Talk About a 'Bone Head': Brand Deniers!

This liberal lunatic starts off his piece by wanting to physically brand climate change 'deniers' and 'skeptics' the way that Nazis tatooed Jews during the Holocaust, an event in which many liberals these days no longer believe--secretly--happened, partly because they're Palestinian sympathizers who clandestinely loath Zionists, who are, ironically, very liberal in their politics. Weird, huh?

But, I digress. One is left wanting to ask (no pun intended) the question: Why does this author want to "Scarlet Letter" a group of people who question a semi-religious theory based on REAL scientific stipulations in which the alarmists simply dismiss (like this writer does)? What's the point of that? To make them targets of violence? To ostracize them? To make them targets of social discrimination and hate? This sort of thing isn't new when it comes to so-called deniers and the liberals who hate them.

You see, these climate alarmists are unhinged, left-learning people. The truly frightening part is that they're unaware that they're unhinged. This one starts off by wanting to DISCRIMINATE against a group of people based on their audacity to question the CONSENSUS. Branding human beings is a form of discrimination, but these liberals only accept discrimination when it fits their purposes, and then they attempt to hide their discrimination in new terminologies and paradigms to confuse the easily confusable among us.

On the other hand, these morons have NOT had their orthodoxy shaken one iota, even after all the countless scandals, empirical evidence, and scientific evidence to the contrary. All they have left is fear...and they continue trying to use it against the clueless masses.

Strange how the author is concerned about the planet we will leave our children and grandchildren while seemingly UNCONCERNED about the REAL, STINKING ECONOMY we're giving to them RIGHT NOW!!! And guess what? Green fad bull shit enacted for a trumped up lie WILL ONLY MAKE THE ECONOMY WORSE!!! But hey...that's what liberals wanted to cool the planet down, remember?

Surely it's time for climate-change deniers to have their opinions forcibly tattooed on their bodies.

Not necessarily on the forehead; I'm a reasonable man. Just something along their arm or across their chest so their grandchildren could say, ''Really? You were one of the ones who tried to stop the world doing something? And why exactly was that, granddad?''

On second thoughts, maybe the tattooing along the arm is a bit Nazi-creepy. So how about they are forced to buy property on low-lying islands, the sort of property that will become worthless with a few more centimetres of ocean rise, so they are bankrupted by their own bloody-mindedness? Or what about their signed agreement to stand, in the year 2040, lashed to a pole at a certain point in the shallows off Manly? If they are right and the world is cooling - ''climate change stopped in the year 1998'' is one of their more boneheaded beliefs - their mouths will be above water. If not …

***

Aside from the frothing fringe of the environmental movement, no one is secretly pleased about global warming. We'd all rather it just went away. Who needs to feel guilty about having a long shower, flying to Paris or eating T-bone steak?Who needs to be worried about their children and grandchildren and the way we are pushing the burdens of our time on to them?

[From The dangers of bone-headed beliefs]

NPR: Deniers are like 'Birthers' and 'Flat Earthers'

Liberals at NPR are still at it, but they're so smug and arrogant that they can't see that their stupid f'ing argument works in reverse. A climate change "denier" could say that BELIEVING in climate change is tantamount to believing Obama wasn't born in the U.S. or that the Earth is flat. Are you guys really this goony?

And this whole "all educated scientists accept that climate change as fact" is full of crap. First, isn't it an oxymoron to call scientists "educated"? Aren't all scientists, by definition, educated? Secondly, there are THOUSANDS--REPEAT--THOUSANDS of "educated" scientists who DO NOT BELIEVE THIS BULLSHIT. It's all politics, plain and simple. Yes, climate change that occurs on Mother Nature's calendar is real. Anthropogenic global warming IS NOT REAL. It never was real.

"We're not covering the birthers. We are not covering them. There's a whole movement within the conservative group about questioning something that Obama has said as fact, 'I was born in Hawaii, when it was the United States.' The group that questions this, some of whom are commentators...I don't know any who are Democrats, but they are primarily conservative commentators and people who follow them question if Obama is [a citizen]," she further explains.

"I think the challenge in our society now is that we are questioning facts. It's not opinions we are debating. I mean, what are the facts? Is the world flat? Is that the next question we're going to debate?" Ms. Liley wonders.

Mr. Schiller chimes in later saying, "The main point here is that it is not our responsibility to present the opinion of a non-scientist through our science desk. All educated scientists accept that climate change as fact. On the political side, however, where it is not accepted as fact, and the fact that debate is happening is news and it's really important news. And our point of view requires that we cover that debate, if for no other reason than to have Americans understand there are still people who believe that it is not fact."

[From (video) NPR officers compare deniers of climate change to birthers and flat earth believers - Washington Times]

Obama Caught in Record Winter Storm

Another record-breaking winter (the last several winters have been extremely cold, icy, snowy, miserable, and deadly). These winters have followed cool summers too, though you'll always find a news story proclaiming whatever year it is to be 'the hottest ever.' Yet, the liberal indoctrinators continue the hue and cry about climate "denialists," even after numerous climatology scandals and empirical evidence surface to demonstrate the complete, utter failure and dishonesty of manmade global warming theory and its proponents. The boondoggle has been exposed long ago.

Of course, the global warming alarmists, the faithful, and the zealots will continue to say that the record cold PROVES global warming is real. Just like record heat PROVES global warming. Record ANYTHING to them PROVES global warming. It’s all bullshit. Empirical data proves nothing except that this is one muddy picture, and that’s just the way alarmists like it. The easier it is to snow (no pun intended) the more intellectually challenged among us, the easier for them to consolidate social and political controls to reshape society in the way they deem “Earth friendly.” Capitalism is rejected and socialism is embraced in a clandestine way.

New York City and Philadelphia are just two of the communities across the mid-Atlantic that broke daily snowfall records on Wednesday. For a more elite group that includes New York City, this month is now the snowiest January in history.

With the disruptive storm over, final snow tallies exceed a foot throughout the corridor from Philadelphia to New York City.

[From AccuWeather.com - Weather News | Snowstorm Shatters New York City, Philadelphia Records]

WASHINGTON – Heavy snow and icy roads Wednesday night created hazardous condition for President Barack Obama as he returned to the White House from a trip to Wisconsin.
The wintry weather grounded Marine One, the helicopter that typically transports Obama to and from the military base where Air Force One lands. Instead, a motorcade met Obama at the base, and the line of vehicles spent an hour weaving through rush hour traffic already slowed by the storm.

[From Obama caught in Washington's wintry weather - Yahoo! News]

Al Gore Blames Reporters

This one is rich. The media, by and large, has been playing along with this fake global warming crap for years. So now The Gore is throwing the blame of Climategate and other revealing scandals on the media?!? I'm cracking up...

Much of the media has done a particularly bad job covering the climate crisis. Instead of informing the public about the facts, they have treated the issue as if the same political divisions they exuberantly cover also exist in the scientific community. They don't.

[From Al's Journal : Denialists in Denial ]

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?]

Jo Nova Responds to New Scientist's "Denier-gate" Story

Alarmists at the New Scientist, sensing their reputations are in big trouble following all the recent mounting scandals (including Climategate), have decided to respond by creating "Denier-gate" out of thin air (as if they hadn't done that years ago). However, Jo Nova does a phenomenal job of parrying the ad hominem attacks against climate skepticism by turning the tables on the global warming cultists. She keeps bringing them back to the fundamental question: Is CO2 in its current quantity within our atmosphere warming the planet? Let's talk evidence, not "debate's over," not bluster, swearing, name-calling, etc.

The answer from alarmists is: "DENIER!! How can you question the CONSENSUS? The debate's over!" Get the picture? Where is the scientific debate?!? Without the name-calling?

And spot the appearance of the mythical “HUGE body of evidence”. Can anyone at New Scientist find that one mystery paper with empirical evidence showing that carbon causes major warming? Just ONE? That’s major warming, not minor. And that’s empirical, i.e., by observation, not by simulation.

This is the paragraph where New Scientist proves it has become Non Scientist:

“If we are going to judge the truth of claims on the behavior of those making them, it seems only fair to look at the behavior of a few of those questioning the scientific consensus. There are many similar examples we did not include. We leave readers to draw their own conclusions about who to trust.”

Alarm bells are ringing from Galileo’s grave. We’re trying to figure out if the world is warming due to man-made carbon right? New Scientist’s method is not to look at the evidence, but to look at the behavior of the sceptics. Did you see the black hole of ad hominem that this once esteemed journal just stepped into? Logic and reason were reduced in a flash to a naked singularity. Follow its reasoning through the black hole, and you don’t emerge on the other side.

Did you see the black hole of ad hominem that this once esteemed journal just stepped into?

Who to trust indeed? Let’s trust people who can reason, and scientists who don’t hide their data. It doesn’t matter how “sceptics behave”; it matters whether the data can be independently analyzed and interpreted; whether the conclusions are robust. But, since the data is g-o-n-e , no one can verify anything. So in a way, it does come down to “trust”: In the new quasi-religious form of science, you have to trust those who hold the global data. Isn’t postmodern “science” an awful lot like the old religions?

[From New Scientist becomes Non Scientist « JoNova]

Jo Nova's Skeptics Handbook, Vol. I and II

First, every skeptic should read and practically memorize these volumes, so that you can deftly parry any stupid, leftist global warming attack uttered by global warming cultists (those bits of "science" that they've learned from carefully selected sources like the mainstream media, politicians, and alarmist scientists).

Next, every global warming believer should challenge their own religious orthodoxy and read these volumes. We've heard all of your alarmist arguments before (since the news media trumpets this baloney from sunup until sundown). Now it's time to monitor your own thoughts and feelings as you read these wonderful pamphlets and expose your brains to something other than the "consensus" view; in other words: REAL SCIENCE. That stuff that the U.N., NASA, EPA, NOAA, Al Gore, and the media have neglected to tell you.

Send your friends these links. Save the PDFs for self-study. Spread the word. Our U.S. news media isn't doing the job it once did; it picks advocate positions and attempts to propagandize the public. This is why we need bloggers like Joanne to expose this hokey shit for what it is.

Joanne does a great job of covering all the relevant points (much better than I ever have here in this blog); like me, she's doing all this for NOTHING, because she hates seeing real science hijacked by politics. You'll notice good coverage of ad hominem attacks (i.e., labels like "denier" used to associate climate skepticism with the evils of the Holocaust), which you can also read about in Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit.

This booklet has captured attention around the world.

Donors have paid for over 160,000 copies so far in the US, Australia, New Zealand, Sweden and soon in Germany. Volunteers have translated it into German, French, Norwegian, Finnish, Swedish, Turkish, Portuguese Danish, Japanese and Balkan. (Versions in Dutch, Spanish, and possibly Italian are on the way). Updates are placed here, along with translations, as well as places to read comments and links to the web-pages where each part of the handbook will be discussed.

[From The Skeptics Handbook « JoNova]

Who is Jo Nova? Here you go:

Joanne has 15 years of experience in explaining science as a professional speaker, TV host, radio presenter and book author.

Making sense of science.

Jo Nova is a science communicator, she’s presented science on TV, radio, on stage, in cartoons, exhibitions, reports and now in her blog which over 200,000 people visited in 2009.
After winning prizes in her science degree in molecular biology, Joanne joined the Shell Questacon Science Circus and spent five years touring Australia first as a performer, then as manager of the half million dollar exhibition with a team of twelve. As an associate lecturer at ANU Joanne helped to develop the Graduate Diploma in Science Communication in its earliest years.

[From About « JoNova]

U.N. Climate Chief Admits Flawed Prediction on Glaciers

I've already written about this, but here it really hits the fan. What I find funny (in the news over this story) is that pundits simply say that this gives fodder to the "deniers" and strengthens the "denial machine." They take this and turn it around as a negative about "deniers" and skeptics, like myself. Amazing how mounting proof of this utter hoax is turned into a negative about me and my fellow skeptics, simply because we notice the mounting evidence of the hoax and dare to bring it up.

After Climategate, years-long record cold empirical data, Copen-faken, Hansen's climate retractions, and now this admission, the cult members in the media still aren't willing to entertain the idea that they've been royally had.

The UN’s top climate change body has issued an unprecedented apology over its flawed prediction that Himalayan glaciers were likely to disappear by 2035.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said yesterday that the prediction in its landmark 2007 report was “poorly substantiated” and resulted from a lapse in standards.

[From UN climate chief admits mistake on Himalayan glaciers warning - Times Online ]

Shock: Many Scientists Disagree on Global Warming

Yes, surprise, surprise indeed. I've been saying this all along, but it's good to see someone else say the same thing. There is no unassailable agreement or consensus. That assertion...along with manmade global warming...is a MYTH! This is only a surprise if you just accept the mainstream media's assertions that debate is over.

As the Climate-gate controversy continues to grow, amid charges of hiding and manipulating data, and suppressing research by academics who challenge global warming, there is one oft-repeated defense: other independent data-sets all reach the same conclusions. "I think everybody is clear on the science. I think scientists are clear on the science ... I think that this notion that there's some debate . . . on the science is kind of silly," said President Obama's Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, when asked about the president's response to the controversy on Monday. Despite the scandal, Britain's Met, the UK’s National Weather Service, claims: "we remain completely confident in the data. The three independent data sets show a strong correlation is highlighting an increase in global temperatures."

But things are not so clear. It is not just the University of East Anglia data that is at question. There are about 450 academic peer-reviewed journal articles questioning the importance of man-made global warming. The sheer number of scientists rallying against a major intervention to stop carbon dioxide is remarkable. In a petition, more than 30,000 American scientists are urging the U.S. government to reject the Kyoto treaty. Thus, there is hardly the unanimity among scientists about global warming or mankind's role in producing it. But even for the sake of argument, assuming that there is significant man-made global warming, many academics argue that higher temperatures are actually good. Higher temperatures increase the amount of land to grow food, increase biological diversity, and improve people's health. Increased carbon dioxide also promotes plant growth.

[From FOXNews.com - Surprise, Surprise, Many Scientists Disagree On Global Warming]

Negative label 'skeptic' used by media to fight Climategate

It's interesting how the words "skeptic", "naysayer", and "denier" are still bantered around in the liberal press like curse words--negative labels, even after many of the charges of skeptics have now, finally--thanks to the hacker or whistleblower involved, been vindicated and verified.

The press DOES NOT want to admit they've been duped; they DO NOT want to admit that skeptics ARE RIGHT. Same with all the other climate accomplices involved...they know this has killed their boondoggle and, likely, their careers too!

Hence the reason for all the fiery intransigence and obstinacy coming from the global warming faithful the world over.

The malice, mischief and Machiavellian manoeuvrings revealed in the illegally hacked megabytes of emails from the University of East Anglia’s prestigious Climate Research Unit, for example, offers a useful paradigm of contemporary scientific conflict. Science may be objective; scientists emphatically are not. This episode illustrates what too many universities, professional societies, and research funders have irresponsibly allowed their scientists to become. Shame on them all.

***

Dubbed “climate-gate” by global warming sceptics, the most outrageous East Anglia email excerpts appear to suggest respected scientists misleadingly manipulated data and suppressed legitimate argument in peer-reviewed journals.

[From FT.com / Comment / Opinion - Secrecy in science is a corrosive force]

Environmentalists in Denial: Climategate

More of the same. Lefties are ignoring what can't be ignored, but that won't stop them from trying. I take issue with the chap below, however. He says that climate change deniers have made wild claims like global warming is over. Ha! I make the claim that global warming NEVER OCCURRED. He doesn't know his deniers very well.

Climate sceptics have lied, obscured and cheated for years. That's why we climate rationalists must uphold the highest standards of science.

I have seldom felt so alone. Confronted with crisis, most of the environmentalists I know have gone into denial. The emails hacked from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, they say, are a storm in a tea cup, no big deal, exaggerated out of all recognition. It is true that climate change deniers have made wild claims which the material can't possibly support (the end of global warming, the death of climate science). But it is also true that the emails are very damaging.

[From Pretending the climate email leak isn't a crisis won't make it go away | George Monbiot | Environment | guardian.co.uk ]

Dr. Ian Plimer: CO2 not causing global warming

Another scientist sticks his neck out at which the 'consensus' will saw away. Hate to tell you folks who've been brainwashed by the leftist media, but there are thousands more like him who are keeping the mouths shut to avoid wearing the scarlet letter.

So, do you believe this professor? Or Al Gore? If your answer is Al Gore...why? Are you dumb, or something?

Professor Ian Plimer, a geologist from Adelaide University, argues that a recent rise in temperature around the world is caused by solar cycles and other "extra terrestrial" forces.

He said carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, widely blamed for global warming, is a natural phenomenon caused by volcanoes erupting.

[From Climate change 'sceptic' Ian Plimer argues CO2 is not causing global warming - Telegraph]

Thulsa Doom Obama Blasts 'Naysayers'

Thulsa Doom: Steel isn't strong, boy, flesh is stronger! Look around you. There, on the rocks; a beautiful girl. Come to me, my child...

Thulsa Doom: [coaxes the girl to jump to her death]

Thulsa Doom: That is strength, boy! That is power! What is steel compared to the hand that wields it? Look at the strength in your body, the desire in your heart, I gave you this! Such a waste. Contemplate this on the tree of woe. Crucify him!

I don't care if the Lord Messiah Obama is hitting out at 'naysayers' or not. His little crap-and-tax government control BS isn't washing in the United States or the rest of the world. People believe less and less everyday in this hoax, because they have eyes, ears, skin (that can feel cold), and a THINKING BRAIN--something apparently lacking in the countless sheep willing to follow Obama over a cliff, if he so commands it.

I just drew an interesting film analogy to describe Obama's Cult of Personality. Remember the first Conan the Barbarian movie in the 80s (with Arnold However-you-spell-his-name-enegger)? James Earl Jones played a cult leader named Thulsa Doom, a mystical, snake-loving Jim-Jones type, who could command his followers to do anything--including jumping to their deaths at his very whim.

If Thulsa Doom Obama is lashing out in this way at us 'naysayers' (formerly 'deniers'), it's because he knows this mythological nonsense is, itself, doomed. To direct another film quote from the talented James Earl Jones towards Thulsa Doom Obama, "Now, your failure is complete."

US President Barack Obama on Friday hit out at naysayers he blamed for peddling "cynical" claims that global warming is a myth to derail a landmark climate change bill in Congress.

Obama warned that the closer the Senate came to passing legislation which has already cleared the House of Representatives, the more opponents would resort to underhand tactics.

[From Obama hits out at climate 'naysayers']

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.”

U.N.'s Orwellian Money and Power Grab

George H.W. Bush's "New World Order?" I don't think so. Obama and his climate minions in the U.N. will comprise the Orwellian climate framework by which we will all be controlled. The Thought Police under the thumb of Big Brother are already telling us that we can't DENY GLOBAL WARMING. To speak against it is heretical.

The lie and myth of manmade climate change provides the perfect "crisis" to take over world economy and all the nuances of your lives. Global warming requires wealth redistribution; hate to say I told you so, but...

Please wake up, Americans. Only you can stop this stupidity from succeeding.

U.N. 'Climate Change' Plan Would Likely Shift Trillions to Form New World Economy

A United Nations document on "climate change" that will be distributed to a major environmental conclave next week envisions a huge reordering of the world economy, likely involving trillions of dollars in wealth transfer, millions of job losses and gains, new taxes, industrial relocations, new tariffs and subsidies, and complicated payments for greenhouse gas abatement schemes and carbon taxes — all under the supervision of the world body.

Those and other results are blandly discussed in a discretely worded United Nations "information note" on potential consequences of the measures that industrialized countries will likely have to take to implement the Copenhagen Accord, the successor to the Kyoto Treaty, after it is negotiated and signed by December 2009. The Obama administration has said it supports the treaty process if, in the words of a U.S. State Department spokesman, it can come up with an "effective framework" for dealing with global warming.

EPA’s Got You Where They Want You

Here’s that slippery slope that the Supreme Court opened the door on. Look for Obama to be the leader to go stumbling over that slope, ala Chevy Chase. Here’s where government bureaucrats look to cement control over our economy and your lives for the foreseeable future—all in the name of saving your ass, because they deem you too dumb to know better.

This moron below says that this finding will “end the era of denial on global warming.” I’m sorry, but his little report or their insignificant governmental actions have no effect whatsoever on science and reality—global warming is not real, and it won’t suddenly become real because they say so and begin regulating farts and other gases.

This would be funny if it weren’t so damn serious. I hope America will wake up out there, before they take us over the edge of this slippery slope—the very thing they accuse us “deniers” of doing.

EPA Says Global Warming a Public Danger

Declaring that greenhouse gases are a significant threat to human health, the Environmental Protection Agency proposes regulating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases as pollutants.

WASHINGTON -- The White House is reviewing a proposed finding by the Environmental Protection Agency that global warming is a threat to public health and welfare.

Such a declaration would be the first step to regulating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act and could have broad economic and environmental ramifications. It also would likely spur action by Congress to address climate change more broadly.

The White House acknowledged Monday that the EPA had transmitted its proposed finding on global warming to the Office of Management and Budget, but provided no details. It also cautioned that the Obama administration, which sees responding to climate change a top priority, nevertheless is ready to move cautiously when it comes to actually regulating greenhouse gases, preferring to have Congress act on the matter.

The Supreme Court two years ago directed the EPA to decide whether greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels, pose a threat public health and welfare because they are warming the earth. If such a finding is made, these emissions are required to be regulated under the Clean Air Act, the court said.

***

Such a finding "will officially end the era of denial on global warming," said Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., whose Energy and Commerce subcommittee is crafting global warming legislation. He said such an endangerment finding is long overdue because of the Bush administration's refusal to address the issue.

***

"It's to their interest to say the sky is falling, but it's not. ... The truth is we've never had to sacrifice air quality to maintain a healthy economy. The EPA has discretion to do this in a reasonable way."

Happy New Year, Deniers!

You'll find it interesting to know that the Times Square revelers had to deal with a midnight temperature of a single degree Fahrenheit. Aww shucks!

Happy New Year everyone!

Skeptical scientist profile: Dr. John Brignell

I've been wanting to do this for sometime, because I've linked to Dr. Brignell's warmlist page a countless number of times.

From his CV:

Professor Emeritus (ESD)

John Brignell was educated at Stationers’ Company’s School and began his career as an apprentice at STC. He studied at Northampton Engineering College (which became The City University, London) and took the degrees of BSc(Eng) and PhD of London University. He joined the staff at Northampton and was successively Research Assistant, Research Fellow and Lecturer. He worked in a number of areas including dielectric liquids and computer aided measurement, co-authoring a book "Laboratory on-line computing" in 1975. He was for ten years Reader in Electronics at The City University and held the Chair in Industrial Instrumentation at Southampton for twenty years from 1980. He has researched and written extensively in the area of sensors and their applications, and in 1994 co-authored a book with Neil White on "Intelligent sensor systems". He had an extensive private consultancy practice for many years and has advised some of the larger international companies, as well as many small ones in the UK, on all aspects of industrial instrumentation. He pioneered the use of a number of technologies in sensing, such as thick film, and latterly turned his attention to the considerable possibilities of micro-engineering. He was elected Fellow of IOP, InstMC, IEE and RSA. In 1994 he was awarded the Callendar Silver Medal by InstMC. He served on the ISAT Committee of IoP from its inception and was the founding chairman of the first joint professional group of the IEE (J1), having served on both its predecessors (E1 and C11).

What Dr. Brignell has done is simple genius--keep a linked list of actual media stories and articles that purport to show the horrors--both past, present, and future--associated with manmade global warming and climate change.

Simply reading the mass of links is mind-boggling; in my opinion, visiting this one page is all that one needs to do to understand how stupid this global warming hoax is.

Dr. Brignell goes further with his entire Number Watch site--he's showing us how the media can misbehave when using numbers and statistics. Thank you, Dr. Brignell, for being brave enough to stick your neck out in this politically correct environment. As he says:

Number Watch - All about the scares, scams, junk, panics, and flummery cooked up by the media, politicians, bureaucrats, so-called scientists and others who try to confuse you with wrong numbers.

CNN's Myers: AGW theory is 'arrogant'

This just becomes more delicious by the day. Anyone want to take bets on how much longer this global warming BS will last, now that the cards have started to fall and all the silent disbelievers who've patiently waited in the wings have started speaking up?

It has nothing to do with whether man can alter the climate with fart gas; this entire boondoggle is partly predicated on creating political dependence--so that Obama and other like-minded alarmists (like Al Gore) can 'save us.'

What could be a great political achievement to have on one's resume? "I saved the entire Earth."

Seek shelter, Chad! Dr. Cullen and her minions will be after you now for 'coming out,' even if their global warming show on the Weather Channel was cancelled. As you can see in the last bit from the article, the Thought Police were able to bring the other dissenting CNN meteorologist--Rob Marciano--back inline.

CNN Meteorologist: Manmade Global Warming Theory 'Arrogant':

Unprecedented snow in Las Vegas has some scratching their heads – how can there be global warming with this unusual winter weather?

CNN Meteorologist Chad Myers had never bought into the notion that man can alter the climate and the Vegas snowstorm didn’t impact his opinion. Myers, an American Meteorological Society certified meteorologist, explained on CNN’s Dec. 18 “Lou Dobbs Tonight” that the whole idea is arrogant and mankind was in danger of dying from other natural events more so than global warming.

“You know, to think that we could affect weather all that much is pretty arrogant,” Myers said. “Mother Nature is so big, the world is so big, the oceans are so big – I think we’re going to die from a lack of fresh water or we’re going to die from ocean acidification before we die from global warming, for sure.”

***

Marciano also said that, “global warming does not conclusively cause stronger hurricanes like we’ve seen,” pointing out that “by the end of this century we might get about a 5 percent increase.”

His comments drew a strong response and he recanted the next day saying “the globe is getting warmer and humans are the likely the main cause of it.”

UK scientist shunned by BBC after denying "climate change"

Well, how many of examples of this have we seen? Silencing the opposition--the scientific opposition. Demand debate! And the BBC may be marching in-step with the global warming fanatics and alarmist scientists, but the British people are NOT!

Please see Dr. Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit to help deprogram yourself, you goof-wad global warming believer.

Daily Express | Express Yourself :: BBC shunned me for denying climate change:

FOR YEARS David Bellamy was one of the best known faces on TV.

A respected botanist and the author of 35 books, he had presented around 400 programmes over the years and was appreciated by audiences for his boundless enthusiasm.

Yet for more than 10 years he has been out of the limelight, shunned by bosses at the BBC where he made his name, as well as fellow scientists and environmentalists.

His crime? Bellamy says he doesn’t believe in man-made global warming.

Here he reveals why – and the price he has paid for not toeing the orthodox line on climate change.

***

I am a scientist and I have to follow the directions of science but when I see that the truth is being covered up I have to voice my opinions.

According to official data, in every year since 1998 world temperatures have been getting colder, and in 2002 Arctic ice actually increased. Why, then, do we not hear about that?

The sad fact is that since I said I didn’t believe human beings caused global warming I’ve not been allowed to make a TV programme.