Showing posts with label Hansen. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hansen. Show all posts

Thursday, February 10, 2011

Climatologists Urge Chinese-Style Dictatorship

I have been so ridiculed here on my own blog for ever considering the 'conspiratorial' notion that liberal types (including MOST climatologists...as most professors in any university will identify as liberals) want to harm capitalism and replace it with some form of socialism, using global warming as the means to finally get that done (because 'they're trying to save the planet,' remember?).

Well here you go, morons. We've seen how NASA's global warming activist, James Hansen, has openly called for socialism. This clown is not a scientist, because real scientists stick to science and leave the politics to politicians. Here's more of the same. Liberals--for whatever fucking reason--love tyrants like Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Chavez, and Che Guevara. They think--stupidly--that if America was like these failed communist states (or had leaders like these idiots and murderers) then all the world would be right and the Earth would 'cool.'

Don't believe me? Many prominent liberals have called for a slower economy to fight global warming. Well, now we have a slower economy and it's very cold. I guess it worked, LOL!

The nation's most prominent publicly funded climatologist is officially angry about this, blaming democracy and citing the Chinese government as the "best hope" to save the world from global warming. He also wants an economic boycott of the U.S. sufficient to bend us to China's will.

NASA laboratory head James Hansen's anti-democracy rants were published while he was on a November junket in China, but they didn't get much attention until recently. On Jan. 12, the hyperprolific blogger Marc Morano put them on his Climate Depot site, and within hours, the post went viral. In a former life, Mr. Morano was chief global-warming researcher for Sen. James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican.

According to Mr. Hansen, compared to China, we are "the barbarians" with a "fossil-money- 'democracy' that now rules the roost," making it impossible to legislate effectively on climate change. Unlike us, the Chinese are enlightened, unfettered by pesky elections. Here's what he blogged on Nov. 24:

[From MICHAELS: China-style dictatorship of climatologists - Washington Times]

Saturday, September 4, 2010

Now We Have NASA-gate

Once again, we have to rely on Fox News and the British press to report these legitimate stories. Wonder why the lefty press is ignoring it? Hmmm? Anyone? Bueller?

Hansen's GISS at NASA is using the flawed data from another scandal (East Anglia) and thus making itself into another climate scandal. So, we now have three different but interrelated climate scandals: East Anglia's CRU (Climate-gate), U.N. IPCC's flawed climate report (too many "-gates" to mention), and now NASA's flawed climate data (based on CRU's climate data).

These morons represent the "consensus." The flaws are easy to see for anyone with a brain, but the Kool-Aid drinkers won't go quietly.

Not everyone is sipping the global warming Kool-Aid.

Concerns about the validity of NASA's climate research are being raised following revelations that the space agency admitted its data was less accurate than other weather trackers'. Disturbed by these reports, as well as the growing Climate-gate scandal that has left global-warming theorists reeling, Senators John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and David Vitter (R-La.) have written a letter to space agency chief Charles Bolden demanding answers.

"The American people deserve to learn the truth about the data," Barrasso told FoxNews.com, stressing the risks of basing public policy on science that remains largely undecided.

***

The letter, expressing concern with NASA's newly revealed use of data from the East Anglia University's Climatic Research Unit, cites interviews with CRU's chief Phil Jones and programmer Ian "Harry" Harris, both of whom denigrated the quality of the CRU data. "No uniform data integrity, it's just a catalogue of issues that continues to grow as they're found. This whole project is SUCH A MESS," Harris reportedly commented.

[From FOXNews.com - Senators Demand Explanation of NASA's Flawed Climate Data]

NASA Climate Data Inferior to Climategate Data, Space Agency Says

So much for James Hansen's GISS data and the NOAA data that predicts gloom and doom on a monthly basis; we've already seen multiple instances where this data has been proven untrustworthy.

Scandal-ridden UEA CRU data is 'more accurate' than the data invalidated by the Climategate scandal.

It doesn't take a scientist to look at this mess and discern that it's nothing but a political propaganda campaign and witch hunt against all scientists not willing to go along with the imaginary "consensus."

NASA was able to put a man on the moon, but the space agency can't tell you what the temperature was when it did. By its own admission, NASA's temperature records are in even worse shape than the besmirched Climate-gate data.

E-mail messages obtained by a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that NASA concluded that its own climate findings were inferior to those maintained by both the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) -- the scandalized source of the leaked Climate-gate e-mails -- and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Climatic Data Center.

The e-mails from 2007 reveal that when a USA Today reporter asked if NASA's data "was more accurate" than other climate-change data sets, NASA's Dr. Reto A. Ruedy replied with an unequivocal no. He said "the National Climatic Data Center's procedure of only using the best stations is more accurate," admitting that some of his own procedures led to less accurate readings.

[From FOXNews.com - NASA Data Worse Than Climate-Gate Data, Space Agency Admits]

Monday, July 5, 2010

New NASA Goal: Better Muslim Relations?

We all know how NASA has been, more or less, in lockstep with the global warming alarmist community, considering Hansen's slobbering activism. Now you can see that NASA has really lost its mind, now that an appointee of Thulsa Doom Obama has taken over the federal space agency. Seems the moron has decided to move into Secretary Clinton's territory. These academics are the biggest bunch of hapless morons I've ever seen.

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a recent interview that his "foremost" mission as the head of America's space exploration agency is to improve relations with the Muslim world.

Though international diplomacy would seem well outside NASA's orbit, Bolden said in an interview with Al Jazeera that strengthening those ties was among the top tasks President Obama assigned him. He said better interaction with the Muslim world would ultimately advance space travel.

[From FOXNews.com - NASA Chief: Next Frontier Better Relations With Muslim World]

Friday, March 19, 2010

Why You Should Question "Consensus" Scientists

So, "consensus" scientists' theories are unassailable, eh? No debating the undebateable? In this story, we see that scientists were shocked that any creature could live below 600 feet of ice in the Antarctic; this flew in the face of accepted, "consensus" opinion that only certain microbes were hearty enough to exist in such cold conditions. Just read the quote from Dr. Kim below for yourself.

If "consensus" scientists can be wrong about life in the Antarctic, the next question you should ask yourself is, "Could they be wrong about carbon's role in the climate?" Because they ARE WRONG.

Yes, Dr. Kim and Dr. Bindschadler. You guys think you know EVERYTHING (your quote), but YOU DO NOT. And what scientific team produced this bit of news? NASA, of course...the same organization that brings you the unquestionable Dr. James Hansen and his flawed global warming theories.

WASHINGTON -- In a surprising discovery about where higher life can thrive, scientists for the first time found a shrimp-like creature and a jellyfish frolicking beneath a massive Antarctic ice sheet.

Six hundred feet below the ice where no light shines, scientists had figured nothing much more than a few microbes could exist.

That is why a team from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration was surprised when they lowered a video camera to get the first long look at the underbelly of an ice sheet in Antarctica. A curious shrimp-like creature came swimming by and then parked itself on the camera's cable. Scientists also pulled up a tentacle they believe came from a foot-long jellyfish.

***

"It's pretty amazing when you find a huge puzzle like that on a planet where we thought we know everything," Kim said.

[From FOXNews.com - NASA Finds Shrimp Dinner on Ice Beneath Antarctica]

Monday, February 15, 2010

NASA Alarmist: Last Decade Warmest

So, how does this jibe with disgraced CRU (IPCC) scientist Phil Jones' admission just yesterday that there has been no significant warming for 15 years and other studies that show no warming since 1998 even with increasing CO2? Good question. Stories like these keep the warming alarmists out there believing in the myth, even after numerous scandals and empirical evidence to the contrary.

Let's look at the problems with the proclamations in this article (since alarmists will just accept what it says without question). The first problem is the source--alarmist radical Dr. James Hansen at NASA's GISS. Much has been written about him by skeptics, including in this blog. He is the one who said that oil executives should be put on trial and wrote a letter to Thulsa Doom Obama urging a carbon tax to redistribute wealth. Sound like a level-headed, unbiased climate scientist to you, whose only concern is scientific truth?

Next, let's look at his past assertions and the erroneous data behind them. Hansen is the scientist who called October 2008 the hottest October on record and then had to publicly recant that contention after mathematical mistakes were found in his data (and those errors were ONLY DISCOVERED because SKEPTICS SCRUTINIZED HIS NUMBERS). Hansen has proven time and again that he is a climate radical, and therefore, biased. Amazing that skeptics are often denigrated (even after being vindicated in their scrutiny of his work), while chumps like Hansen are just continually accepted as 'bringers of truth.' No one has put two-and-two together here. Why isn't the media questioning this proclamation after his past mistakes are a matter of record?

The problems with surface temperature measurements and sweeping contentions drawn from those data (such as the contention made here) were just recently discussed in the news. First, the "next climate scandal" discussed NOAA's >75% reduction in temperature monitoring stations that occurred in 1990 (and, surprise...most of those were stations in cooler areas). Second, the "urban island effect" is a factor, though it is often poo-poo'd away by alarmists as irrelevant. However, if you've ever watched professional tennis events like the Australian Open or U.S. Open, the players and commentators will often discuss how much warmer it is on the court, simply because of the reflected sun and heat energy coming off the concrete and onto players (this is almost common sense). If you live in a hot part of the country, do an experiment yourself; wait until the hottest part of the day (usually 1600 or so) and see which is warmer: your driveway or the grass in your yard? Use your hand or thermometer...doesn't matter. Clearly, urban areas will be hotter than non-urban areas, regardless of how alarmists might try to cover up that fact. An accurate temperature measurement in or around urban areas is problematic.

The next problem with Hansen and GISS is that, much like the scandal-ridden CRU's refusal to release data, Hansen has continually blocked attempts to release data for independent verification under the Freedom of Information Act. NASA is currently being sued to release more data. If they ever do, I assert that skeptical scrutiny will uncover more errors, just as they have before with Hansen and all the recent IPCC report errors.

The point here is that these calculations (or any others) by the radical alarmist, Dr. Hansen, should not be given full credence absent careful scrutiny. Unfortunately, the alarmists and media organizations with interests (like the BBC) in continuing the global warming myth will simply accept what GISS says without the slightest question. Much like the now debunked CRU data and IPCC reports, GISS's proclamations will be taken as gospel by those who don't want their religious-like belief in manmade climate change disrupted.

The 2000s were the warmest decade on record according to analysis by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS).

Goddard's surface temperature record shows an upward trend of about 0.2°C (0.36°F) per decade over the past three decades and a rise of 0.8°C (1.5°F) since 1880 since reliable record-keeping began in 1880.

2005 was the warmest year of the past decade and, by NASA's estimate, is the warmest year since 1880 (the U.N.'s World Meteorological Organization gives 1998 that title). 2009 was only slightly cooler than 2005, although it was the warmest year on record in the Southern Hemisphere. 2010 is expected to be even warmer due, in part, to the return of El NiƱo, a cyclical phenomenon.

[From The warmest decade on record]

Sunday, December 6, 2009

U.N. Climate Chief: E-mails are Damaging

That's nice of him to admit the scandal is damaging, but he's sticking with the 'consensus' platform. You know. That magical number of scientists that make up the 'consensus.' What is that number again? Oh, that's right...no one has quantified it. I have a list of >31,000 skeptical scientists, and the media NEVER reports on them.

I'm sorry...but the research IS NOT SOLID. It was NEVER solid.

COPENHAGEN (AP) - The U.N.'s top climate official on Sunday conceded that hacked e-mails from climate scientists had damaged the image of global warming research but said evidence of a warming Earth is solid.

In an interview with The Associated Press ahead of the U.N. climate summit starting Monday, Yvo de Boer said the e-mails pilfered from a British university fueled skepticism among those who believe the science is manipulated to exaggerate global warming.

"I think a lot of people are skeptical about this issue in any case," de Boer said. "And then when they have the feeling ... that scientists are manipulating information in a certain direction then of course it causes concern in a number of people to say 'you see I told you so, this is not a real issue.'"

[From My Way News - UN climate chief: hacked e-mails are damaging]

Thursday, December 3, 2009

Suing NASA for Withheld Climate Data: Climategate

Climategate continues (thank goodness our awful news media can't completely bury it) and we see that even NASA is in on the scam (Dr. Hansen proved that long ago). Do you see, sheep? There are thousands of scientists out there who've been STRAINING AND BEGGING to be heard above the "consensus" mantra, but they've been shut out by an overzealous establishment.

Question: Exactly what figure constitutes a "consensus"?

I have a figure of >31,000 petition-signing, skeptical scientists (see petition.org), which in my opinion is a fairly big number (not a "few" fringe scientists as our news media portrays such skeptics). I've yet to hear how many scientists are in this magical, unassailable "consensus," but I doubt it's much higher than 31,000.

The fight over global warming science is about to cross the Atlantic with a U.S. researcher poised to sue NASA, demanding release of the same kind of climate data that has landed a leading British center in hot water over charges it skewed its data.

Chris Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, said NASA has refused for two years to provide information under the Freedom of Information Act that would show how the agency has shaped its climate data and would explain why the agency has repeatedly had to correct its data going as far back as the 1930s.

[From Researcher: NASA hiding climate data - Washington Times]

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

NASA: Doomsday Won't Be in 2012

Irony? I think so. NASA, whose scientists regularly predict global warming doom, is calling another prophecy false? Instead of slamming the Mayans, NASA should ask itself whether its officially-sanctioned predictions of global warming catastrophe are a bit of the pot calling the kettle black.

There's been a lot of speculation and fear that the end of the world could coincide with the end of the Mayan calendar on Dec. 21, 2012. Sony's doomsday film "2012," set for release next month and based on the prediction that the world will end in three years, has put a spotlight on the theory.

A NASA scientist is trying to quell those fears and has condemned the film and the company's viral marketing campaign, The Washington Post reports.

[From NASA Vs. Mayans: Doomsday Won't Be in 2012 - Archaeology | Egyptology | Archeology - FOXNews.com]

Saturday, July 18, 2009

The Oracle, Prince Charles, Modifies Climate Prediction...AGAIN

Once upon a time (in May 2008), Prince Charles--brilliant climate scientist and politically-clever royal who left Princess Diana for...ahem--declared that we had 18 months to save the world. Now over a year later with time enough to weigh the numerous technical variables that went into his previous prediction, Charles now says we have 96 months to save the Earth.

Really, do I need to say anything else about Charles or Al Gore or Dr. Hansen? They've so thoroughly discredited themselves as climate soothsayers that even the greatest moron among us should be able to figure it out.

Capitalism and consumerism have brought the world to the brink of economic and environmental collapse, the Prince of Wales has warned in a grandstand speech which set out his concerns for the future of the planet.

The heir to the throne told an audience of industrialists and environmentalists at St James's Palace last night that he had calculated that we have just 96 months left to save the world.

And in a searing indictment on capitalist society, Charles said we can no longer afford consumerism and that the "age of convenience" was over.

[From Just 96 months to save world, says Prince Charles - Green Living, Environment - The Independent]

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

EPA Silences One of its Own

Of course the EPA is suppressing this report from ‘one of their own.’ They can’t have any of this whistle-blowing stuff going on. It’s just like a similar dissenting report that came out of the Obama Administration: All one sees are attempts to cover up dissent. It’s the same reason Al Gore won’t debate anyone over global warming; he knows he’ll get his head handed to him, because he’s a moron.

Alarmists have been resorting to this sort of climate cover-up business since the very beginning of Hansen’s manufactured CO2 claims. They know the science is shaky to non-existent; they know the empirical evidence doesn’t stack up in their favor—especially now. They don’t care. Too many jobs, reputations, and fortunes hang in the balance now to let truth ruin it all.

But there is a problem. It’s all full of crap and people know it. That’s not stopping Obama or his minions in Congress who need to exact more control. Think it’s all science now and no politics? If so, you’re very gullible.

Sen. Inhofe Calls for Inquiry Into 'Suppressed' Climate Change Report

Republicans are raising questions about why the EPA apparently dismissed an analyst's report questioning the science behind global warming.

A top Republican senator has ordered an investigation into the Environmental Protection Agency's alleged suppression of a report that questioned the science behind global warming.

The 98-page report, co-authored by EPA analyst Alan Carlin, pushed back on the prospect of regulating gases like carbon dioxide as a way to reduce global warming. Carlin's report argued that the information the EPA was using was out of date, and that even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have increased, global temperatures have declined.

"He came out with the truth. They don't want the truth at the EPA," Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla, a global warming skeptic, told FOX News, saying he's ordered an investigation. "We're going to expose it."

Friday, June 26, 2009

AP: Recession Has Cut Warming

The AP is attempting to vindicate the statements of prominent liberal politicians (like Clinton, Prince Charles, Chu, and Geithner), who—before the recession—said that cooling our economy was key to fighting global warming. This article is now saying that the recession (i.e., REDUCED CAPITALISM) has helped our environment by cutting CO2 emissions.

Global warming as a theory is nothing more than socialism masquerading as science, pure and simple; it’s a parlor trick designed to flabbergast the stupid among us into hating capitalism. Capitalism is destroying the Earth, after all (they’re contention…not mine).

I predicted that alarmists would try to find a way out of their lie, such that they solved global warming through their policies. The truth is that there was never a problem, so they can wait for the opportune moment to declare their solutions worked.

Global Recession Cuts Down on Global Warming

AMSTERDAM — The global recession has an up side, at least for people worried about climate change: Carbon emissions are growing more slowly than in recent years, Dutch researchers said Thursday.

But they also said the emissions of developing countries were higher than those of the industrialized world for the first time last year.

Less money in the bank, higher oil prices and a growing use of wind, solar and other renewable energy resources put a brake last year on the increase of the most common greenhouse gas blamed for global warming, said the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.

Monday, April 20, 2009

GASP!: Obama's Energy Secretary Predicts Certain Doom

Well, Secretary Steven Chu has jumped on the goofball bandwagon along with Al Gore, Dr. Hansen, and Prince Charles. They’re all part of the same cult—the Cult of Global Warming Doom. And why? Well, there are currently substantial barriers to the policies they want to enact (like public doubt), and public fear is the only way these Draconian measures will happen—public fear which can drive political action.

Please read the last three paragraphs I included from the article; they contain the only responses really needed for this idiotic hogwash. Just remember: Experienced, educated weather forecasters can’t ACCURATELY predict what the weather will be like five days from today. Yet, these climate alarmists and opportunists have been deemed so smart (with their human-made computer models) that we’re to believe them when they say what our worldwide climate will be 100 years from now.

PUH-LEAAZZZEEEE!!!! The climate is far more complex than mere weather—thousands of additional variables, both known and unknown. More fear to be found in the GASP! series and Dr. Brignell’s warmlist.

Energy Secretary Offers Dire Global Warming Prediction

Speaking at the Summit of the Americas in the Carribean nation of Trinidad and Tobago, Steven Chu says some islands could disappear if water levels rise as a result of greenhouse-gas induced climate change.

PORT-OF-SPAIN, Trinidad and Tobago -- Caribbean nations face "very, very scary" rises in sea level and intensifying hurricanes, and Florida, Louisiana and even northern California could be overrun with rising water levels due to global warming triggered by carbon-based greenhouse gases, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said Saturday.

Chu's comments followed meetings with environmental ministers attending the fifth Summit of the Americas. He did not shy away from the most perilous predictions about the potential effects of global warming.

He said global temperatures have already risen by 0.8 degree Centigrade, that another 1 degree increase was certain to occur and "there's a reasonable probability we can go above 4 degrees Centigrade to 5 and 6 more."

Chu painted a dire picture of the implications.

***

"Secretary Chu's assertions on sea level rise and hurricanes are quite simply being proven wrong by the latest climate data. As the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute reported in December 12, 2008: There is 'no evidence for accelerated sea-level rise.'"

Morano said hurricane activity levels in both hemispheres of the globe are at 30 years lows and hurricane experts like MIT's Kerry Emanuel and Tom Knutson of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration "are now backing off their previous dire predictions.”

He said Chu is out of date on the science and is promoting unverified and alarming predictions that have already been proven contrary.

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Especially Thin Ice This Spring? What About Last?

Coincidentally, we saw similar fear stories last spring. Are they different? Not really? They're all wrong. Predictions of doom failed to appear as forecast last year too. This one is a variation on last year's story about 'new' ice versus 'old' ice.

No matter the good news, the alarmist scientists have a way of twisting empirical data to their ends.

Arctic Ice Especially Thin This Spring, Scientists Say

WASHINGTON — The Arctic is treading on thinner ice than ever before.

Researchers say that as spring begins, more than 90 percent of the sea ice in the Arctic is only 1 or 2 years old. That makes it thinner and more vulnerable than at anytime in the past three decades, according to researchers with NASA and the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado.

"We're not set up well for summertime," ice data center scientist Walt Meier said Monday. "We're in a very precarious situation."


Friday, April 3, 2009

GASP!: Arctic Ice Now Gone in 30 Years?

First, this story is from AP, which is famous for its global warming fear pieces. Second, notice that they’re saying that ice is melting faster now and will be worse than expected because ‘COMPLEX COMPUTER MODELS OF WEATHER AND CLIMATE’ said so. When the investigator has preconceived conclusions about climate and humankind’s affect on it, any computer model that investigator designs will be compromised, and only data that seems to support a conclusion will be considered. No investigator, thus far, has gone to the Arctic to DISPROVE global warming! They all go to verify it exists; as a result, they find that for which they’re looking.

No computer model, however complex one designs it, can ever account for the complexity of nature—with incalculable variables--many unknown or unconsidered--of every description. Just look at Dr. Hansen’s own errors to see how easy it is to skew collected data towards one’s own opinions; warmaholics don’t like being shown the errors of their ways.

There’s one good thing about the modification of this prediction. Many of us will still be around to realize how wrong they were. One need not wait until then, however. There are already many examples of failed prophecy with regard to global warming catastrophes.

Of course, I predict that global warming will be a long forgotten fad in 30 years; it will waft and linger in our collective consciousness only if we allow politicians to utterly destroy our economic health for the sake of a lie.

Melting ice has been a constant mantra of global warming fear from the beginning. If you want to follow the history of the media’s incessant melting ice fear (and tons of other imagined fears associated with the myth of global warming), please read the GASP! series and the warmlist.

Study: Arctic Sea Ice Melting Faster Than Anticipated

Arctic sea ice is melting so fast most of it could be gone in 30 years. A new analysis of changing conditions in the region, using complex computer models of weather and climate, says conditions that had been forecast by the end of the century could occur much sooner.

A change in the amount of ice is important because the white surface reflects sunlight back into space. When ice is replaced by dark ocean water that sunlight can be absorbed, warming the water and increasing the warming of the planet.

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

NYT Covers Denying Princeton Scientist

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

The Civil Heretic

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

***

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

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

***

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

***

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

Thursday, March 26, 2009

GASP!: 90 Seconds From Doom

Something about this fear piece sounds vaguely familiar. I think I’ve read similar things in past articles on nuclear annihilation, the Y2K computer bug, the ozone hole, and yes…global warming. The point is that the American media has been filling our hearts and minds with fear, not just for a few years but for decades and decades. Fear sells…it gets people to read and consume the news of the day.

But it’s really, really dumb. I’m not saying that solar weather isn’t potentially harmful to our electrical grid, but to imply that millions of Americans will be dead as a result is just plain stupid. Give me a break. I hate these predictions of doom, which are unrelenting…and unscientific.

Who’s behind it? NASA, of course, (Dr. Hansen’s employer) which is a division of our government trying to find new avenues to remain relevant, given the state of space travel these days.

More fear to be had in the GASP! series and warmlist.

Space storm alert: 90 seconds from catastrophe

IT IS midnight on 22 September 2012 and the skies above Manhattan are filled with a flickering curtain of colourful light. Few New Yorkers have seen the aurora this far south but their fascination is short-lived. Within a few seconds, electric bulbs dim and flicker, then become unusually bright for a fleeting moment. Then all the lights in the state go out. Within 90 seconds, the entire eastern half of the US is without power.

A year later and millions of Americans are dead and the nation's infrastructure lies in tatters. The World Bank declares America a developing nation. Europe, Scandinavia, China and Japan are also struggling to recover from the same fateful event - a violent storm, 150 million kilometres away on the surface of the sun.

It sounds ridiculous. Surely the sun couldn't create so profound a disaster on Earth. Yet an extraordinary report funded by NASA and issued by the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in January this year claims it could do just that.

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Yep, Hansen Activist, NOT SCIENTIST!

There's no denying this now; this doof has no objectivity remaining on the subject whatsoever. Scientifically, anything that issues forth from his alarmist trap should be disregarded by serious peers in climate research. Why? Because he's biased in only one direction, and therefore, tainted. His data has been shown flawed on a few occasions, and what conclusions do you think the flaws pointed towards? Yep, manmade global warming. Once shown to be flawed, he said nothing of his erroneous data which showed the Earth to be FAR COOLER than he said it was.

This guy wants open revolution to stop something that doesn’t exist; furthermore, he wants to BE A POLITICIAN!

Leading climate scientist: 'democratic process isn't working'

Protest and direct action could be the only way to tackle soaring carbon emissions, a leading climate scientist has said.

James Hansen, a climate modeller with Nasa, told the Guardian today that corporate lobbying has undermined democratic attempts to curb carbon pollution. "The democratic process doesn't quite seem to be working," he said.

Speaking on the eve of joining a protest against the headquarters of power firm E.ON in Coventry, Hansen said: "The first action that people should take is to use the democratic process. What is frustrating people, me included, is that democratic action affects elections but what we get then from political leaders is greenwash.

Sunday, March 15, 2009

Hansen a Radical Activist...NOT a Scientist

I've written about this egomaniacal, erroneous-data pontificator on many occasions in the past, but Hansen keeps managing to put his dumb butt back in the spotlight over manmade climate change, even after his retarded research has been exposed as fraudulent (and no mainstream media types will call him on it).

Science should be politically neutral; it should not take social positions, because taking positions can bias one’s judgment and one’s study designs. If you’re already sold on climate change, you’re not going to accept any contrary evidence that may show up in your own or other’s research. Scientists should be like any citizen—take a political position when you go vote. Otherwise, please shut up and stop acting like most Hollywood celebrities, somehow believing that YOUR political opinion is far more valuable than anyone else’s. What a narcissist!

The last statement highlighted below shows just how retarded this guy has become; he’s actually saying that ONLY SCIENTISTS are smart enough to be politicians. Not even politicians can define the implications of their policy choices; they regularly screw stuff up, but a political amateur is going to somehow set up policies to save us all, simply because he’s a believing, alarmist scientist?

Predictably, no antithetical voice to AGW is given a single sentence of rebuttal in the article.

Plan B: scientists get radical in bid to halt global warming ‘catastrophe’

THE director of a Nasa space laboratory will this week lead thousands of climate change campaigners through Coventry in an extraordinary intervention in British politics.

James Hansen plans to use Thursday’s Climate Change Day of Action to put pressure on Gordon Brown to wake up to the threat of climate change - by halting the construction of new power stations and the expansion of airports, with schemes such as the third runway at Heathrow.

The move by a leading American researcher is the highest-profile example to date of the way climate change is politicising scientists.

***

Hansen, director of Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said he believed scientists, the people who knew most about climate change, now had a moral obligation to become politically active.

***

“The scientists can connect the dots and define the implications of different policy choices and we should make clear those implications.”

Sunday, January 4, 2009

Dr. Roy Spencer's new web site

Another great, skeptical scientist, Dr. Roy Spencer, updated his web presence; check out his great site and blog at http://www.drroyspencer.com! For you alarmist believers out there (ahem...suckers), here's his biography. Even though Barbara Boxer was unable to broach these facts during Spencer's inquisition on Capitol Hill, please note:

Dr. Spencer’s research has been entirely supported by U.S. government agencies: NASA, NOAA, and DOE. He has never been asked by any oil company to perform any kind of service. Not even Exxon-Mobil.

Neat to see that he is an award-winning scientist who, like climate alarmist Dr. Hansen, hails from NASA. Interesting to note which NASA scientist the news media chooses to interview and mention in their continuing coverage of this scam--hint: it ain't Dr. Spencer. Instead, they've always attempted to paint Spencer as a rogue who is in the pocket of "big oil," and they never mention that he's also a respected NASA scientist!

Why won't Al Gore debate Dr. Spencer (or any other skeptical scientist or meteorologist)? Because he'd have his Nobel Prize handed to him on a silver platter; Al Gore IS A POLITICIAN--and a mediocre one at that. GORE IS NOT A SCIENTIST! He can only parrot what other alarmist scientists have fed him in his silly PowerPoint presentations, while he collects the profits from his lame speeches and carbon offset schemes.

NOW what?? Carbon dioxide is what? Necessary for life on Earth?

What are you, some kind of global warming denying right-wing extremist wacko? The polar bears are drowning!!

I can see I’m just wasting my time…sheesh.

[From 50 Years of CO2: Time for a Vision Test « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.]