Bengazi, IRS, AP ... who cares? These are mere distractions.
Let's not forget the real crises. We are still facing a catastrophe of global proportions unlike any before in history. Populations will uproot. Coastlines will sink. Water wars will erupt. Biodiversity will disappear. Icecaps will liquefy. Space aliens will conquer.
Nearly 40 years ago, when I was an undergraduate in meteorology at Penn State University, things were quite different. Back then, the potential crisis for humanity--besides the aftermath of Watergate and the Vietnam War--was the coming of the next ice age and all its attendant misery.
We know now that next-ice-age thing was wrong. We were mistaken.
After careful reflection and a rechecking of the data, we now know with certainty the truth about the global climate in the decades ahead. 97% of scientists who make their living off of exploring and promoting a human-caused climate-change crisis confirm there is a human-caused climate-change crisis--and it's in the direction of global warming.
Damn the peer-reviewed data over the past 16 years that says otherwise.Besides, data can always be explained away.The planet isgoing to swelter, just you wait!
In response to multiple inquiries from media and global warming advocates, Friends of Science issue this release to expose the statistical manipulation evident from the break down of the Cook et al paper. Friends of Science decry the linking of this flawed study with alleged danger from man-made carbon dioxide emissions (CO2) as there has been no global warming in 16 years despite a rise in CO2 levels; Friends of Science say the sun and oceanic oscillations are the main drivers of climate change, not CO2.
Calgary, Alberta (PRWEB) May 28, 2013
“The Cook et al paper is very misleading as described in major media. The breakdown of the survey results are not described up front,” says Ken Gregory, Director of Friends of Science. “The Cook study claims that any paper that mentions CO2 as a possible cause of some warming is part of a ‘consensus’. That is simply not true. Further, this survey does not assess ‘danger’.”
A young man from Africa who went to study in the Soviet Union, back when there was a Soviet Union and young men from Africa did that sort of thing, was asked about the winter in Russia. He replied that the green winter wasn't so bad but the white winter was terrible.
As much of the world, including my part of it, is currently enjoying a green winter, I chanced to listen to an episode of This American Life devoted to global warming: Hot In My Backyard. TAL is one of my favorite podcasts. I rarely miss and episode. While I expect quirky and entertaining fare and occasionally something that challenges my biases, what I don't expect is manifest stupidity. That is what I got from Julia Kumari Drapkin's contribution to the episode.
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) wasted no crisis knowing what and whom to blame following the devastating tornado that hit Moore, Oklahoma. Republicans caused it to happen through anthropogenic (man-caused) global warming. “When cyclones tear up Oklahoma and hurricanes swamp Alabama and wildfires scorch Texas, you come to us, the rest of the country, for billions of dollars to recover. And the damage that your polluters and deniers are doing doesn’t just hit Oklahoma and Alabama and Texas.”
So what about all that hot air? Is it possibly coming from none other than the senator himself? Well-respected meteorologist Joe Bastardi believes so, and will explain why.
Mr. Bastardi’s reputation for bold and accurate weather forecasts has landed him interviews on numerous major television programs, including Fox News Live, the O’Reilly Factor, Your World With Neil Cavuto, and Imus in the Morning, to name but a few. Many companies across a multitude of industries use his analytical services which correlate similarities between current and historical weather patterns to predict likely developments.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry straddled the diplomatic boundary this weekend between presenting the best face of America and a misleading one.
In a question-and-answer session with young Ethiopians on Sunday, Kerry exaggerated the U.S. record on climate change, appeared to conflate past U.S. policy on drones with President Barack Obama's new policy and gave an incomplete account of how he opposed the Iraq war. A day earlier, he struggled with economic data as well as the contents of his own department's terrorism blacklist.
KERRY on climate change: "We're below the Kyoto levels now."
Science questioning climate change should not be “rubbished or ridiculed”, a Westcountry MP charged with devising climate and energy policy for David Cameron has said. George Eustice, Conservative MP for Camborne and Redruth, says he believes there is a link between carbon emissions and warming the planet, but argues “all perspectives” should be heard. Mr Eustice is soon to be part of an eight-strong team of Conservatives developing policy within No 10, and will advise on energy and climate change. Conservative peer Lord Lawson, who established the Global Warming Policy Foundation, has accused climate scientists of “manipulating” records of global temperature and called for a “an open and reasoned debate” about climate change policies. --Graeme Demianyk, Western Morning News, 27 May 2013
Around 1250 A.D., historical records show, ice packs began showing up farther south in the North Atlantic. Glaciers also began expanding on Greenland, soon to threaten Norse settlements on the island. From 1275 to 1300 A.D., glaciers began expanding more broadly, according to radiocarbon dating of plants killed by the glacier growth. The period known today as the Little Ice Age was just starting to poke through.
Summers began cooling in Northern Europe after 1300 A.D., negatively impacting growing seasons, as reflected in the Great Famine of 1315 to 1317. Expanding glaciers and ice cover spreading across Greenland began driving the Norse settlers out. The last, surviving, written records of the Norse Greenland settlements, which had persisted for centuries, concern a marriage in 1408 A.D. in the church of Hvalsey, today the best preserved Norse ruin.
Next weekend is Memorial Day Weekend in the States, so CCD will be on a short vacation till next Tuesday, May 28.
Please feel free to share links, articles of interest (snippets, etc...), or anything climate related.
You can also visit our Facebook page or Twitter feed to share posts, etc...
From the "Never eat yellow snow" department:
Reuters: The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an Alaskan village's claim that it should be able to sue oil companies and utilities for damages attributed to climate change.
Lawyers for the village of Kivalina wanted various named defendants responsible for greenhouse emissions, including Exxon Mobil Corp, Chevron Corp and Duke Energy Corp, to pay damages for greater flooding and erosion that they say have caused by a reduction in sea ice.
New research suggests that the standstill in global temperature increases since 1998 means that global warming will be less severe than originally predicted in the coming decades as temperature estimates are adjusted downwards.
“The most extreme projections are looking less likely than before,” Dr. Alexander Otto of the University of Oxford told BBC News.
Researchers found the globe will warm about 20 percent more slowly in the coming decades than previously estimated. In 2007, the United Nations climate authority predicted that temperatures would rise between 1 degree Celsius and 3 degrees Celsius in the short term. However, this new report estimates that the globe will only warm between 0.9 degrees Celsius and 2.0 degrees Celsius.
Among the greatest liars on Earth today is the international organization called Friends of the Earth (FOE). It has engaged in the most scurrilous fear-mongering for decades, along with Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, and the World Wildlife Fund, while all the time they pulled in billions in funding.
In May 2012, the Daily Caller noted that “The Congressional Research Service estimates that since 2008 the federal government has spent nearly $70 billion on ‘climate change activities.’” The leading critic in Congress, Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) asked at the time, “Which would you rather have? Would you rather spend $4 billion on Air Force base solar panels, or would you rather have 28 new F-22s or 30 F-25s or modernized C-130s?”
Chemophobic anti-pesticide groups are at it again. This time they’re attacking a widely used and safe new insecticide, but their assertions and real agendas are nothing new.
Radical environmentalism rose to ascendancy on opposition to pesticides, specifically DDT. “If the environmentalists win on DDT,” Environmental Defense Fund scientist Charles Wurster told the Seattle Times in 1969, “they will achieve a level of authority they have never had before.” Using Rachel Carson’s often inaccurate book Silent Spring to drive a nasty campaign, they succeeded in getting the Environmental Protection Agency to ban US production and use of DDT in 1972, leading to a de facto global ban even to combat malaria.