Posts Tagged ‘Climate Change’

International Bureaucrats Lie About Global Warming

February 2, 2010

By Doug Bandow

If what global warming scaremongers said was true, the planet would be in peril.  But if what they said was true was, in fact, true, they wouldn’t have to lie about the process.

Walter Russell Mead points out in American Interest:

After years in which global warming activists had lectured everyone about the overwhelming nature of the scientific evidence, it turned out that the most prestigious agencies in the global warming movement were breaking laws, hiding data, and making inflated, bogus claims resting on, in some cases, no scientific basis at all. This latest story in the London Times is yet another shocker; the IPCC’s claims that the rainforests were going to disappear as a result of global warming are as bogus and fraudulent as its claims that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035.  It seems as if a scare story could grab a headline, the IPCC simply didn’t care about whether it was reality-based.Gore_Pachauri

With this in mind, ‘climategate’ – the scandal over hacked emails by prominent climate scientists – looks sinister rather than just unsavory.  The British government has concluded that University of East Anglia, home of the research institute that provides the global warming with much of its key data, had violated Britain’s Freedom of Information Act when scientists refused to hand over data so that critics could check their calculations and methods.  Breaking the law to hide key pieces of data isn’t just ‘science as usual,’ as the global warming movement’s embattled defenders gamely tried to argue.  A cover-up like that suggests that you indeed have something to conceal.

The urge to make the data better than it was didn’t just come out of nowhere.  The global warmists were trapped into the necessity of hyping the threat by their realization that the actual evidence they had – which, let me emphasize, all hype aside, is serious, troubling and establishes in my mind the need for intensive additional research and investigation, as well as some prudential steps that would reduce CO2 emissions by enhancing fuel use efficiency and promoting alternative energy sources – was not sufficient to get the world’s governments to do what they thought needed to be done. Hyping the threat increasingly doesn’t look like an accident: it looks like it was a conscious political strategy.

The political war over climate change is ending.  The alarmists have lost.  The campaign won’t disappear any time soon.  But unless the movement sheds its discredited leaders and brings its policy prescriptions into line with the evidence, the center and even the moderate left will begin running in the opposite direction.  After all, in today’s political climate, what politician wants to tell the American people that he or she intends to wreck the U.S. economy for a lie?

Doug Bandow, American Conservative Defense Alliance

View the original article at Campaign for Liberty

Advertisements

Leaked climate change emails scientist ‘hid’ data flaws

February 2, 2010

Fred Pearce
London Guardian
Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

Phil Jones, the beleaguered British climate scientist at the centre of the leaked emails controversy, is facing fresh claims that he sought to hide problems in key temperature data on which some of his work was based.

A Guardian investigation of thousands of emails and documents apparently hacked from the University of East Anglia’s climatic research unit has found evidence that a series of measurements from Chinese weather stations were seriously flawed and that documents relating to them could not be produced.

Jones and a collaborator have been accused by a climate change sceptic and researcher of scientific fraud for attempting to suppress data that could cast doubt on a key 1990 study on the effect of cities on warming – a hotly contested issue.

Today the Guardian reveals how Jones withheld the information requested under freedom of information laws. Subsequently a senior colleague told him he feared that Jones’s collaborator, Wei-­Chyung Wang of the University at Albany, had “screwed up”.

Full article here


The Death of Global Warming

February 2, 2010
FROM-The American Interest
Walter Russel Mead
Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

The global warming movement as we have known it is dead. Its health had been in steady decline during the last year as the once robust hopes for a strong and legally binding treaty to be agreed upon at the Copenhagen Summit faded away. By the time that summit opened, campaigners were reduced to hoping for a ‘politically binding’ agreement to be agreed that would set the stage for the rapid adoption of the legally binding treaty. After the failure of the summit to agree to even that much, the movement went into a rapid decline.

The movement died from two causes: bad science and bad politics.

After years in which global warming activists had lectured everyone about the overwhelming nature of the scientific evidence, it turned out that the most prestigious agencies in the global warming movement were breaking laws, hiding data, and making inflated, bogus claims resting on, in some cases, no scientific basis at all. This latest story in the London Times is yet another shocker; the IPCC’s claims that the rainforests were going to disappear as a result of global warming are as bogus and fraudulent as its claims that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035. It seems as if a scare story could grab a headline, the IPCC simply didn’t care about whether it was reality-based.

With this in mind, ‘climategate’ — the scandal over hacked emails by prominent climate scientists — looks sinister rather than just unsavory. The British government has concluded that University of East Anglia, home of the research institute that provides the global warming with much of its key data, had violated Britain’s Freedom of Information Act when scientists refused to hand over data so that critics could check their calculations and methods. Breaking the law to hide key pieces of data isn’t just ’science as usual,’ as the global warming movement’s embattled defenders gamely tried to argue. A cover-up like that suggests that you indeed have something to conceal.

The urge to make the data better than it was didn’t just come out of nowhere. The global warmists were trapped into the necessity of hyping the threat by their realization that the actual evidence they had — which, let me emphasize, all hype aside, is serious, troubling and establishes in my mind the need for intensive additional research and investigation, as well as some prudential steps that would reduce CO2 emissions by enhancing fuel use efficiency and promoting alternative energy sources — was not sufficient to get the world’s governments to do what they thought needed to be done. Hyping the threat increasingly doesn’t look like an accident: it looks like it was a conscious political strategy.

Now it has failed. Not everything that has come out of the IPCC and the East Anglia Climate Unit is false, but enough of their product is sufficiently tainted that these institutions can best serve the cause of fighting climate change by stepping out of the picture. New leadership might help, but everything these two agencies have done will now have to be re-checked by independent and objective sources.

The global warming campaigners got into this mess because they had a deeply flawed political strategy. They were never able to develop a pragmatic approach that could reach its goals in the context of the existing international system. The global warming movement proposed a complex set of international agreements involving vast transfers of funds, intrusive regulations in national economies, and substantial changes to the domestic political economies of most countries on the planet. As it happened, the movement never got to the first step — it never got the world’s countries to agree to the necessary set of treaties, transfers and policies that would constitute, at least on paper, a program for achieving its key goals.

Even if that first step had been reached, the second and third would almost surely not have been. The United States Congress is unlikely to pass the kind of legislation these agreements would require before the midterm elections, much less ratify a treaty. (It takes 67 senate votes to ratify a treaty and only 60 to overcome a filibuster.) After the midterms, with the Democrats expected to lose seats in both houses, the chance of passage would be even more remote — especially as polls show that global warming ranks at or near the bottom of most voters’ priorities. American public opinion supports ‘doing something’ about global warming, but not very much; support for specific measures and sacrifices will erode rapidly as commentators from Fox News and other conservative outlets endlessly hammer away. Without a commitment from the United States to pay its share of the $100 billion plus per year that poor countries wanted as their price for compliance, and without US participation in other aspects of the proposed global approach, the intricate global deals fall apart.

The Death of Global Warming kokszifu8eyfluzjahrgdq Since the United States was never very likely to accept these agreements and ratify these treaties, and is even less prepared to do so in a recession with the Democrats in retreat, even “success” in Copenhagen would not have brought the global warming movement the kind of victory it sought — although it would have created a very sticky and painful political problem for the United States.

But even if somehow, miraculously, the United States and all the other countries involved not only accepted the agreements but ratified them and wrote domestic legislation to incorporate them into law, it is extremely unlikely that all this activity would achieve the desired result. Countries would cheat, either because they chose to do so or because their domestic systems are so weak, so corrupt or so boththat they simply wouldn’t be able to comply. Governments in countries like China and India aren’t going to stop pushing for all the economic growth they can get by any means that will work — and even if central governments decided to move on global warming, state and local authorities have agendas of their own. The examples of blatant cheating would inevitably affect compliance in other countries; it would also very likely erode what would in any case be an extremely fragile consensus in rich countries to keep forking over hundreds of billions of dollars to poor countries — many of whom would not be in anything like full compliance with their commitments.

For better or worse, the global political system isn’t capable of producing the kind of result the global warming activists want. It’s like asking a jellyfish to climb a flight of stairs; you can poke and prod all you want, you can cajole and you can threaten. But you are asking for something that you just can’t get — and at the end of the day, you won’t get it.

The grieving friends and relatives aren’t ready to pull the plug; in a typical, whistling-past-the-graveyard comment, the BBC first acknowledges that even if the current promises are kept, temperatures will rise above the target level of two degrees Celsius — but let’s not despair! The BBC quotes one of its own reporters: “BBC environment reporter Matt McGrath says the accord lacks teeth and does not include any clear targets on cutting emissions. But if most countries at least signal what they intend to do to cut their emissions, it will mark the first time that the UN has a comprehensive written collection of promised actions, he says.”

Gosh! A comprehensive written collection of promised actions! And it’s a first!! Any day now that jellyfish is going to start climbing stairs. Sure, it will be slow at first — but the momentum will build!

The death of global warming (the movement, not the phenomenon) has some important political and cultural consequences in the United States that I’ll be blogging on down the road. Basically, Sarah Palin 1, Al Gore zip. The global warming meltdown confirms all the populist suspicions out there about an arrogantly clueless establishment invoking faked ’science’ to impose cockamamie social mandates on the long-suffering American people, backed by a mainstream media that is totally in the tank. Don’t think this won’t have consequences; we’ll be exploring them together as the days go by.

Marc Morano on Alex Jones TV: NASA Scientist Demands End to Industrial Society

February 2, 2010

The Alex Jones Channel

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

Alex welcomes back to the show Marc Morano, the man behind the climate website ClimateDepot.com for the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow. Morano is a former journalist with Cybercast News Service. He has written articles critical of NASA global warming scientist James E. Hansen. Morano was also a producer and correspondent for the nationally syndicated television newsmagazine American Investigator.

View the original video at The Alex Jones Channel

Climategate: Is the British government conspiring not to prosecute?

February 1, 2010

James Delingpole
London Telegraph
Monday, February 1st, 2010

Ed Miliband, the weird blobby egg creature with dark hair on top currently doing untold damage as Britain’s Energy and Climate Secretary, has declared war on Climate Sceptics.

According to the Observer:

The danger of climate scepticism was that it would undermine public support for unpopular decisions needed to curb carbon emissions, including the likelihood of higher energy bills for households, and issues such as the visual impact of wind turbines, said Miliband.

If the UK did not invest in renewable, clean energy, it would lose jobs and investment to other countries, have less energy security because of the dependence on oil and gas imports and contribute to damaging temperature rises for future generations. “There are a whole variety of people who are sceptical, but who they are is less important than what they are saying, and what they are saying is profoundly dangerous,” he said. “Every­thing we know about life is that we should obey the precautionary principle; to take what the sceptics say seriously would be a profound risk.”

Could the New Labour government’s zeal to impose this eco-fascist vision on Britain at any cost have anything to do with the curious case of the Information Commissioner who barked but didn’t bite?

Christopher Booker points up the mystery in his latest column:

There is something very odd indeed about the statement by the Information Commission on its investigation into “Climategate”, the leak of emails from East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit. Gordon Smith, the deputy commissioner, confirms that the university’s refusal to answer legitimate inquiries made in 2007 and 2008 was an offence under S.77 of the Information Act. But he goes on to claim that the Commission is powerless to bring charges, thanks to a loophole in the law – “because the legislation requires action within six months of the offence taking place”.

Careful examination of the Act, however, shows that it says nothing whatever about a time limit. The Commission appears to be trying to confuse this with a provision of the Magistrates Act, that charges for an offence cannot be brought more than six months after it has been drawn to the authorities’ attention – not after it was committed. In this case, the Commission only became aware of the offence two months ago when the emails were leaked – showing that the small group of British and American scientists at the top of the IPCC were discussing with each other and with the university ways to break the law, not least by destroying evidence, an offence in itself.

Full article here

Pachauri fails to get UK support over ‘unsubstantiated’ climate report claims

February 1, 2010

Damian Carrington
London Guardian
Monday, February 1st, 2010

Rajendra Pachauri, who has faced criticism as chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change following allegations of inaccurate statements in panel reports, suffered a fresh blow last night when he failed to get the backing of the British government.

A senior government official reiterated Pachauri’s position but stopped short of expressing confidence in him. “The position is that he is the chair and he has indicated that mistakes were made,” the climate change official said. “There is no vacancy at this stage, so there is no issue at this stage.”

The IPCC is required by governments to assess the science and imapct of climate change and its thousands of scientists produce major reports and summaries for policymakers. Its last report in 2007 concluded that greenhouse gas emissions from human activities were 90% certain to be causing observed global warming and was accepted by all governments.

“It is clearly unfortunate that individual problems with individual papers have been found,” said the official. “But the scientific basis for climate change does not rest on a very small number of papers in which the [IPCC] review process has not been rigorous enough. It relies on thousands and thousands of papers that have been peer reviewed through scientific journals.”

Full article here


Controversial climate change boss uses car AND driver to travel one mile to office… (but he says YOU should use public transport)

January 31, 2010

Simon Parry
UK Daily Mail
Sunday, January 31st, 2010

He is the climate change chief whose research body produced a report warning that the glaciers in the Himalayas might melt by 2035 and earned a Nobel Prize for his work – so you might expect Dr Rajendra Pachauri to be doing everything he can to reduce his own carbon footprint.

But as controversy continued to simmer last week over the bogus ‘Glaciergate’ claims in a report by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – which he heads – Dr Pachauri showed no apparent inclination to cut global warming in his own back yard.

On Friday, for the one-mile journey from home to his Delhi office, Dr Pachauri could have walked, or cycled, or used the eco-friendly electric car provided for him, known in the UK as G-Wiz.

But instead, he had his personal chauffeur collect him from his £4.5million home – in a 1.8-litre Toyota Corolla.

Hours later, the chauffeur picked up Dr Pachauri from the office of the environmental charity where he is director-general – The Energy and Resources Institute – blatantly ignoring the institute’s own literature, which gives visitors tips on how to reduce pollution by using buses.

Full article here

What's next for Bin Laden?

January 29, 2010

By Dark Politricks

Did you know that Usama Bin Laden has recently joined the green lobby?. His latest tape reveals that he is firmly in the man made global warming camp and he condemns those fools who want to debate the science behind climate change as well as condemning big corporations for raising living costs and the governments for bailing them out. You couldn’t make this up yet it seems someone, probably in CIA headquarters, is doing just that.

In fact since his probable death in 2001 Bin Laden has released more new material than Biggie Smalls, Tupak and John Lennon put together and he joins that list of uber stars who won’t let being dead stand in the way of a successful career. There are lots of people relying on his regular appearances to get paid including the intelligence agencies, the military industrial complex, security companies and all the rest of the leeches that suck from the teet of big government as it expands into a huge Orwellian nightmare. Therefore Bin Laden speaking from beyond the grave is good for many vested interests and his body actually turning up one day after a drone raid is actually the last thing many people would want to see.

In fact if Bin Laden wasn’t around to play the role of the big bad bogey man he would have to be invented to fulfil the role. He seems to have an uncanny knack of popping up just at the right moment either before a major speech is to be made or when an important piece of legislation such as the Patriot Act needs renewing and he does such a good job of scaring the public into giving up their liberties without thought or question that he has become a major part of the establishment.

Therefore as death isn’t likely to stop his career, and it seems he is branching out from the usual diatribe against western leaders into other current affairs,  should we be on the look out for even more unusual behaviour or off the wall topics of conversation in his future releases? As all good business people know diversification is the key to surviving in these challenging economic times and Bin  Laden is most certainly one of the best survivors around. As all bets are off on his next move I thought I would come up with some ideas for his next move  so maybe he will do one of the following:

1. Release a charity single along with Mullah Mohamed Omar and the rest of the Taliban backing singers in aid of Haiti. All profits go straight to a special disaster relief fund based in Kandahar and will be used to fund Islamic terrorists from all around the world to travel first class to the disaster zone and help the unfortunate citizens of Haiti by praying for them. Why should Pat Robertson and all the other nutty Christians be the only ones to make a quick buck out of the earthquake?

2. Go on Strictly Come Dancing or I’m a celebrity, get me out of here. Apparently he has always loved ballroom dancing and watches every Saturday night from his bat cave in the Stan. Plus he would be perfect in the jungle surviving on meagre rations and living on the bare necessities as he has managed to survive 9 years with a life threatening kidney disease and no dialysis machine in the mountains of Pakistan.

3. Tour schools lecturing kids on the dangers of drugs. He is the perfect spokesman to preach the just say no message and drum up support for the troops in Afghanistan who are doing such a good job in reducing the flow of Opium out of the Golden Crescent. As Tony Blair said we are in the Stan to reduce the flow of smack onto the streets of the UK. The fact that the Opium crop has boomed year on year since the Taliban eradicated it in 2001 is just pure coincidence.

4. Enter the world hide and seek championship. He seems to already hold the record for longest game without being caught so he would definitely be in the running for a medal.

5. Run for congress. Although a fundamental Muslim he is probably more liberal and less radical than some of the right wing Christians that hold office in the USA and after the recent vote in Massachutus he probably has a better chance of being elected than a Democrat. Plus he needn’t worry about getting into the country as even though he surely tops any no fly list ever created we all know that isn’t a bar to entry into the USA and the recent Christmas day bombing attempt shows that even terrorists without passports can gain entry if they know the right people.

I’m sure he has many plans for his next career move and if he’s branching out from beyond the grave to help his fellow man overcome the dangers of climate change then we should all applaud his generous spirit and good will to all humanity as its obvious that he only wants to help. Or we could all take the logical decision to see these tape releases as what they probably are which is faked material which is being produced to keep alive the Bin Laden myth as well as the phony war on terror.

Cap And Trade Scam To Be Enforced At State Level

January 29, 2010

Individuals and businesses in Austin and a plethora of other states to be taxed for emissions of life-giving gas carbon dioxide

Cap And Trade Scam To Be Enforced At State Level 290110top2

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Prison Planet.com
Friday, January 29, 2010

Globalists intent on ushering in a zero-growth post-industrial society are bypassing the federal government’s stuttering efforts to implement the cap and trade scam and going directly to the states in an effort to impose their control freak tax on the very life-giving gas that we all exhale – carbon dioxide.

Even as the foundation of the argument that human emissions of CO2 cause global warming crumbles and collapses amidst scandal after scandal, energy companies and state authorities are still pushing ahead with sinister plans to mandate that individuals and businesses get government allowances and permits to emit carbon dioxide.

KLBJ radio reports that Austin Energy, which powers the city, presented to the Austin City Council “Austin Energy’s Carbon Reduction Plan,” which goes even further than the federal cap and trade bill in calling for CO2 emissions to be reduced by 20% by 2025.

The fact that energy companies are behind this again disproves the flawed notion that oil and electricity companies oppose the global warming movement, when in fact they are its major adherents. The climate change scam is a goldmine for them because effectively licensing CO2 emissions only drives up utility prices – the costs are passed on to the consumer and their profits soar.

Austin Energy head Roger Duncan told the Austin City Council that the program would cost around $2.6 billion, but since the cost such initiatives is routinely underestimated, expect a final figure that is significantly higher. He admitted that the plan would cause energy prices to rise.

This will of course result in much higher energy bills for the general public because they will be forced to buy permits from the government to emit the deadly life-giving gas carbon dioxide.

The program will also include a Energy Conservation Audit and Disclosure Ordinance, which will empower environmental goons to perform energy audits on every house over ten years old when it is put up for sale. The new enforcement would also require “an energy audit/rating for all non-industrial commercial buildings with 5,000 square feet or more and multifamily properties with five or more units, aged 10 years or older.”

A similar system was introduced in 2007 in the UK amidst widespread derision and loathing. Known as Home Information Packs, shortly after they were introduced the British property market crashed as sellers refused to pay the fee, which was mandatory for all home sales. The system has since become notorious as nothing more than an odious new tax.

The implementation of so-called “green economies” in other countries has devastated economies and cost millions of jobs. As the Seattle Times reported back in June, Spain’s staggering unemployment rate of over 18 per cent was partly down to massive job losses as a result of attempts to replace exisiting industry with wind farms and other forms of alternative energy.

In a so-called “green economy,” “Each new job entails the loss of 2.2 other jobs that are either lost or not created in other industries because of the political allocation — sub-optimum in terms of economic efficiency — of capital,” states the report.

Despite the fact that the carbon trading market, along with “smart meter” programs, have been exposed as slush fund scams owned by the very globalists fearmongering about man-made climate change – namely Al Gore and Maurice Strong – designed to line the pockets of habitual con men who have been caught over and over again lying about the evidence behind global warming, states are now adopting their own version of the scheme so that the trick can be played on an unsuspecting public who still think that cap and trade hasn’t been implemented.

In reality, as Bloomberg News reports, “State government actions are likely to dominate the emerging U.S. carbon market in 2010,” with programs set to expand. “A group of Northeastern states already has a carbon market and two more regional programs in the Midwest and West plan to follow suit,” states the article.

As we have highlighted in the past, the ultimate goal is to reduce carbon emissions by at least 80 per cent by 2050, a move that would inflict a new Great Depression, cost millions of jobs, and sink America to near third world status.

The agenda to cut carbon emissions by 80 per cent is a huge leap towards the ultimate goal, expressed by the Carnegie Institute in 2008 and afforded sober credibility by the corporate media – a complete reduction down to zero carbon emissions, which would return mankind to the agrarian age and completely reverse hundreds of years of technological progress.

This is the ultimate tax on life and a dream come true for control freaks and globalist organizations like the Bilderberg Group and the Club of Rome who have openly pushed for a “post-industrial zero-growth society” where our standards of living are drastically reduced.

As internationally bestselling author and Bilderberg expert Daniel Estulin writes in his book The Bilderberg Group, “In a post-industrial period, zero growth will be necessary to destroy vestiges of general prosperity. When there is prosperity, there is progress. Prosperity and progress make it impossible to implement repression, and you need repression if you hope to divide society into owners and slaves. The end of prosperity will bring an end to the production of nuclear-generated electric power (as well as coal-fired plants – ed) and all industrialization (except for the computer and service industries.) The remaining Canadian and American industries would be exported to poor countries such as Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, Nicaragua, where slave labor is cheap. One of the principal objectives for NAFTA will then be realized.”

Water vapour a ‘major cause of global warming and cooling’

January 29, 2010

David Derbyshire
UK Daily Mail
Friday, January 29th, 2010

Climate scientists have overlooked a major cause of global warming and cooling, a new study reveals today.

American researchers have discovered that the amount of water high in the atmosphere is far more influential on world temperatures than previously thought.

Although the findings do not challenge the theory of man-made global warming, they help explain why temperatures can rise and fall so dramatically from decade to decade.

The study, published in the journal Science, says a 10 per cent drop in humidity 10 miles above the Earth’s surface explains why global temperatures have been stable since the start of the century, despite the rise in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

And a rise in water vapour in the 1980s and 90s may also explain why temperatures shot up so quickly in the previous two decades, they say.

Full article here

TuneUp Utilities 2010