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]

Average 2010 Temp 1 Deg Below "Normal"

Amazing. NOAA (and their buddies at NASA) always try to play the manmade climate change game, but read the last paragraph too. I've bolded the most interesting parts.

The main culprit behind the cold temperatures in December 2010 was the same one which caused the cold winter of 2009-2010; a strongly negative North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) and Arctic Oscillation (AO). When these atmospheric oscillations are in the strong negative phase, they essentially “flip” the weather pattern across North America, with upper-level high pressure and relative warmth over Greenland and Northeastern Canada and upper-level low pressure and cold over the eastern Continental United States, including Florida (Figure 1). This pattern forces the jet stream to plunge south from northern Canada into the southeastern U.S., transporting Arctic air masses into Florida.

***

As mentioned above, South Florida experienced its hottest summer on record in 2010 (with the exception of Naples which recorded its second hottest recorded summer). Despite the record hot summer, average yearly temperatures at the main climate sites will end up around 1 degree below normal, which will be the coolest calendar year since the early and mid 1980s, and among the top 10 on record (except for Miami). At secondary sites Miami Beach and Moore Haven, it was the coolest year on record (please note caveat below table).

[From NOAA on Miami Florida: Coldest December on Record | Watts Up With That?]

700 Alarmist Scientists Plan Campaign (Against 31,000+)

Apparently these schmucks have conveniently forgotten Climategate, NASA-gate, IPCC-gate--all of the climate scandals that broke over the past year and demonstrated what a bunch of shit this global warming lie is. Stay out of politics?!?! These alarmist, fear-mongering buttholes have NEVER stayed out of politics. All they've done is to seek global taxation and regulation to 'save us from ourselves.'

This is SO EASY to counter; simply enlist the THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of SKEPTICAL SCIENTISTS. Then maybe the world will get the picture that there is NO UNQUESTIONED CONSENSUS.

Reporting from Washington — Faced with rising political attacks, hundreds of climate scientists are joining a broad campaign to push back against congressional conservatives who have threatened prominent researchers with investigations and vowed to kill regulations to rein in man-made greenhouse gas emissions.

The still-evolving efforts reveal a shift among climate scientists, many of whom have traditionally stayed out of politics and avoided the news media. Many now say they are willing to go toe-to-toe with their critics, some of whom gained new power after the Republicans won control of the House in Tuesday's election.

On Monday, the American Geophysical Union, the country's largest association of climate scientists, plans to announce that 700 climate scientists have agreed to speak out as experts on questions about global warming and the role of man-made air pollution.

[From Climate science: Climate scientists plan campaign against global warming skeptics - latimes.com]

TX First to Challenge 'Consensus' in Court

Given that the EPA, NOAA, NASA, and other government agencies have continuously cited the now-discredited IPCC's latest climate report (that openly exaggerated and even relied on environmentalist rantings instead of hard science), Texas is the first to tell the EPA to take their regulation of CO2 as 'pollution' and shove it.

Don't mess with TX, you socialists.

The state of Texas today sued the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in a federal appeals court in Washington DC, claiming four new regulations imposed by the EPA are based on the 'thoroughly discredited' findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and are 'factually flawed,' 1200 WOAI news reports.  

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott says the rules are illegal and if imposed, will cost Texans in higher energy costs and tens of thousands of lost jobs.  

"The state explained that the IPCC, and therefore the EPA, relied on flawed science to conclude that greenhouse emissions endanger public health and welfare," Abbott said. "Because the Administration predicated its Endangerment Finding on the IPCC's questionable facts, the state is seeking to prevent the EPA's new rules, and the economic harm that will result from these regulations, from being imposed on Texas employers, workers, and enforcement agencies."

[From Texas Sues to Block Bizarre "Global Warming" EPA Rules]

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]

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]

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]

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 Niño, a cyclical phenomenon.

[From The warmest decade on record]

U.N. Hides 'Greening' Information

So, it seems to me that we've seen very recent examples of a university (and their colleagues), NASA, and the U.N. hiding information on climate change and the Green Fad. Their accomplices in the U.S. Congress decide to go after the email leakers, while their media accomplices decide to ignore Climategate altogether or simply dismiss it. Smell any rats yet?

The United Nations, which has been telling the world that it must cut back dramatically on its greenhouse gas emissions, has finally decided to practice what it preaches. But the world body isn't coming clean on the full costs of its self-greening effort with the member states who foot the bill.

After Fox News began asking questions about a pilot project that aims to start that process, the documentation concerning the greening effort abruptly disappeared from the U.N. Web site where it had been stored.

[From U.N. Deletes Documents, Won't Come Clean on Costs of Greening World Offices - United Nations - FOXNews.com]

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]

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]

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."

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.

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.

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.”

NASA Astronaut/Scientist Speaks Out

Yet another scientist (former NASA astronaut and former U.S. Senator) speaks the truth. He probably only came forward because he's in his 70s; there's little the enviro-scientific establishment can do to harm him.

Former astronaut speaks out on global warming

SANTA FE, N.M. - Former astronaut Harrison Schmitt, who walked on the moon and once served New Mexico in the U.S. Senate, doesn't believe that humans are causing global warming.

"I don't think the human effect is significant compared to the natural effect," said Schmitt, who is among 70 skeptics scheduled to speak next month at the International Conference on Climate Change in New York.

Schmitt contends that scientists "are being intimidated" if they disagree with the idea that burning fossil fuels has increased carbon dioxide levels, temperatures and sea levels.

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.]

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]

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.