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.

Deep freeze in upper midwest (with warmth disclaimer)

Of course, Chicagoans are preparing to freeze their tootsies off, and the media must begrudgingly report this fact. But not without placing a disclaimer in the second paragraph about recent warmth.

cbs2chicago.com - B-r-r utal: Upper Midwest Locked In Deep Freeze:

The forecast high for the day in Chicago is a mere 7 degrees, with an overnight low of 3 below zero. But with northwest winds at 20 to 25 mph, the wind chills will make it feel as if it were 20 to 25 below.

Thus far this January, people across the Chicago area have been treated to a warm spell with one day where the mercury reached a shocking 65 degrees. But with the temperatures plummeting beginning last night, Chicagoans have been preparing.

What we have here is an attempt to discredit cold empirical evidence (denoting really cold January temperatures that are normal for Chicago) using warm empirical evidence (that helps denote climate change). [In case you didn't notice the subtle shift, climate change has replaced global warming as the en vogue catch-phrase, which is meant to allow the Enviro-Zealots a way out when the temps cool off, which they know is inevitable.]

So, which empirical evidence is right? The one that supports the religion of global warming/climate change (with Al Gore as messiah), or the one that says it freakin' cold outside--even for January!

Very sly and sneaky...and stupid. People aren't buying into the hysteria, media, no matter how many corkscrew neon light bulbs you turn on to reduce your carbon footprint.

Meanwhile at the National Weather Service, Green Bay is warned of the coming wind chill problems for the weekend:

URGENT - WINTER WEATHER MESSAGE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE GREEN BAY WI 244 PM CST SAT JAN 19 2008

...BITTERLY COLD WIND CHILLS EXPECTED THROUGH NOON SUNDAY...

.WIND CHILLS ARE EXPECTED TO AVERAGE AROUND 35 BELOW ZERO THROUGH
SUNDAY MORNING.

Yep, the globe sure is "warming." Please...please...someone bring back the damn global warming!

NASA falls back on "melting ice"

Given Dr. Hansen's recent blaring mathematical errors, where he incorrectly proclaimed Oct 2008 as the warmest October ever, NASA has decided to fall back on a common empirical theme used by global warming alarmists when there are times of trouble -- THE ICE IS MELTING, THE ICE IS MELTING! Need more fear? Read the GASP! series and the warmlist.

Of course, they don't spend a lot of time (they actually avoid) talking about the ice that reforms EVERY SINGLE WINTER. When alarmist scientists have discussed ice that reforms annually in the press, they predictably downplay the "new ice" in attempts to strengthen the level of alarm in the minds and hearts of the public. In other words: "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!" These devious powers want us all to be the Cowardly Lion. Al Gore is the Wizard...Dr. Cullen is the Wicked Witch, and Dr. Hansen is one of her evil monkeys.

As expected, empirical evidence (e.g., heat waves, storms, hurricanes, etc.) that seems to support global warming as a theory is always played up in the endorsable media, while antithetical empirical evidence (that which calls global warming into question--record cold, winter storms, ice, etc.) is covered up or turned on its head as proof of AGW (this is one reason alarmists switched to the term "climate change" as opposed to "global warming"--that way man can be blamed for warming or cooling). This is why alarmists say that the cooling of recent years is a result of warming or that warming is being "masked" by cooling. See how ridiculous this is? The sun cools (fewer sunspots)? They ignore that scientific observation as a cause for our cooling, because it doesn't fit the CO2 template.

There's alarm right now in the camps of alarmists; the trend over the past few years (both scientific and empirical) has not been good for the theory of manmade global warming. For one thing...it's REALLY FRICKIN' COLD OUTSIDE, so alarmists proclaim that the cold is being caused by warming or that it's only masking the warming. Antithetical science is simply ignored or countered with supporting pseudo-science. Skeptical scientists (and there are MANY...not a few as portrayed in the media) who question the theory or ask to debate are lambasted (more proof that this crap IS NOT REAL).

The other problem for alarmists is that the economy has taken a dive, so the public is saying 'hell no!' to the expense of "solving" a nonexistent problem. Ironically, top liberals consistently said that we needed a slower economy to fight AGW; well, they got their wish! They may wish they had never wished for that, because a slower economy means fewer will support political action to address environmental issues, especially those that are questionable.

People are beginning to smell a rat, and the alarmists know it. The alarmists have all sorts of reasons for propping up this madness, so they'll keep it up...even if a new ice age takes hold. After all, any new ice age will just be proof of global warming. LOL!

FOXNews.com - NASA: 2 Trillion Tons of Ice Have Melted Since 2003:

WASHINGTON — More than 2 trillion tons of land ice in Greenland, Antarctica and Alaska have melted since 2003, according to new NASA satellite data that show the latest signs of what scientists say is global warming.

More than half of the loss of landlocked ice in the past five years has occurred in Greenland, based on measurements of ice weight by NASA's GRACE satellite, said NASA geophysicist Scott Luthcke. The water melting from Greenland in the past five years would fill up about 11 Chesapeake Bays, he said, and the Greenland melt seems to be accelerating.

Hansen: Put oil execs on trial?!

Before I go any further, let me just say that I AM IN NO WAY AFFILIATED WITH ANY OIL INTERESTS. The only way I’m affiliated with “big oil” is as a consumer—and a pissed off one, but that’s only because of the outrageous gas prices that everyone else is suffering through.

The punk-ass, so-called “Doctor” James Hansen of NASA is at it again. Since he tries to play it off like he’s an unassailable government representative who simply cares about the common folk, please read through my previous post on this “illustrious giant of climate science.” Notice a common thread present in the challenges of all these fear-mongering “scientists.” They all want to shut down dissent and debate, and the reasoning for turning off debate is that “there’s no time left—we have to act now!” And they’re not at all interested in the increasing federal grants to study climate change—no! Why would they care about that?

They also consistently accuse every dissenter or denier (including credentialed, respected scientists) of being “in bed with big oil,” which is just laughable. There are literally THOUSANDS of scientists out there right now who think that all this manmade climate change junk is the stupidest crap they’ve ever heard, but they’re keeping quiet because of creeps like Hansen, Gore, and Cullen. Similar to Hansen, Heidi Cullen of the Weather Channel (whose founder—John Coleman—feels global warming is utter baloney and a sham) says that all non-believing meteorologists should lose their professional credentials. Here we see that Hansen wants non-believers put on trial. Other liberal believers simply want conservative climate realists to die. Scientists who speak up are being ignored or ridiculed. It’s Galileo all over again.

Look people, even the founder of Greenpeace believes THERE IS NO MANMADE WARMING!!!

But these alarmo-fascists still believe in their pipe-dream, even though the temperatures have not risen along with CO2 levels in 10-years (if you accept their temperature baseline), and that’s with ever-increasing CO2 levels. Also, CO2 (even in its present amounts) is a minor greenhouse gas compared to the volume of water and methane in our atmosphere. The bottom line is that manmade global warming is a farce; it is a lie. This past record-setting cold, snowy, icy winter is empirical evidence that mirrors the scientific data out there; I can site empirical evidence, because the alarmists certainly do whenever there’s a summer heat wave, drought, flood, hurricane, tornado, or other natural disaster. Their partners in the media also quickly highlight ridiculous numbers of things attributed to global warming, and those incalculable stories alone are probably responsible for making a mockery of their climate cause. In short, me thinks they protest too much!

I love how they’re now saying that 10-years of cooling (from La Nina) will mask global warming! LOL! These guys all know the myth is drying up; people aren’t buying it, especially in the U.K. Alarmists and climate profiteers are panicking because we aren’t all running around like Chicken Little.

Yes, this is supposedly America—the land of freedom (including freedom of speech); you can only speak freely, however, if you agree to speak their propaganda. Otherwise, you must hush your mouth and march in lock-step, you pathetic sheep.

Put oil firm chiefs on trial, says leading climate change scientist | Guardian:

James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.

He is also considering personally targeting members of Congress who have a poor track record on climate change in the coming November elections. He will campaign to have several of them unseated. Hansen's speech to Congress on June 23 1988 is seen as a seminal moment in bringing the threat of global warming to the public's attention. At a time when most scientists were still hesitant to speak out, he said the evidence of the greenhouse gas effect was 99% certain, adding "it is time to stop waffling".

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]

More Irony: New Obama Climate Service Postponed by Blizzard

Poetic justice continues to pile-on the alarmists and global warming believers out there, even amidst all the empirical data and fraud evidence to the contrary. Thulsa Doom Obama, refusing to acknowledge recent record-setting cold or climate scandal after climate scandal, is sticking to the party-line: Man’s use of fossil fuels (capitalism) is heating up the world. What would you expect from a Marxist like Obama and his Comrades?

Of course, Mother Nature and TRUTH get the last words. Sorry, TD Obama.

So, this schmuck alarmist in the article is going to teach us ‘children’ the difference between climate and weather. Sorry, but the weather reflects the climate. After all, their version of climate equals warmer temperatures that drive empirical changes in weather. But when the empirical part doesn’t fit their template (like all these blizzards), they poo-poo it away and lecture us for not knowing the difference between climate and weather. Or they’ll claim that warming causes the observed cooling; or they’ll claim that La Nina is masking warming.

This is what I call climate revisionism. If there’s a heat wave, hurricane, or if a chunk of ice melts somewhere in the Antarctic, however (even when it doesn’t really happen as recent scandals have shown), they’re quick to jump up and say, “See, see? Global warming!!!” The opposite empirical evidence results in all sorts of hysterical contortions on the part of alarmists, like this lecture on ‘climate’ versus ‘weather.’

As D.C. continued to dig out from Snowmageddon and is keeping an eye on another storm system, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration was busy making a climate change announcement.

NOAA, part of the Department of Commerce, is going to be providing information to individuals and decision-makers through a new NOAA Climate Service office. “More and more, Americans are witnessing the impacts of climate change in their own backyards, including sea-level rise, longer growing seasons, changes in river flows, increases in heavy downpours, earlier snowmelt and extended ice-free seasons in our waters. People are searching for relevant and timely information about these changes to inform decision-making about virtually all aspects of their lives,” the release says.

Earlier snowmelt? That would be nice.

Turns out the release was planned prepared ahead of the snowstorm, which shut federal agencies today and forced its senders to hold a press conference by telephone instead of at the National Press Club.

[From NOAA: Blizzard Rearranges Climate Change Announcement - Washington Wire - WSJ]

Obama: Climate Damage Currently Happening

Bull-f’ing-shiza! What about the current June snow storms? Don’t believe ANY of this garbage! Just remember that it’s politically-motivated. See how the White House climate status report “contains NO NEW RESEARCH.” This means that the assessment is based on someone’s belief or empirical evidence, and all empirical evidence I’ve seen lately seems to point to global COOLING.

Just remember why they’ve got to convince everyone to be afraid; they need support to take action, which means you WILL PAY…in one way or another.

U.S.: Climate Change Damage Happening Now

Harmful effects from global warming are already here and worsening, warns the first climate report from Barack Obama's presidency in the strongest language on climate change ever to come out of the White House.

Global warming has already caused more heavy downpours, the rise of temperatures and sea levels, rapidly retreating glaciers and altered river flows, according to the document released Tuesday by the White House science adviser and other top officials.

"There are in some cases already serious consequences," report co-author Anthony Janetos of the University of Maryland told The Associated Press. "This is not a theoretical thing that will happen 50 years from now. Things are happening now."

The White House document -- a climate status report required periodically by Congress -- contains no new research.

Drought...a new concept?

Okay, let's just take Reuters at its word. Let's assume that experts--who are never named (we'll just believe them when they say it)--are correct that the empirical evidence of drought (drought anywhere...but here in Cyprus) is proof of MANMADE climate change.

Where was the talk of a manmade climate disasters when we've had countless droughts and resulting famines throughout history? Droughts are not new! Remember the Dust Bowl of the Great Depression? Those areas are no longer in a drought, but shouldn't they be if manmade climate change is screwing up the earth?

What do the same experts say about this past horrid winter that we've had almost worldwide, including Greece (located right next to Cyprus) that had record snowfall? That's empirical evidence too, but it's either ignored or, insanely, sited as proof of global warming! Warming and cooling are proof of warming?

And the way I'm reading the literature, Cyprus has a climate that seems capable of displaying drought conditions!

The climate is temperate and Mediterranean with dry summers and variably rainy winters. Summer temperatures range from warm at higher elevations in the Tröodos mountains to hot in the lowlands. Winter temperatures are mild at lower elevations, where snow rarely occurs, but are significantly colder in the mountains with sufficient snow for seasonal ski facilities. Dust storms are frequent throughout the year.

Drought-hit Cyprus starts emergency water rations | Reuters:

Official accounts suggest rainfall in Cyprus has fallen by about 20 percent over the past 35 years, a decline experts attribute to climate change.

North Dakota's June Snowfall

More empirical evidence for you to stuff in your pipe and smoke. Global warming is a non-event. The alarmists will site everything in the world that points, as they see it, to global warming—just check out the warmlist for hundreds of examples. But when contrary empirical evidence (of which there is a lot) points away from global warming as reality, the advocate media (like NBC) will never report on it.

It’s up to you thinking people out there to wake up from the trance under which they’ve placed you.

Snow falls in western ND, in June

Bismarck, N.D. (AP) Snow has fallen in Dickinson in June, the first time in nearly 60 years the city has seen snow past May.

GASP!: Climate 'Going Over Edge'

From the same reliable news rag, Newsweek, that brought you the “The Cooling World” in the 1970s, we get a new fear piece that--sticking with the popular media’s ‘we-refuse-to-question’ template—continues the media’s practice of proclaiming ‘global warming’ as a foregone conclusion.

Has this writer experienced the same winter that we all have? True our record-setting winter is empirical evidence, but alarmists never fail to spout empirical evidence (i.e., hurricanes, fires, floods, etc.) when it backs up their own propaganda. They also ignore the hard data that points away from manmade global warming, and they DEFINITELY ignore scientists that state the truth: AGW resides in Malarkey City.

It has become as politically incorrect to question manmade climate change as it has to be a member of the KKK.

Here’s something I absolutely promise you. Nothing is going over the edge, except for maybe our economy, which would go further over the edge if we enact any politically driven attempt to modify the climate. But hey...remember that liberals like Bill Clinton, Prince Charles, and Obama's climate czar stated that we NEEDED to shrink our economy to fight global warming; so what do they say today? Why isn't the media asking them both this tough question: Mr. Clinton and Ms. Browner, are you satisfied now that the economy is in recession?

It has become as politically incorrect to question manmade climate change as it has to be a member of the KKK. And it’s unfortunate, because the two—climate denials and racial bigotry—can’t be equated as equally reprehensible. They’re not even close.

Get more fear by reading the GASP! series and the warmlist.

Will Climate Go Over The Edge?

There is something compelling, in a ghoulish sort of way, about the notion that earth's climate may be headed toward a tipping point. The idea gained broad currency in 2007, when a panel of scientists, including Harvard environmental expert John Holdren—now the White House science adviser—warned that the planet is approaching a threshold beyond which damage to the environment would be irreversible. As policymakers work toward a climate treaty in Copenhagen in December that will include new limits on emissions, the question in the back of everyone's mind is whether an agreement can halt the warming trend, or at least stave off the worst consequences. Or is it already too late? A definitive answer isn't forthcoming, but the signs in recent months have been gloomy.

Absolute iceberg malarkey

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

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

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

Pressdemo.com Headlines | Western Antarctic Ice Chunk Collapses:

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

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

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

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

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

Slab of Antarctic ice shelf collapses amid warming | Reuters:

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

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

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

Sleeping Sun Baffles Dimwits

The quiet sun may be baffling astronomers, but the climate change believers (ahem…fear mongers) among them haven’t been baffled into changing their silly stances on the climate. Yes, the sun has cooled, as has the solar system. And so has our climate. For the past 11 years the global mean temperature on Earth has cooled gradually, mirroring the quiescence of solar energy. If you believe the baseline established by climate psychos (and that 1998 was our ‘hottest’ year), this hard data can’t be ignored, though everyone seems to be doing just that.

Empirical evidence since Hurricane Katrina has accumulated to the point of generating no end of revisionist statements from alarmist camps—from La Nina’s “masking” of warming to this article’s assertion: The sun’s cooling is also masking Earth’s warming, not contributing to the observed cooling. Hurricanes have simply dropped off the radar in comparison to the predictions blasted by Gore and others like him. We’ve had two record winters in a row, with snow storms continuing into this April. The ice melts heralded as ‘horrible’ in the Arctic and Antarctic were exposed as the fear tactics that they are.

This is quite silly to behold, but I guess few seem willing to think their way out of this paper bag into which the media and their manipulators have scooped them. Too many goofy looking, ugly, expensive light bulbs need to be sold. Obama’s dumb, expensive, intrusive climate plans need to be enacted. Scientific and political reputations must be salvaged. Many doubting scientists continue to keep quiet rather than risk evisceration by their colleagues. Too much rests on the continuation of this lie for anyone to admit they are wrong.

I’m sorry to tell this chap what he’s ignoring—the Earth’s global temperature “rise” has already reversed (for more than a decade), and the empirical evidence (and scientific data) continues trumpeting a tune that he prefers not to hear: There is NO GLOBAL WARMING AS A RESULT OF CO2. There never was and there never will be.

'Quiet Sun' baffling astronomers

Last year, it was expected that it would have been hotting up after a quiet spell. But instead it hit a 50-year year low in solar wind pressure, a 55-year low in radio emissions, and a 100-year low in sunspot activity.

According to Prof Louise Hara of University College London, it is unclear why this is happening or when the Sun is likely to become more active again.

***

"Others are suggesting we'll be going into another minimum period - this is a big scientific debate at the moment."

***

In the mid-17th Century, a quiet spell - known as the Maunder Minimum - lasted 70 years, and led to a "mini ice-age".

This has resulted in some people suggesting that a similar cooling might offset the impact of climate change.

***

He added that the current slight dimming of the Sun is not going to reverse the rise in global temperatures caused by the burning of fossil fuels.

"What we are seeing is consistent with a global temperature rise, not that the Sun is coming to our aid."

Video: American Politicians Said Lack of Snow Meant Warming

Empirical evidence. We've just been told that the recent record blizzards are not proof that global warming isn't real; on the contrary, we're now told that this record cold weather is PROOF of global warming. Really? Climate revisionism at its best.

Here, liberal American politicians (in the recent past) proclaimed LACK OF SNOW as proof of manmade global warming. So, which is it? It's ridiculous that contrary empirical evidence (i.e., lack of snow and too much snow) is used to validate global warming; it's fairly easy to see the frantic 'grasping at straws' that's now happening, due to recent cold weather and scandals. You can't have it both ways (though you're now trying), liberals.

My 9-year-old daughter is smart enough to see the hypocrisy and BS level of this obvious contradiction.

Ice between Canada and Greenland highest in 15 years!

I can't stop laughing. It's really hilarious. This is in the news (coming from the source) but it's being summarily IGNORED. What's the matter AGW-psychos? Has your scam been exposed? Kudos to Newsbusters for the heads-up!

Kuldebreak i Vestgrønland:

The ice between Canada and southwestern Greenland has reached its highest level in 15 years.

Minus 30 degrees Celsius. That's how cold it's been in large parts of western Greenland where the population has been bundling up in hats and scarves. At the same time, Denmark's Meteorological Institute states that the ice between Canada and southwest Greenland right now has reached its greatest extent in 15 years.

You're asking, where's the AGW disclaimer? Hold on to your seats...I just fell off of mine laughing:

But how do these new reports fit in with continual reports that ice in the Arctic Ocean has been melting at a record rate due to increasing temperatures? And isn't global warming at the top of the political agenda these years?

But wait, I thought global warming had NOTHING TO DO WITH POLITICS? I THOUGHT IT WAS ALL SCIENCE!

[T]here is not anything inherently contradictory that extreme cold is replaced by higher temperatures than average. Or that melting sea ice occasionally is replaced by expanding ice sheets.

'Weather is a phenomenon which changes from year to year and right now the atmosphere has changed so we have cold weather. That will certainly mean that melting ice in the North Pole will be less this year, but next year the situation can look completely different,' according to Henriksen.

To sum things up, global warming hasn't been called off. In the meanwhile, western Greenlanders will have to accept that the cold weather continues for some time.

You have to understand that they can't let this go; too many professional reputations hang in the balance and too many gloom-and-doom news stories have been written to profess our coming peril. Notice when it's really cold, excessively snowy, or demonstrating some other empirical evidence that is antithetical to AGW, "the experts" say we're only in a temporary hiatus from global warming--it will PROBABLY be back next year. Meanwhile, if we have a severe tornado outbreak or a really bad hurricane, they IMMEDIATELY say it's proof of manmade climate change. Surely, the simplest of idiots can see through this hypocrisy and chicanery. If empirical evidence can mean one thing, surely the opposite of it can mean another!

Empirical Evidence: Record Early Snowfall in Houston, TX

More bad news for you alarmists. And before you dismiss this...remember that you alarmist psychos are always quick to use empirical evidence that you believe backs up your really flawed theory of manmade climate change (tornados, hurricanes, storms, heat waves, etc.).

Houston's rare snowfall led to slippery conditions overnight that forced road closures and contributed to several serious accidents, including one that killed a driver and another that injured a Houston police officer.

[From Houston drivers confront icy, dangerous roads | | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle]

Global Weirding? They Can't Back That Up

At first we were told that anthropogenic global warming was a result of man's CO2 emissions and that we'd see less and less snow and ice. Ice would melt and raise the sea levels, flooding cities. Then, when it was obvious that empirical data showed we were actually cooling more than warming, they said that dynamic weather variability was the result of manmade 'climate change.' Another group said that global warming was merely being 'masked' by the La Nina effect; that was why we were experiencing cooler summers and winters. Dynamic weather referred to anything deemed 'unusual,' such that a blizzard or freezing temperatures would give the same support to the renamed 'climate change' as a would a heat wave or tornado outbreak. I call these sudden grasps at explaining non-correlating empirical data CLIMATE REVISIONISM.

Somewhere in the midst of the mounting empirical evidence to the contrary, climate scandal upon climate scandal erupted. Interested powers tried to put the genie back in the bottle, but it was too late.

As the public continued to reject the idea of manmade global warming or climate change, Thulsa Doom Obama decided to go with the new moniker of 'global climate disruption.' And most recently, the term 'global weirding' came into vogue. No matter what alias they use, it still all comes down to an indictment of capitalism as the driving force behind a climate gone mad. Americans aren't buying it, and neither are Europeans. The rat radar is up and detecting something foul.

Last week a severe storm froze Dallas under a sheet of ice, just in time to disrupt the plans of the tens of thousands of (American) football fans descending on the city for the Super Bowl. On the other side of the globe, Cyclone Yasi slammed northeastern Australia, destroying homes and crops and displacing hundreds of thousands of people.

Some climate alarmists would have us believe that these storms are yet another baleful consequence of man-made CO2 emissions. In addition to the latest weather events, they also point to recent cyclones in Burma, last winter's fatal chills in Nepal and Bangladesh, December's blizzards in Britain, and every other drought, typhoon and unseasonable heat wave around the world.

But is it true? To answer that question, you need to understand whether recent weather trends are extreme by historical standards. The Twentieth Century Reanalysis Project is the latest attempt to find out, using super-computers to generate a dataset of global atmospheric circulation from 1871 to the present.

As it happens, the project's initial findings, published last month, show no evidence of an intensifying weather trend. "In the climate models, the extremes get more extreme as we move into a doubled CO2 world in 100 years," atmospheric scientist Gilbert Compo, one of the researchers on the project, tells me from his office at the University of Colorado, Boulder. "So we were surprised that none of the three major indices of climate variability that we used show a trend of increased circulation going back to 1871."

[From The Weather Isn't Getting Weirder - WSJ.com]

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.

GASP!: The health risks of global warming!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

EPA experts detail global warming's health risks

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

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

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

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

Skeptics, Alarmists Clash Over Record Blizzards

Yes scandals and empirical evidence have hampered your efforts to indoctrinate people, alarmists. The lopsided propaganda machine, where manmade global warming theory is unassailable and not open to scrutiny, is in trouble. it's about time.

The scandals have destroyed your "warming trend" evidence, because data relied on in IPCC reports has been tainted by both recent IPCC report revelations and Climategate. Why won't you guys admit this? Because reputations must be saved, that's why. Notice how this has become a battle of hearts and minds? It's NOT SCIENCE at all. It's politics masquerading as science.

"It's absurd for the 'anti-science side' to say we're in a cooling trend when we're in an overall warming trend," says Romm of the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank. "Heavy snow is not evidence that climate science is false," he added, noting that "the snow we've seen is entirely consistent with global warming theory."

But Patrick J. Michaels, senior fellow in environmental studies at the Cato Institute and state climatologist for Virginia for 27 years, disagrees. "Global warming simply hasn't done a darned thing to Washington's snow," he wrote on National Review, adding that "if you plot out year-to-year snow around here, you'll see no trend whatsoever through the entire history."

Politicians are jumping on the bandwagon, too. "It's going to keep snowing in DC until Al Gore cries 'uncle,'" tweeted Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C.

Global warming advocates feel under attack as skeptics use the record-setting snowstorms -- and the recent discoveries of errors in the U.N.'s climate science study, a growing scandal called climate-gate -- to question the theory that climate change is a manmade problem.

[From FOXNews.com - Global Warming Debate Heats Up in Wake of Record Snowstorms]

Alarmists admit ‘cool year’ but coach you on conclusions to draw

Forget that 2008 will be the ‘coolest’ year of this decade, according to ‘experts.’ 2007 was also quite cold (as you can review by looking over some of our past posts on the empirical evidence of weather phenomenon), and alarmist scientists were coaching us then to disregard the record cold for several reasons.

Remember the prediction about 2008 too! 2008 was going to be among 'the hottest on record' compared against the 'long term average' (a period which laughably amounts to only 30 years out of the Earth's estimated 4.5 billion year age).

They stated, among other things, that the sudden cooling was just a brief anomaly, it was being caused by warming (LOL!), and they have used climate revisionism (La Nina) to explain away the sudden antithetical appearance of cold weather (that is ‘masking’ warming – LOL!). These record cold spells and record winter storms (see China’s misery last winter), in essence, disrupt their entire fearmongering theory (upon which they’ve hung their collective professional reputations).

The question is, why are alarmists ALARMED over these recent cooling trends and our attitudes about it? Because they realize the obvious conundrum that even the stupidest among us can discern—CO2 has continued going up while temperatures have continued to drop (and dropped since 1998, if you believe their baseline). Lately, temperatures have dropped DRAMATICALLY, and CO2 has certainly NOT!

Remember why they NEED this pseudo-religion to be REAL! Scientific reputations are on the line. Federal climate research grants are on the line. Political power is on the line. The ‘Greed Fad’ and associated climate industries are all on the line, and there’s an increasingly skeptical public (at least in the U.S. and U.K.), who are bound and gagged by political correctness from declaring, “I DON’T BELIEVE IN THIS RETARDED STUPIDITY!” The world, however, faces a global economic crisis, and with falling temperatures, the little manmade climate change fart cloud is rapidly dissipating; people don’t want you telling them to buy the expensive ‘green’ light bulbs when they’ve just been laid off. The alarmists' NEED grows daily, or more of their ilk are going to suffer (like the climate team at the Weather Channel).

Forget the junk science in this article. Let’s go over some facts they’ve omitted. Global mean temperatures have only DECLINED since 1998, which Dr. Hansen, alarmo-scientist extraordinaire, declared (and later retracted) as the ‘hottest year ever.’ We’ve also seen his most recent mistake (where he declared October 2008 the hottest ever); he later had to retract this silly assertion when some of my intelligent, skeptical brethren and sistren bloggers pointed out the stupid errors in his skewed data (he used September temperatures instead of October temperatures).

2008 will be coolest year of the decade:

Global average for 2008 should come in close to 14.3C, but cooler temperature is not evidence that global warming is slowing, say climate scientists

***

The relatively chilly temperatures compared with recent years are not evidence that global warming is slowing however, say climate scientists at the Met Office. "Absolutely not," said Dr Peter Stott, the manager of understanding and attributing climate change at the Met Office's Hadley Centre. "If we are going to understand climate change we need to look at long-term trends."

Prof Myles Allen at Oxford University who runs the climateprediction.net website, said he feared climate sceptics would overinterpret the figure. "You can bet your life there will be a lot of fuss about what a cold year it is. Actually no, its not been that cold a year, but the human memory is not very long, we are used to warm years," he said, "Even in the 80s [this year] would have felt like a warm year."

***

The Met Office predicted at the beginning of the year that 2008 would be cooler than recent years because of a La Niña event - characterised by unusually cold ocean temperatures in the equatorial Pacific Ocean. It is the mirror image of the El Niño climate cycle. The Met Office had forecast an annual global average of 14.37C.

***

In March, a team of climate scientists at Kiel University predicted that natural variation would mask the 0.3C warming predicted by the Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change over the next decade. They said that global temperatures would remain constant until 2015 but would then begin to accelerate.