Deep Freeze in Deep South Kills Deep Stupidity

Let's face it...the last few years have been really bad for the alarmist cult followers of global warming. Climategate, Copen-faken, and empirical evidence (not to mention REAL SCIENCE) have been stacking up against them.

Jan. 2 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. East Coast faces the coldest night of the season as frigid air spills south and threatens agriculture in Georgia, Alabama and the orange crop in Florida.

Freeze warnings were posted by the National Weather Service as far south as the Orlando area, which may be as many as 20 degrees below normal tonight, the National Weather Service said. The advisory alerts growers that subfreezing temperatures are imminent and may kill crops or other sensitive vegetation.

[From U.S. East Coast Faces Deep Freeze; Florida Oranges Threatened - Bloomberg.com]

Atmospheric CO2 Remains at Pre-Civil War Levels

1850. The beginning of the Industrial Revolution and just before the Civil War kicked off. Today's CO2 levels haven't changed since then IN THE ATMOSPHERE! Where does it go? The oceans absorb it, of course.

Alarmist scientists aren't going to like that this little tidbit got out there in a scientific journal.

ScienceDaily (Dec. 31, 2009) — Most of the carbon dioxide emitted by human activity does not remain in the atmosphere, but is instead absorbed by the oceans and terrestrial ecosystems. In fact, only about 45 percent of emitted carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere.

[From No rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide fraction in past 160 years, new research finds]

Smoking Code of Climategate

Have you been suckered by the liberal excuses on Climategate that the 'hacked' emails have been taken out of context? Well, here's a skeptical scientist's breakdown of computer code hacked from the CRU of East Anglia University at the same time that shows how a computer model was manipulated to produce the 'hockey stick' graph showing a large uptick in temperatures. Remember, the supposed hacker didn't just 'steal' emails; they swiped a lot of files, including this script or code file.

If you've had any computer programming courses, this stuff will make more sense to you, and you'll see what the author is talking about.

NOTE: This is an actual snippet of code from the CRU contained in the source file: briffa_Sep98_d.pro

1;
2; Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!
3;
4 yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]
5 valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75   ; fudge factor
6 if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,'Oooops!'
7
8 yearlyadj=interpol(valadj,yrloc,timey)

What does this Mean? A review of the code line-by-line

[From Climategate: The Smoking Code « Watts Up With That?]

U.N.'s IPCC Chair Sticks Head in Sand: Climategate

You've got to understand that these people can't just let this go, even when caught red-handed; they are too far invested in this hoax as a reality. If it's not real, ask yourself what becomes of their reputations? Ask yourself what they would all do if Al Gore himself came on the news and said he was wrong (fat chance)? I've written about their reputations before on this blog, long before Climategate broke and proved us skeptics to be CORRECT; to admit it's all a sham and unsupportable by science or empirical evidence is tantamount to saying that their careers are shams too...and THEY ARE. This is why global warming won't go quietly...it will die a horrid death, and many careers and business interests will go down with it.

Al Gore's Oscar, Nobel Prize, and Carbon Credit business? SCAM. The "Green Fad"? SCAM. Countless claimed extinctions blamed on global warming? SCAM. Dead polar bears? SCAM. Countless atrocities blamed on global warming? SCAM. Obama's climate treatises? SCAM. Dr. Hansen's "climate work"? SCAM. Deleted climate data at the Climate Research Unit of UEA? SCAM. Prince Charles' stupid climate predictions? JUST IDIOTIC. United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and their recommendations? SCAM. Liberal news media's NEAR ABSOLUTE support of global warming "consensus"? SHAM and a TRAVESTY against people they should protect. Liberal politicians worldwide who've used this as a means to strengthen their hold on power? SCAM.

This is a worldwide scam and boondoggle that involves many parties, all with different, self-serving agendas. The not-about-to-debate-anyone Al Gore-acle is like the Bernie Maddoff of climate change; he's that culpable in this total rip-off on the people and governments of the world. Congratulations world: You just let a moron con you into giving him millions, a once prestigious award, and an Oscar...all for a stupid, alarmist, error-filled PowerPoint presentation. Didn't you realize he was a doof when he said he 'created' the Internet?

There is "virtually no possibility" of a few scientists biasing the advice given to governments by the UN's top global warming body, its chair said today.

Rajendra Pachauri defended the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in the wake of apparent suggestions in emails between climate scientists at the University of East Anglia that they had prevented work they did not agree with from being included in the panel's fourth assessment report, which was published in 2007.

The emails were made public this month after a hacker illegally obtained them from servers at the university.

Pachauri said the large number of contributors and rigorous peer review mechanism adopted by the IPCC meant that any bias would be rapidly uncovered.

[From Leaked emails won't harm UN climate body, says chairman | Environment | guardian.co.uk ]

Cornell University: Global warming OVERESTIMATED

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

Cornell Chronicle: Black carbon affects climate predictions:

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

***

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

***

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

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

Forecasters: It's cold now but will be warm later

Forecasters said the same thing about last year's record cold winter (i.e., it was only going to be briefly cold--ahem, WRONG!).

Review the posts here, here, and here (among others talking about last year's winter). We were also told, insanely, that the cold weather we were seeing was caused by global warming! Then La Nina and El Nino were used as excuses to explain away the record-setting cold we've seen, which runs empirically counter to the entire global warming theory. Again and again, climate predictions--from higher temperatures to increased hurricanes--have continually refused to materialize. Can you expect this prediction to be any different than the others? I PREDICT NO!

Clearly, it's uncomfortable for the believers and alarmists in the media to keep seeing these low temperatures that cast doubt on all the brainwashing in which they've engaged.

Cold start to winter will warm, forecasters say - USATODAY.com:

Weather forecasters are predicting a colder-than-normal start to winter in the eastern part of the United States.

The season overall will be warmer than normal in the Southwest, South and parts of the Midwest, according to independent forecasters.

"It's going to be an aggressive start," said Ken Reeves, director of forecasting at Accuweather.com.

"What's really going to stand out for a lot of people is the immediate slap in the face of what will be a rather cold December, especially in the eastern third of the nation," Reeves said.

***

Despite the early cold, Ed O'Lenic, a senior meteorologist and chief of the climate operations branch at the Climate Prediction Center, said he believes this winter will be warmer than the average over the past 30 years.

Anthony Barnston, director of forecasting at Columbia University's International Research Institute in New York, said a lessening of La Niña could result in a warmer winter.

The Lord Obama speaks...and sounds dumb

Sounding like a liberal broken record, President-elect Obama (true to form) comes out against carbon and makes several asinine proclamations. We already know that Schwarzenegger is a climate idiot; we can expect this from a muscleheaded steroid junkie. But Obama is supposed to be smarter than God, remember?

Ahem, Dear Lord Obama, the Almightly Savior of all person-kind, the science IS NOT BEYOND DISPUTE. SCIENCE IS NEVER BEYOND DISPUTE, and the "science" behind global warming is total BS. Furthermore, that Al Gore hat-trick about hurricanes is old and has been thoroughly debunked, including by NOAA, but you nitnoids keep leaning on that as empirical proof, even though the hurricane seasons have only been weak since 2005.

How about the empirical evidence sited on this blog? Alarmists ignore the evidence that points towards normal climate variation and only embrace bits and pieces that back up their stupid theory.

We are in big trouble. Dumb people have elected a scientifically dumb man to do dumb things to our dumb asses.

Obama addresses global warming summit - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Political Intelligence - Boston.com:

Through the magic of video, President-elect Barack Obama will encourage governors and others today to tackle global warming -- an issue he highlighted during the campaign.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California is hosting a two-day summit, drawing several fellow governors plus more than 600 environmental officials and activists from around the world.

Obama is pledging to make America more energy independent and to also slash carbon emissions by focusing on alternative sources such as wind and solar. He is also vowing to work more cooperatively with other nations on climate change.

"Few challenges facing America -- and the world – are more urgent than combating climate change," he says in the video. "The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear. Sea levels are rising. Coastlines are shrinking. We’ve seen record drought, spreading famine, and storms that are growing stronger with each passing hurricane season. Climate change and our dependence on foreign oil, if left unaddressed, will continue to weaken our economy and threaten our national security.

Dr. Hansen publishes bogus "hottest ever" October temperatures

Mostly speaks for itself. Read all about Hansen and Gore's collective stupidity throughout this blog. Read all about the empirical evidence pointing out how darn cold it is right now on Our Good Mother, the Earth.

Turn off AGW advocates like CNN, MSNBC, and other stupid lefty bullcrap and read here and elsewhere on the Internet to find out what you're not being shown or told.

The world has never seen such freezing heat - Telegraph:

A surreal scientific blunder last week raised a huge question mark about the temperature records that underpin the worldwide alarm over global warming. On Monday, Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), which is run by Al Gore's chief scientific ally, Dr James Hansen, and is one of four bodies responsible for monitoring global temperatures, announced that last month was the hottest October on record.

This was startling. Across the world there were reports of unseasonal snow and plummeting temperatures last month, from the American Great Plains to China, and from the Alps to New Zealand. China's official news agency reported that Tibet had suffered its "worst snowstorm ever". In the US, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration registered 63 local snowfall records and 115 lowest-ever temperatures for the month, and ranked it as only the 70th-warmest October in 114 years.

So what explained the anomaly? GISS's computerised temperature maps seemed to show readings across a large part of Russia had been up to 10 degrees higher than normal. But when expert readers of the two leading warming-sceptic blogs, Watts Up With That and Climate Audit, began detailed analysis of the GISS data they made an astonishing discovery. The reason for the freak figures was that scores of temperature records from Russia and elsewhere were not based on October readings at all. Figures from the previous month had simply been carried over and repeated two months running.

The error was so glaring that when it was reported on the two blogs - run by the US meteorologist Anthony Watts and Steve McIntyre, the Canadian computer analyst who won fame for his expert debunking of the notorious "hockey stick" graph - GISS began hastily revising its figures. This only made the confusion worse because, to compensate for the lowered temperatures in Russia, GISS claimed to have discovered a new "hotspot" in the Arctic - in a month when satellite images were showing Arctic sea-ice recovering so fast from its summer melt that three weeks ago it was 30 per cent more extensive than at the same time last year.

SD already with 4 feet of snow

Here you go. Happy Global Warming, dolt alarmists! Winter yet? Nope. More mounting evidence can be perused here.   

South Dakota Hit With 4 Feet of Snow:

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. — A wintry blast of punishing wind and close to 4 feet of snow in places pummeled the Northern Plains on Thursday, stranding unknown numbers of motorists for a day or more and knocking out power to thousands. State officials said some people could be without power for days, but they had a simple message for anyone thinking of trying to drive in western South Dakota's blizzard: Don't. "This is a dangerous storm," Gov. Mike Rounds told reporters in a telephone conference call Thursday evening. "Western South Dakota is basically under a no-travel advisory."

Gore: Imminent, rapidly growing threat "rescue" needed?

Here's where we find out if we truly are a nation of idiots. Most Americans don't believe global warming is a threat (and Britons definitely don't believe), but we can see that it's being shoved down our throats anyway. Gore got what he wanted (he was going to get it with Obama or McCain): A sympathetic ear and a true believer in governmental intervention.

Problem is that there is NOTHING to intervene against, except to protect Gore's pervasive environmental empire.

Meanwhile, temperatures in 2008 have been BELOW NORMAL TO WELL BELOW NORMAL.

Op-Ed Contributor - The Climate for Change - NYTimes.com:

THE inspiring and transformative choice by the American people to elect Barack Obama as our 44th president lays the foundation for another fateful choice that he — and we — must make this January to begin an emergency rescue of human civilization from the imminent and rapidly growing threat posed by the climate crisis.

Snow falls on House of Commons debating AGW bill

How many of examples of this have we seen? Global warming alarmists hold a protest march or debate a bill, and a huge (usually record) winter weather event comes along to ruin it.

Empirical evidence (and scientific evidence) continues stacking up against the alarmist theory, and they keep ignoring the reality. Just like the news media seems to be ignoring the real reasons why their readers and viewers are jumping ship. When you're deluded, it's really hard to wake up from the pipe dream.

Finally, don't forget what Britons think of their government's efforts! That's even with Prince Charles' alarmist advocacy.

Snow blankets London for Global Warming debate • The Register:

Snow fell as the House of Commons debated Global Warming yesterday - the first October fall in the metropolis since 1922. The Mother of Parliaments was discussing the Mother of All Bills for the last time, in a marathon six hour session.

In order to combat a projected two degree centigrade rise in global temperature, the Climate Change Bill pledges the UK to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions by 80 per cent by 2050. The bill was receiving a third reading, which means both the last chance for both democratic scrutiny and consent.

The bill creates an enormous bureaucratic apparatus for monitoring and reporting, which was expanded at the last minute.

October: Nor'easter already??!

Just in time for Prince Charles' latest global warming fear proclamation. The vast array of empirical evidence collecting month by month continues demonstrating just how bogus this load of manmade climate change bull is.

Nor`easter Dumps Snow, Rain:

A potent nor'easter will blast the Northeast today with strong winds, heavy rain and wet snow as a huge dip in the jet stream pushes cold air as far south as central Florida.

Near-record cold, and mountain snow:

Snow is accumulating this afternoon in the North Carolina mountains, and the rest of the Carolinas is shivering in the first cold outbreak of the season.

Temperatures that are more than 15 degrees below normal for this time of year, combined with strong northwest winds, are making today uncomfortably chilly in the Charlotte metro region.

But the cold snap is more pronounced in the mountains, where the strong winds are accompanied by snow showers.

The National Weather Service said that up to 3 inches of snow had accumulated by midday in some parts of the mountains. Snow is still falling this afternoon, and a dusting is even being reported in some lower elevations, such as Asheville.

Alaska glaciers expanded this year--not melted

More empirical evidence that proves how stupid this 'theory' is; there's just no way to conclude (when using one's actual brain logically) that man's CO2 is warming the Earth catastrophically (unless you're a Kool-aid drinker).

McClatchy Washington Bureau | 10/14/2008 | Alaska glaciers grew this year, thanks to colder weather:

Two hundred years of glacial shrinkage in Alaska, and then came the winter and summer of 2007-2008.

Unusually large amounts of winter snow were followed by unusually chill temperatures in June, July and August.

"In mid-June, I was surprised to see snow still at sea level in Prince William Sound," said U.S. Geological Survey glaciologist Bruce Molnia. "On the Juneau Icefield, there was still 20 feet of new snow on the surface of the Taku Glacier in late July. At Bering Glacier, a landslide I am studying, located at about 1,500 feet elevation, did not become snow free until early August.

"In general, the weather this summer was the worst I have seen in at least 20 years."

Never before in the history of a research project dating back to 1946 had the Juneau Icefield witnessed the kind of snow buildup that came this year. It was similar on a lot of other glaciers too.

"It's been a long time on most glaciers where they've actually had positive mass balance," Molnia said.

Another "flat earth" scientist debunks global warming stupidity

Just so you know, not everyone is marching in step like a zombie. Dr. Douglass at the University of Rochester is pointing out some "inconvenient truths," and Steven Milloy of junkscience.com made some great points about a subject that global warming alarmists hate to discuss--the sun and it's role in heating and cooling the Earth.

FOXNews.com - Study: Part of Global-Warming Model May Be Wrong:

Part of the scientific consensus on global warming may be flawed, a new study asserts.

The researchers compared predictions of 22 widely used climate "models" — elaborate schematics that try to forecast how the global weather system will behave — with actual readings gathered by surface stations, weather balloons and orbiting satellites over the past three decades.

The study, published online this week in the International Journal of Climatology, found that while most of the models predicted that the middle and upper parts of the troposphere —1 to 6 miles above the Earth's surface — would have warmed drastically over the past 30 years, actual observations showed only a little warming, especially over tropical regions.

"Can the models accurately explain the climate from the recent past? It seems that the answer is no," said lead study author David H. Douglass, a physicist specializing in climate at the University of Rochester.

FOXNews.com - It's the Sun, Stupid - Opinion:

When the international global warming alarm-ocracy gathers for its annual convention on the balmy island of Bali next week, is there any chance that the delegates will look up at the big yellow ball in the sky and ask, “Could it be the Sun, stupid?”

New research suggests that would be a great question for them to consider.

A recent study from the Journal of Geophysical Research (November 2007) reports that the sun may have contributed 50 percent or more of the global warming thought to have occurred since 1900.

Researchers from Duke University and the U.S. Army Research Office report that climate appears to be insensitive to solar variation if you accept the global temperature trend for the past 1,000 years as represented by the so-called “hockey stick” graph — which claims to show essentially unchanging temperatures between from 1000 to 1900 and then a sharp uptick from 1900 to the present. But the hockey stick-graph has been relegated to the ash heap of global warming history.

Greenpeace founder says no proof of global warming!!!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Nobel Dodo bird's prediction

Notice certain words below in the article on Dr. Molina's "prestigious research" and pontification. We see ALARM, WARNING, IRREVERSIBLE CONSEQUENCES, and WORRISOME. The term Nobel no longer has much weight with me, since they gave one to Al Gore--a complete dufus. This article is a stereotypical climate fear piece, designed to influence the sheep among us for political reasons.

Now, let's look at all the B.S. stuffed into the article; I've already debunked many of these subjects in previous posts, but let's take each one-by-one. First, is the Earth warming? No, it isn't and hasn't since 1998; as a matter of fact, the temperature this past winter failed to meet warming predictions and instead plummeted.

Next, the changes in climate we see are a result of human activities--namely, CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions. We've seen how the temperature graph of the past 10 years has not mirrored the CO2 graph, which was previously espoused as proof of manmade warming. If CO2 drives warming then we should not have had plateaued and then reduced warming over the past 10 years (especially the precipitous drop this past winter).

Finally, Dr. Molina really shows his true alarmist tendencies by broaching the subject of hurricanes. NOAA has already debunked the connection to stronger hurricanes and "manmade warming," and if the Earth is still warming (which it isn't) then we should have seen stronger storms than 2005's Katrina over the past few years, even with the oft-used La Nina and El Nino excuses to revise failed climate and hurricane predictions. Heck, 1998 should have brought the worst hurricanes with the "spike" in warming, and it failed to do so.

Note that the consequences mentioned below are "ALMOST" irreversible. That means that "really smart" scientists and politicians can still save your dumb butt from your love of capitalism, which is fed by oil.

Nobel scientist warns on climate change | Environment | Reuters:

MIAMI (Reuters) - The Nobel Prize-winning scientist who rang the first alarm bells over the ozone hole issued a warming about climate change on Saturday, saying there could be "almost irreversible consequences" if the Earth warmed 2.5 degrees Celsius (4.5 degrees F) above what it ought to be.

"Things are changing and there's no doubt that it's as a result of human activities," said Mario Molina, a Mexican who shared a Nobel prize in chemistry in 1995 for groundbreaking work on chlorofluorocarbon gases and their threat to the Earth's ozone layer.

"Long before we run out of oil, we will run out of atmosphere," he said.

Molina told a panel discussion on climate change at an annual Inter-American Development Bank meeting in Miami that the increasing intensity of hurricanes was among the worrisome changes that scientists had linked to a rapid global warming trend over the past 30 years.

CO2 vs Global Mean Temperature

Read it and weep, warmaholics! CO2 keeps going up while the temperature went down from the claimed 1998 high (if you believe the baseline) and plateaued. Notice which year is missing on this graph? This past winter (2008) saw the temperature spike sharply downward (way below the zero baseline). See this graph to see what the temperature waveform looks like with 2008 added. Notice that if you do believe the baseline (which is highly suspect), there HAS BEEN NO WARMING SINCE 1998!!! With the increasing CO2, there should be more warming, if we're to believe the theory being shoved down our throats by the "consensus."

This is all the scientific proof needed to dispel the myth, but the media and alarmists are predictably ignoring all this evidence (and all the empirical evidence of the past year that points to cooling).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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