Global Warming (Climate Change) Now 'Global Weirding'

As I predicted long ago, the new tactic--now that climate predictions continue to FAIL--will be to call anything that happens 'global warming.' In other words, the warming climate is causing all unusual weather events. But I have news for you psychos out there; we have hundreds of years of written accounts of 'unusual' weather and climate events, dating back to the global floods of ancient times (not to mention the Medieval Warm Period...a time that alarmists don't want you to bring up).

This bullshit is such a complete and utter farce. It's a failed government power grab. Interesting that Europeans seem to be awakening from their stupor far faster than we are.

So then the mantra became “climate change.” The liberals formerly known as “warmists” began predicting that we would experience fundamental changes in our weather. Scientists at the University of East Anglia — the Harvard of climate change — said snow would be “a very rare and exciting event.” Children wouldn’t know what it was.

As for summers, in the wake of Katrina “change-ist” groups like realclimate.org predicted “global warming will make hurricanes even worse in the future.”

What happened? Nothing. Europe has had three winters in a row of snow and cold temperatures. In the Atlantic, “there has been a dramatic decrease in the number of hurricanes in the last five years,” according to meteorologist Art Horn. “The total energy in all hurricanes around the world has plunged since 1993. The opposite of what was predicted.”

So the new fall back is “global weirding.” The site thedailygreen.com has a “Weird Weather Watch” page. The uber-liberal Huffington Post ran a story in August headlined “Global Weirding”: Extreme Climate Events Dominate The Summer.”

[From Reliable forecast under the weather - BostonHerald.com]

History Channel's Number One Way We Go Extinct

Can you guess what it was? Yes, that's right...global warming. LOL! How can something so utterly discredited still be reeling its ugly head? Well, follow the threads. History Channel--a once great channel that USED to ACTUALLY have programming of historical significance--is owned by Arts and Entertainment Networks (A&E, Bio, LMN, etc.). You'll get the same alarmism on other channels run by liberals, including NATGEO (National Geographic) and Discovery Channel (interesting that a enviro-psycho with a gun didn't think Discovery was doing enough in the propaganda department recently).

[From History TV Shows & Schedule]

Last Days on Earth: Could the human race become suddenly extinct? We count down seven ways in which the world as we know it could meet an abrupt and untimely end, from a mammoth asteroid strike to the eruption of a super volcano.

GASP!: Sharks are gonna eat us!

In our new installment in the GASP! series, we cover an article that points out how you should be afraid of all the harm you're causing by breathing, pooting, and burning fossil fuels--you awful person! As a result, if you step out into the beautiful waters surrounding our great country, you might just be eaten by a globally-warmed, vengeful shark.

There have been four fatal attacks this year so far, while there was only one last year; sounds like an upsurge that can only be explained by manmade global warming, since AGW causes everything else. There's currently no warming and won't be for 10 more years. LOL! If the cooling waters of La Nina are masking warming then why would sharks be driven to be more active and attack so early in the year, especially since winter appears still very active? The theory is that warmer waters drive shark attacks and hurricanes, but we're currently cooler than the baseline average; some are currently claiming that our cool winter this year was caused by an unexpected La Nina, but that still doesn't jibe with sharks attacking people because the water's warm--it's cool! La Nina! Remember?!

A little history review will show you that shark attack spikes are NOT UNPRECEDENTED. Darn! Those pesky climate alarmists are foiled again by truth and history.

Surge in fatal shark attacks blamed on global warming | Environment | The Observer:

'The one thing that's affecting shark attacks more than anything else is human activity,' said Dr George Burgess of Florida University, a shark expert who maintains the database. 'As the population continues to rise, so does the number of people in the water for recreation. And as long as we have an increase in human hours in the water, we will have an increase in shark bites.'

Some experts suggest that an abundance of seals has attracted high numbers of sharks, while others believe that overfishing has hit their food chain. 'I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but it's a convenient excuse,' Burgess said. Another contributory factor to the location of shark attacks could be global warming and rising sea temperatures. 'You'll find that some species will begin to appear in places they didn't in the past with some regularity,' he said.

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

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.

Carbon profiteering, scientific intimidation, and U.S. history

Why is a flawed theory (that has been so thoroughly debunked that it's not funny) still so widely accepted and espoused by media and politicians alike? Follow the dollars, my friend. Dollars for research grants and dollars for carbon credits (including credits from Gore's own company--that he buys from himself) and other emerging climate technologies (such as biofuels) spell big money for everyone except you common sheep out there.
2007 EU carbon data due out April 1| Environment | Reuters:

Under the EU's carbon market, energy-intensive industry has to submit an emissions permit called an EU Allowance (EUA) for every ton of carbon dioxide emissions.

Emissions data is therefore closely watched because it shows the level of demand for such permits and so the appropriate carbon price.

Check out Dr. Richard Lindzen's (an atmospheric scientist at MIT and a DENIER) excellent piece on the subject. He's another one of those "outlier" scientists as labeled by Al Gore. Do you believe this MIT climate scientist knows more about the climate science than Al Gore? I hope so...

The Wall Street Journal Online - Extra | Climate of Fear - Global-warming alarmists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence:

The answer has much to do with misunderstanding the science of climate, plus a willingness to debase climate science into a triangle of alarmism. Ambiguous scientific statements about climate are hyped by those with a vested interest in alarm, thus raising the political stakes for policy makers who provide funds for more science research to feed more alarm to increase the political stakes. After all, who puts money into science--whether for AIDS, or space, or climate--where there is nothing really alarming? Indeed, the success of climate alarmism can be counted in the increased federal spending on climate research from a few hundred million dollars pre-1990 to $1.7 billion today. It can also be seen in heightened spending on solar, wind, hydrogen, ethanol and clean coal technologies, as well as on other energy-investment decisions.

More on profiteering below with respect to climate change and Guyana. It's easy to see why it's not going to go away easily, even with all the mounting scientific evidence and the opinions of scientists (some who were once on the IPCC); there's too much money at stake--research money for scientists and profit for politicians. When ethical scientists speak up, they're essentially shoved down by the all-powerful "consensus" because the ethical scientists are "taking food off the table."

Remember, our Founding Fathers did this sort of thing, too; they went to war to "free the colonists from evil British oppression," but they were, in reality, protecting their own personal and business interests. Profiteering under noble guises is not a new thing to America; it's almost part of America! History does repeat itself. The Boston "Massacre" and resulting outrage from the inflamed, biased media coverage in the form of Paul Revere's engraving was the major impetus behind stirring popular dissent and starting the Revolutionary War! Don't think the media doesn't still do these things! Don't think our leaders, regardless of party, are no longer elites and out for their own best interests! Your interests only become their interests when popular opinion threatens their hold on power (and thus wealth).

Investor buys Guyana forest's rain and carbon | Environment | Reuters:

LONDON (Reuters) - The British-based investment firm Canopy Capital said on Thursday it had bought a share in the rain-making potential of a chunk of Guyanan rainforest bigger than the Mediterranean island of Mallorca.

The move is a novel twist in an investor frenzy to make money from the prospect of climate change that has also seen businesses snap up permits to emit greenhouse gases and invest in low carbon-emitting technologies.

Need more proof? Here's where two countries are trying to find cheaper "wiggle room" with regard to carbon credits, but you can bet Al Gore and company aren't going to stand by and let that happen. Carbon credits that are cheap would cut into their profits!

Spain, Ireland join cheap carbon credit chase | Environment | Reuters:

That cheaper, alternative route has drawn criticism not only from environmentalists but also from carbon traders who want to make money from selling carbon offsets to countries struggling to meet their Kyoto caps.

Don't be fooled by the article below. Oil firms already wanted to explore these regions and have the technology to do so; they have been prevented by the environmentalist lobby from carrying through, however. The media wants you to fear both the "melting ice" and those evil oil companies who would "compound" the problem.

Ice shrink in Arctic sea may attract oil firms | Environment | Reuters:

Oil and gas companies are pushing north into the Barents Sea, seeking new reserves. Scientists say climate change may make the region less inhospitable and prices around $100 a barrel can justify exploration despite high costs.