated with fuzzy chickens, offers outdated Easter greetings to the steady stream of sightseers who make their way to Toulouse Crescent.

Animal Death-Watch: Frog disappearance now disputed

I can barely believe I’m reading this. If the NYT is slowly turning on global warming theory, what next? Here we see that these poor, helpless frogs that we were killing off due to our evil human transgressions are actually not biting it thanks to our love of capitalism. Yes, a fungus is responsible. Not human-induced climate change as originally claimed with glee.

Link to Global Warming in Frogs’ Disappearance Is Challenged - New York Times:

In the scientific equivalent of the board game Clue, teams of biologists have been sifting spotty evidence and pointing to various culprits in the widespread vanishing of harlequin frogs.

The amphibians, of the genus Atelopus — actually toads despite their common name — once hopped in great numbers along stream banks on misty slopes from the Andes to Costa Rica. After 20 years of die-offs, they are listed as critically endangered by conservation groups and are mainly seen in zoos.

It looked as if one research team was a winner in 2006 when global warming was identified as the “trigger” in the extinctions by the authors of a much-cited paper in Nature. The researchers said they had found a clear link between unusually warm years and the vanishing of mountainside frog populations.

Absolute iceberg malarkey

For the fearmongering and alarmist portions of the article, please follow the link and read it for yourself. I've highlighted the disclaimer portions below (my emphasis in bold), whereby the author is letting loose little facts that actually detract from the fear this story is meant to instill in you (because of your greenhouse gas emissions, loser).

These collapses happen. They ARE NOT PROOF that human-emitted CO2 is causing the earth to warm. Don't let them snow you, so to speak.

Now, look here to see where ice is reforming. Note how they're still not wanting to admit that the new ice means anything.

Pressdemo.com Headlines | Western Antarctic Ice Chunk Collapses:

While icebergs naturally break away from the mainland, collapses like this are unusual but are happening more frequently in recent decades, Vaughan said. The collapse is similar to what happens to hardened glass when it is smashed with a hammer, he said.

Climate in Antarctica is complicated and more isolated from the rest of the world.

Much of the continent is not warming and some parts are even cooling, Vaughan said. However, the western peninsula, which includes the Wilkins ice shelf, juts out into the ocean and is warming. This is the part of the continent where scientists are most concern about ice-melt triggering sea level rise.

Here's Reuter's version, which is even more preposterous. Note the huge leap he makes in the last paragraph; they're watching ice break up, and that's all. They HAVE NOT IN ANY WAY TIED THIS TO GREENHOUSE GASES. A high school science student could recognize what an abysmal bit of reaching that is in terms of the scientific method. PUH-LEEEZZZZEEE!!! Again, this is empirical evidence, and empirical evidence pointing in the other direction is always ignored or sited as proof of manmade climate change (i.e., record cold and snow THIS VERY WINTER ACROSS THE WORLD). Let's also not forget this unfortunate fact--the earth has cooled FOR THE LAST 10 YEARS, while CO2 levels have reportedly continued rising; why are these "geniuses" ignoring this?

If he has to say it has been in place for "at least a few hundred years," does that mean he knows for sure? And if so, how did it form before 200 years ago. Can it form again? Scam-bos is a good name for this guy. The NYT is giving its opinion too, so I'll be watching the Wilkins ice shelf carefully, even though they admit in the editorial it will reform due to the winter that's now starting...which is funny, because it means it just broke up during a seasonally warmer period?!

Slab of Antarctic ice shelf collapses amid warming | Reuters:

"One corner of it that's exposed to the ocean is shattering in a pattern that we've seen in a few places over the past 10 or 15 years. In every case, we've eventually concluded that it's a result of climate warming," Scambos added.

Scambos said this ice shelf has been in place for at least a few hundred years, but warm air and exposure to ocean waves are causing a breakup.

"The warming that's going on in the peninsula is pretty clearly tied to greenhouse gas increases and the change that they have in the atmospheric circulation around the Antarctic," Scambos said.

No credit given to like-minded "conservatives"

For some reason (and the reason is probably hate), the media refuses to believe how supportive Bush and like-minded, moderate Republicans (like John McCain) are on "climate change" issues, because these two "conservatives" actually back government action on global warming, which is laughable and ultimately destructive.

My guess is that they see the dollar signs too. Get ready to take a punch in the stomach, America. If gas prices weren't bad enough, they're going to take more from you in taxes too.

Government to propose CO2 rules this spring | Reuters:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration, which has resisted regulating carbon dioxide emissions, this spring will propose rules that could affect everything from vehicles to power plants and oil refineries, the top U.S. environmental official told Congress on Thursday.

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Stephen Johnson said the agency will issue proposed rules "later this spring" on "the specific effects of climate change and potential regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from stationary and mobile sources."

This NYT editorial proves a point beyond what I explored above. First, as you can see...they don't believe Bush for a second, and they'll turn on McCain too if elected. Second, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the EPA to DETERMINE IF CO2 IS A PROBLEM; THEY DID NOT SAY IT WAS A PROBLEM, which they aren't qualified to do. If I were in charge of the EPA, I would let things ride too, because CO2-caused global warming is such an obvious sham and farce that it's laughable.

More Flimflam on Warming - New York Times:

On April 2, 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that the Clean Air Act clearly empowered the Environmental Protection Agency to address greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks. The ruling instructed the agency to determine whether global warming pollution endangers public health and welfare — an “endangerment finding” — and, if so, to devise emissions standards for motor vehicles. One year has passed, and despite repeated promises from President Bush and the E.P.A. administrator, Stephen Johnson, nothing has happened. And it seems increasingly likely that nothing will happen while Mr. Bush remains in office. Last week, Mr. Johnson notified Congress that he had discovered new regulatory complexities and decided against immediate action. Instead, he planned to offer an “advanced notice of proposed rule-making,” which requires a lengthy comment period and a laborious bureaucratic process that would almost certainly stretch beyond the end of Mr. Bush’s term.

NYT: Science at risk to politics?

Note the sentence in bold within the NYT story; this is the ever-present attempt by political elements to blame everything deemed wrong with this planet on the Bush administration, including the lie of global warming, which is ironic because Bush actually (stupidly) backs all of this global warming nonsense.

Since when did Al Gore qualify as a bringer of science? Is he on par with Einstein or Newton? I know he claims to tout science in his rhetoric, but his claims and presentations have proven flawed on many levels. Ladies and Gentleman...do I really need to remind you that Al Gore is a politician? Remember his years in the Senate? Remember his years as Vice President? Remember his run for the White House in 2000? How in the hell did he become elevated to the level of an exalted scholar of science on a subject in which he has ZERO EXPERIENCE (either practically or academically)--a subject with POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS in terms of its potential solutions?

I love how one side of politics in this country tries to claim the high ground; they, and only they, are following "science," which is often called "consensus" to halt debate. The implication is that this "science" is devoid of politics, which is absurd. This so-called scientifically proven "problem" has everything to do with grant funding and politics.

Don't be fooled, America! Remember, it's the NYT!

Science at Risk - New York Times:

Nobody was greatly surprised last week when Stephen Johnson, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, proposed new limits on smog-forming pollutants that were weaker than those his scientists had recommended — and more to the liking of industry. In the Bush administration, contests between politics and science are usually resolved in favor of politics.