‘Skeptics Meeting’ Mildly Ridiculed

What a surprise, though I AM shocked to see some positive coverage of climate realism in this article that hasn’t appeared before in others. First, they admit that almost NO media covered the event. Surprised? Probably not. Doesn’t fit the media’s agenda to admit that global warming has vast problems. Of course, the line about the absence of media coverage could be meant to convey how ‘outside’ the ‘skeptics’ are, and that’s probably more the case.

But, they did actually cover some of Dr. Spencer’s scientific data, which is something that hasn’t been done much in the mainstream media. To actually talk about his cloud data and how it’s a missing variable in the consensus view is very surprising. Even to say that ‘scientist after scientist’ pointed out the flaws in global warming theory was quite a bold move for this writer, who may harbor some secret skepticism of his own.

However, he lost me when he said that skepticism over global warming isn’t new and that it has ‘been around since the 1970s.’ On the contrary, the 1970s was the decade that major media outlets proclaimed global cooling was the problem contributing to a ‘coming ice age,’ which would bring with it nothing but horrendous consequences. (Sounds like familiar fear, huh?)

Global warming? Not so fast, skeptics say at meeting

U.S. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher was in a froth, and his audience loved it.

The California Republican was talking about global warming and could barely contain his disgust.

"Al Gore has been wrong all along!" Rohrabacher yelled into the microphone. "This is outrageous! All of this is wrong! The people who have stifled this debate have an agenda that is just frightening!"

Welcome to the third annual International Conference on Climate Change, a daylong session of speeches and scientific presentations that took place Tuesday just blocks from the U.S. Capitol. Almost no media covered the event.

***

But scientist after scientist at the conference pointed out flaws and shortcomings in the calculations of the IPCC, especially its reliance on computer models to make forecasts.

One researcher, Roy Spencer, a professor at the University of Alabama-Huntsville, noted that the IPCC did not adequately calculate how clouds play a major role in ground temperatures.

***

Skepticism over climate science is hardly new. Indeed, skepticism has always been a part of scientific discourse and has been around global warming since the 1970s, when the theory first gained credence.

Hansen: Advance socialism using AGW hoax

Moron NASA climate scare scientist Dr. Hansen shows his true colors once more. AGW is simply an assault on capitalism, plain and simple.

Climate realists around the world have contended for years that the real goal of alarmists such as Nobel Laureate Al Gore and his followers is to use the fear of man-made global warming to redistribute wealth. On Monday, one of Gore's leading scientific resources, Goddard Institute for Space Studies chief James Hansen, sent a letter to Barack and Michelle Obama specifically urging the president-elect to enact a tax on carbon emissions that would take money from higher-income Americans and distribute the proceeds to the less fortunate.

[From NASA's Hansen to Obama: Use Global Warming to Redistribute Wealth | NewsBusters.org]

Cornell University: Global warming OVERESTIMATED

The truth continues trickling out. And gets ignored. For instance, take a look at Al Gore's fear blog and Obama's recent revoicing comments; they all keep pretending as if there's absolutely no reliable, contradictory evidence in existence that detracts from the theory of manmade climate change. This issue (it's not real science at all from the advocate's perspective) has become far too political and wealth-producing to simply go away based on any scientific and/or empirical reality.

Cornell Chronicle: Black carbon affects climate predictions:

A detailed analysis of black carbon -- the residue of burned organic matter -- in computer climate models suggests that those models may be overestimating global warming predictions.

***

As a result of global warming, soils are expected to release more carbon dioxide, the major greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere, which, in turn, creates more warming. Climate models try to incorporate these increases of carbon dioxide from soils as the planet warms, but results vary greatly when realistic estimates of black carbon in soils are included in the predictions, the study found.

***

By entering realistic estimates of stocks of black carbon in soil from two Australian savannas into a computer model that calculates carbon dioxide release from soil, the researchers found that carbon dioxide emissions from soils were reduced by about 20 percent over 100 years, as compared with simulations that did not take black carbon's long shelf life into account.

The findings are significant because soils are by far the world's largest source of carbon dioxide, producing 10 times more carbon dioxide each year than all the carbon dioxide emissions from human activities combined. Small changes in how carbon emissions from soils are estimated, therefore, can have a large impact.

Revised Hurricane Season

Okay, I respect Dr. Gray for his global warming skepticism, but what he's doing here with the hurricane forecast is just revisionism--which is what the global warming phonies do (climate revisionism). When your predictions are going south, just find a way to make them right by revising what you said initially. Then you can never be wrong. In the case of global warming, you can still believe in the BS because it’s just “being masked” by cooling. LOL!

One thing is certain: The global warming alarmists will love this new forecast, because if it pans out they’ll be able to claim that this is more empirical evidence of global warming (while they ignore or denigrate contrary empirical evidence).

Contrary empirical evidence? When alarmists tell us that we can't use a mean temperature drop over one season (or even over the past ten years) to say that global warming is nonexistent, that's called dismissing empirical evidence. However, note how quickly they see a single cyclone or group of tornados (or anything else deemed anomalous) and claim that global warming was the cause? If they site empirical data, it's okay. If we realists do it, they say that we can't claim that against "the long-term average." "Long-term" in this case means the statistically non-significant period of roughly thirty years between 1970 and 2000. We've addressed how statistically stupid that is on here many times.

Colorado State Team Increases Hurricane Predictions:

The hurricane research team at Colorado State University increased the number of storms expected to form in the Atlantic Tuesday, predicting a total of 17 named storms.

The revised predictions were made based on warm sea surface temperatures and low sea level pressure over the tropical Atlantic Ocean in June and July as well as an active early season in the deep tropics, the university reported on its Web site.

Five named storms have already been observed this season, as Edouard hits Texas with high winds and a rising surf.

The team, formed by William Gray, whose predictions have not been accurate in recent years, predicted the six-month hurricane season would produce 15 storms, of which eight would be hurricanes, Reuters reported.

Scientists: Are they corruptible?

The angle of the association here to global warming is actually obvious if you think about it. I've written about it many times in this blog.

We skeptics and climate realists are told to more or less "shut up" (to shut off debate) when presenting calm, deliberate, scientific points and data that counter the pseudo-scientific basis of the global warming scam; the authority used to dismiss skeptics and turn off debate--even highly-intelligent, tenured atmospheric scientists--as outliers is based on a politically- and profit-driven "consensus."

The "consensus" is very questionable, since many once part of the consensus are abandoning their old theories, and we know of at least 31,000 scientists who are brave enough to declare AGW a huge lie.

One must ask: Can scientists have corrupt motivations, and can they internally justify their actions to the point of actually harming mankind? Dr. Ivins here apparently (and allegedly) did just that and only killed himself after it was apparent he was going to be held to account.

Now, I know alarmists will attempt to say that this is what denying, outlying, "flat-earth" scientists do, but they never think to question the authoritative basis of their own beliefs--authorities like Al Gore, Heidi Cullen, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Prince Charles, James Hansen, Bill Nye, and the list goes on. These names are seen time-and-again in the media to offset the credentials of actual climatologists who question--quite sanely--the scientific basis of the global warming cult; climatologists such as Dr. Roy Spencer (UAH and formerly with NASA), Dr. William Gray (CSU) and Dr. Richard Lindzen (MIT) make sensical, well-thought counter-arguments to the alarmism, but the usual tactic from the contrary side is to "name call" and denigrate with PC terminology designed to close off debate to the public's awareness (words like "denier," "consensus," and "IPCC").

Anthrax scientist Bruce Ivins stood to benefit from a panic - Los Angeles Times:

Bruce E. Ivins, the government biodefense scientist linked to the deadly anthrax mailings of 2001, stood to gain financially from massive federal spending in the fear-filled aftermath of those killings, the Los Angeles Times has learned.

Ivins is listed as a co-inventor on two patents for a genetically engineered anthrax vaccine, federal records show. Separately, Ivins also is listed as a co-inventor on an application to patent an additive for various biodefense vaccines.

RIP: George Carlin

You will be missed, George. Thanks for telling like it is when it comes to global warming and other environmentalist stupidity! You are a true DENIER, FLAT-EARTHER, and CLIMATE REALIST. I hereby declare George Carlin to be an honorary GLOBAL SHAM-OLOGIST!

BTW, these are the folks about whom George is talking.

(WARNING: Some adult language will be heard in the following video clip!)

George Carlin: Saving the planet is BS!

Sometimes it snows in May...even with global warming

LOL! Remember, the consensus experts predicted a "warm winter." But seeing the truth, they have now grasped onto a new tactic of deception--La Nina revisionism.

May blizzard shuts down parts of S. Dakota - UPI.com:

RAPID CITY, S.D., May 2 (UPI) -- The mayor of Rapid City, S.D., Friday pleaded with residents to stay home as a May blizzard closed down streets and highways in parts of the state.

"Please, stay off the roads until the weather clears. The wind is still gusting to 50 mph with heavy snow," said Mayor Alan Hanks. "There are very few businesses that are going to open, so take a day off and enjoy it."

Global warming taking a 10-year vacation!

On a cool May afternoon in 2008, an alarmed climate alarmist schemes:

"Wait! 100-years of global warming was more or less erased in one year! We need a way out of this debacle; our reputations are in jeopardy! I've got it! We'll just say that global warming is taking a decade hiatus...perfect! Surely the temperatures will begin migrating towards warmth again within a decade; all good sine waves eventually head back towards the positive. Then we'll be back in the climate-consensus-manipulation business."

We've seen this coming folks; I've already written about how they've been claiming that the cooling we've seen is caused by global warming OR that La Nina is driving the cooling trend and "masking" warming (they'll deny until they're blue in the face that solar weather has anything to do with our climate). But few in the media seem willing to entertain the idea that AGW is a bunch of bunk.

Everything possible is being dreamed up or manipulated to prop up the notion of human-emitted CO2 as the "boogeyman" of our climate. Their little theory is blowing away like a fart in the wind (or at least CO2 in the wind), and we've talked here about why they must salvage this baloney at all costs. Now, there is far too much money at stake, and far too many "experts" are on record as espousing this completely baseless drivel (in science and politics, REPUTATIONS ALSO EQUAL MONEY).

IN ONE YEAR (2007-08 winter season), the temperatures moderated in the reverse direction (below the questionable "long-term average" baseline THEY established); the global mean this winter was 0.7°C below the "long term" average (I use their words "long-term" loosely, because there's nothing statistically "LONG-TERM" about how they came up with their baseline).

Need I mention again that the temperature (against their baseline) has ONLY FALLEN since the proclaimed 1998 high (when El Nino was supposed to be warming the Earth), while CO2 keeps going up? This means (again if you believe their baseline-and why should you when they're wrong about everything else?) that our temperatures are now at 1930s levels-with AN EVER INCREASING CO2 SATURATION! So, the very basis of their theory is done--IT'S SHOT! Therefore, enter La Nina to save the day. We must keep the faithful believing in the faith! There MUST be a reason global warming is being "masked"! LOL! So many "consensus experts" can't be wrong.

Just remember, when Galileo published his theories about the Sun being the center of the known universe (opposing the Earth-centric theory espoused by the Roman-Catholic Church), other thinkers of the day produced intricate, complex mathematical models by which we could continue propping up the church-backed myth that the Earth was the center of the solar system, such that it would jibe with the observed movements of the heavens. Galileo's theory was perfect; it easily explained the movements of the heavenly bodies in terms of elliptical or circular orbits, but it also required one to accept the notion (now known fact) that the Sun was the center of the solar system.

This was heresy at the time! Galileo was threatened, branded with "D" for "denier" or "skeptic," if you will; he dared to poke the consensus opinion (the "smart" people) of the day with a stick. Galileo was also eventually silenced and forced to recant his "heretical" counter-theory, eventually vindicated only after his death. Sounds a lot like what's going on right now with the consensus-deemed "unassailable theory" of manmade global warming. It's utter nonsense...it's in danger of being totally exposed. Advocates and alarmists aren't happy with this recent turn of cold and snowy events, so it's time for "shields-up!"

Ocean Cooling to Briefly Halt Global Warming, Researchers Say

April 30 (Bloomberg) -- Parts of North America and Europe may cool naturally over the next decade, as shifting ocean currents temporarily blunt the global-warming effect caused by mankind, Germany's Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences said. Average temperatures in areas such as California and France may drop over the next 10 years, influenced by colder flows in the North Atlantic, said a report today by the institution based in Kiel, Germany. Temperatures worldwide may stabilize in the period.

``Natural variations over the next 10 years might be heading in the cold direction,'' Wood said. ``If you run the model long enough, eventually global warming will win.''

The world will become at least 2.5 degrees Celsius warmer by 2100, compared with the pre-industrial period, Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said in March.

Steven Milloy of junkscience.com had a terrific write-up on this very subject (he beat me to the punch :D):

Junk Science: The Great Global Warming Race

Can global warming's vested interests close the deal on greenhouse gas regulation before the public wises up to their scam? A new study indicates alarmist concern and a need to explain away the lack of actual global warming. Researchers belonging to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, reported in Nature (May 1) that after adjusting their climate model to reflect actual sea surface temperatures of the last 50 years, "global surface temperature may not increase over the next decade, as natural climate variations ... temporarily offset the projected anthropogenic warming."

You got that? IPCC researchers project no global warming over the next decade because of Mother Nature. Although the result seems stunning in that it came from IPCC scientists who have always been in the tank for manmade global warming, it's not really surprising since the notion of manmade climate change has never lived up to its billing.

The bottom line of global warming - and that is why so many are behind it - is that its many vested interests are on the verge of a financial and political bonanza, something that scientific facts and climatic realities are likely only to spoil.

So when global temperature doesn't behave as predicted, excuses and explanations must be found to prevent the almost-mature golden goose from being roasted for dinner. The spin on the Nature study provided by its authors to The New York Times is that, "We're learning that [natural] climate variability is important and can mask the effects of human-induced global change. In the end this gives more confidence in the long-term projections."

Record snowfall in AK (nearly May)

Here we are a few days away from May and we’re still seeing record snowfall and cold in the great age of “global warming,” during the “warmest winter on record.” It was around 45°F a few mornings this week in San Antonio, TX! Maybe the cold, once present at the poles, has shifted towards the equator, while the poles are now the new temperate regions (LOL)?

Anchorage digs out after record snowfall:

Anchorage continues to dig out from a snowfall that set a record for the day and the month.The National Weather Service says 17.2 inches fell at its office just south of Anchorage's international airport and 22 inches fell in northeast Anchorage on Friday and Saturday.

The heaviest snow fell between 3 and 6 p.m. Friday at a rate of almost two inches per hour.

The monthly total at the weather service office is now 29.7 inches, breaking a record from 1963 when 27.6 inches fell during April.

Greenpeace founder says no proof of global warming!!!

Please put your cup down, so that you don’t blow coffee out your nose!

The founder of Greenpeace admits that there’s no scientific evidence that human activity is causing the Earth to heat up; he’s actually advocating increased use of nuclear energy, but his reasoning is still to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (because though it’s not a problem now, it could be). Wow! One must wonder when more of the alarmist ilk will start breaking ranks when it becomes overwhelmingly obvious that Al Gore is a dufus after all.

Isn't this strange? We've got Bush, Gingrich, and Robertson backing global warming solutions, while an environmentalist is saying there's no proof of manmade climate change (even though he still backs action).

Here's the thing--I BELIEVE IN CONSERVING AND PROTECTING OUR ENVIRONMENT too, because it's appropriate to be a good steward of the Earth. However, we shouldn't scare people into doing this based on a lie; it's unethical and highly elitist to do so.

Greenpeace founder now backs nuclear power | News Updates | Idaho Statesman:

Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore says there is no proof global warming is caused by humans, but it is likely enough that the world should turn to nuclear power - a concept tied closely to the underground nuclear testing his former environmental group formed to oppose.

The chemistry of the atmosphere is changing, and there is a high-enough risk that "true believers" like Al Gore are right that world economies need to wean themselves off fossil fuels to reduce greenhouse gases, he said.

"It's like buying fire insurance," Moore said. "We all own fire insurance even though there is a low risk we are going to get into an accident."

The only viable solution is to build hundreds of nuclear power plants over the next century, Moore told the Boise Metro Chamber of Commerce on Wednesday. There isn't enough potential for wind, solar, hydroelectric, and geothermal or other renewable energy sources, 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

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.

Record-setting winter weather on Earth Day

LOL! Yep...so much for global warming, which as I’ve been trying to explain, is about as real as Santa Claus. At least the idea of Santa has some actual value. And this from Canada; remember this Canadian doom piece from the other day? Of course, others from Canada worry about global cooling.

Is it me or does it seem like every time these nutjobs try to hold a media protest event, an antithetical weather anomaly comes in to ruin it?

edmontonsun.com -Edmonton News-No heaven on Earth Day:

Wintry blast cools global warming fervour

So much for global warming. Earth Day festivities went ahead despite the blast of frigid weather yesterday.

Vendors and presenters from various eco-friendly groups, including Bullfrog Power, CO2 Reduction Edmonton and the local solar energy society, crammed into a lone tent in Hawrelak Park after a blizzard forced them to abandon their original locations.

Winter weather sets several records:

All that April snow this weekend was more than surprising -- it was also record-setting.

The flakes that fell across the Vancouver region Friday night and Saturday represent the latest snowfall ever on record.

At its peak, the storm dumped 2.5 cm of snow at the Vancouver International Airport, with 8 cm at Lynn Valley and 30 cm at Mount Seymour. Vancouver Island recorded 6.4 cm of snow at Victoria International Airport by 11 a.m. Saturday -- more than any on an April day since 1940. But the big record dump came in Nanaimo, where the city hadn't seen measurable snow on April 19 since 1947. As of 11 a.m., 24 cm covered the ground at the airport.

AGW rushes spring...NOT!

Wait! I thought global warming was rushing spring???!!!

Mid-April. Still cold. Still winter in too many places. Global warming. BAH! You know the alarmists can’t wait for summer so that they can claim human-induced warming and at least sound less hysterical and stupid. After all, it will be hot outside; it’s easier to convince automatons that there’s global warming when it’s actually warm.

Cold Temperatures Freeze Gardening Season:

MARION – All of this cold weather is freezing the start of the gardening season. Now, outdoor fans are eager for a warm-up.

"I'm 71-years-old and I've never seen spring come this late," Robert Ciesleck said.

Olympic Torch Inflicts Environmental Toll???!!!

LOL! You can’t make this stuff up! I love it. Who knew a little torch could be so harmful?

ABC News: Olympic Torch Inflicts Environmental Toll:

Angry protesters, riot police, mass demonstrations, arrests for disorderly conduct -- it hasn't exactly been smooth sailing for the Olympic-torch relay. If people are looking for another reason to be pissed at China, how about this: By the time this pyro parade is over, it will have produced about 11 million pounds of carbon emissions.

Hurricanes "above average" this year

Here we go again. We’ve had “above average” hurricane forecasts over the past two years, and they were WRONG (and apparently Al Gore is wrong too)! Nothing against Dr. Gray, who is also a fellow global warming skeptic, but this proves a point. Forecasting anything associated with weather and climate accurately beyond a few days is an exercise in futility. This means you can ignore all those global warming doom-sayers who proclaim we’ll be extinct in 10 – 100 years (depends on which prophet you listen to).

Let’s see how accurate this hurricane forecast turns out to be; statistically speaking, if they keep saying we’ll have an “above average” cyclone season then they’ll eventually be correct just based on law-of-averages. Notice the safety of the prediction: “above average but not as strong as 2005.” As long as the season isn’t as slow as last year and fails to be as strong as 2005, they’ll be deemed right. So let’s mark it; the prediction is 15 named storms, 8 hurricanes, and 4 hurricanes that are strong (>111 mph).

FOXNews.com - Forecasters Predict 'Well Above Average' Hurricane Activity for 2008 Season - Science News | Science & Technology | Technology News:

Fasten your seatbelts, it's gonna be a bumpy hurricane season.

That's the latest word from a team of Colorado State University forecasters, who predict the nation's Atlantic coast will experience a hurricane season "well above average."

"Current oceanic and atmospheric trends indicate that we will likely have an active Atlantic basin hurricane season," said William Gray, who heads the university's forecast team.

Marines raise tree on Iwo Jima?

Unlike the video showing that the New Zealand media can calmly examine the debate offered by climate realists, American media have fully invested themselves in the idea that we're killing the planet with CO2, and they're willing to torch iconic images to get their propaganda into your brain!

Time Spokesman Unapologetic for Offending Veterans; Calls Cover ‘Respectful’:

Although the cover of the April 21 Time magazine has gotten widespread complaints from the veterans and has been scrutinized by the media, a spokesman from Time offered no apology. The magazine had changed for their decision to use the iconic image of the Iwo Jima flagraising to promote global warming activism.

"TIME has the utmost respect for our nation's veterans and we well understand the power of the iconic image of the raising of the flag over Iwo Jima," Daniel Kile, associate director of public relations at Time, said in an e-mail to the Business & Media Institute (BMI). "We believe this is a respectful use of this symbol of American valor and courage and serves to highlight another great challenge facing our nation."

The magazine's cover replaced removed the flag in the famous photo and replaced it with a tree.

Australian professor calmly explains reality

So that kook-aid drinkers can understand, please play the video below:

Global Warming 101: Professor Carter Explains Climate Realism

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.

Chief climate dufus Gore: Deniers are flat earthers

Can't this twerp come up with an original thought? I have already listed examples where other alarmists have called we skeptics "flat earthers." This proves what a dunderhead this guy really is--he can't say anything unless he gets it from someone else. Then he says it like he invented it--just like he claimed to create the internet.

When one can't debate based on science, one must resort to name calling. So, go ahead Al...call me a name. Now, say something about this or this or this. I could easily go on, since that's the entire point of this blog--keep a record of what baloney all this climate nonsense turns out to be. I already know it's baloney, but apparently there are quite a few of you sheep out there who have been programmed already by the media and other elements anxious to make a profit.

Here's a new name to call us, alarmists. Call us REALISTS. Because to believe in global warming after it's already proven an obvious fraud is to be a kool-aid-drinking crack smoker. But I understand the testiness. We just had a record-setting winter the world over; you Chicken Littles are in a panic, because you've been proclaiming our doom for years, and we're now seeing that there has been no warming since 1998, while CO2 continues rising. The myth is falling apart.

And remember...names like this can work both ways. It may be you alarmists who are the "flat earthers" for believing in global warming. I assert that this untenable position is the faulty one and has already been proven so.

Gore's Message To Climate Change Skeptics, Tells 60 Minutes That Doubting Global Warming Is Man-Made Is Akin To Believing Earth Is Flat - CBS News:

(CBS) Self-avowed "P.R. agent for the planet" Al Gore says those who still doubt that global warming is caused by man - among them, Vice President Dick Cheney - are acting like the fringe groups who think the 1969 moon landing never really happened, or who once believed the world is flat.