Recently in News Category

By Donna Bowater, www.express.co.uk

The world's leading climate change body has been accused of losing credibility after a damning report into its research practices.

A high-level inquiry into the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found there was "little evidence" for its claims about global warming.

It also said the panel had emphasised the negative impacts of climate change and made "substantive findings" based on little proof.

The review by the InterAcademy Council (IAC) was launched after the IPCC's hugely embarrassing 2007 benchmark climate change report, which contained exaggerated and false claims that Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035.

Rest of the article.

Natural News

A recent report issued by the European Union has revealed that biofuels, or fuel made from living, renewable sources, is not really all that beneficial to the environment. Rather than reduce the net carbon footprint as intended, biofuels can produce four times more carbon dioxide pollution than conventional fossil fuels do.

Common biofuels like corn ethanol, which has become a popular additive in gasoline, and soy biodiesel, which is being used in commercial trucks and other diesel-fueled vehicles, are often considered to be environmentally-friendly because they are renewable. But in order to grow enough of these crops to use for both food and fuel, large swaths of land around the world are being converted into crop fields for growing biofuels.

In other words, millions of acres of lush rainforests are becoming corn and soy fields in order to provide enough of these resources for their new uses. The net carbon footprint of growing crops for fuel is far higher than what is emitted from simple fossil fuel usage.

Entire article here.

By Elmer Beauregard

The east coast has a few warm days and they are calling it the hottest year on record.

They can say that its the warmest year on record because they are cooking the books. They are measuring "worldwide" temperature from less and less weather stations which are mostly in heavily populated areas which tend to be warmer.

If you Google "2010 hottest year on record" you will get thousand of articles. This ties into my first Law of Global Warming which I call "The Chicken Little Syndrome" which states:

After an unusual warm spell, some people think that means the globe will burn up, so they run around screaming "The Globe Is Warming! The Globe Is Warming!"

This inevitably always leads to my second law of Global Warming or "God Is In Control":

Whenever the mainstream media comes out and says that Global Warming is for real, we get hit with unusually cold weather.

Let's not forget the now infamous January 1996 Newsweek Global Warming Cover Story that came out during the blizzard of the century. Newsweek later blamed the blizzard on Global Warming. This put a big dent in the Anti-Global Warming movement, and they were forced to start calling it "Climate Change".

Infowars.com

"The Obama Deception was getting more and more popular, and the establishment doesn't like the fact that it exposes the Left-Right paradigm and identifies Obama as a puppet," said Alex Jones.

Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet.com

The Chinese system has nothing to do with "war" and everything to do with political oppression

When Senator Joe Lieberman attempted to justify draconian legislation that would provide President Obama with a figurative kill switch to shut down parts of the Internet, he cited the Chinese system of Internet policing as model which America should move towards.

Given the fact that Lieberman seeks to mimic the Chinese system as the goal of his Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, should it concern us that the Chinese government routinely orders Twitter and Facebook-like services to "purge sites of politically "sensitive" words and expressions," as the Financial Times reports today?

"Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war and we need to have that here too," Lieberman told CNN's Candy Crowley last month.

However, China's "war" is not against foreign terrorists or hackers, it's against people who dare to use the Internet to express dissent against government atrocities or corruption. China's system of Internet policing is about crushing freedom of speech and has nothing to do with legitimate security concerns as Lieberman well knows.

It's a system concentrated around state oppression of any individual or group that seeks to use the Internet to draw attention to political causes frowned upon by the authorities.

Rest of the article.

After Lord Monckton's lengthy rebuttal yesterday to John Abraham's 83 minute critique, Professor Abraham has decided to remove 10 minutes of his presentation.

From wattsupwiththat.com

"Latest news - sent to me by two readers of Anthony's outstanding blog - is that Abraham, inferentially on orders from the Trustees of his university acting on advice from their lawyers, has (without telling me) re-recorded his entire 83-minute talk to take out the very many direct accusations of "misrepresentation", "complete fabrication", "sleight of hand" etc. etc. that he had hurled at me in the original version of his talk. For instance, he now seems to have appreciated his unwisdom in having accused me of having "misrepresented" the work of scientists I had not even cited in the first place.

Taking out his direct libels has reduced the length of his talk by 10 minutes. To my own lawyers, Abraham's retreat will be of interest, because it is in effect an admission that his talk is libelous, and that he and his university know it is libelous. Though his new version corrects some of the stupider and more egregious errors in the original, many crass errors remain, including errors of simple arithmetic that are surely disfiguring in a "scientist" presuming to correct mine."

Anchored by Andrea Canning - Original Air Date: Monday July 12, 2010

ABC News Global Warming Debate Part 1:

Susan Ferrechio , Washington Examiner

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., plans to bring a comprehensive energy and climate bill to the Senate floor by the end of the month that will include a cap on carbon emissions produced by the nation's utilities.

Reid announced his plans after huddling with President Obama about the Senate's July agenda and said he wants to introduce the bill, which has not yet been written, the week of July 26.

Reid was vague on details, but signaled he wants the bill to require the nation's electricity providers to pay a price for emitting carbon, which the EPA says will lead to global warming.

Read more at the Washington Examiner.

Thanks to Climate Realists

Christopher Monckton has issued an extensive and detailed critique and refutation of a widely circulated 83-minute personal attack on him by one J.P. Abraham, a lecturer in fluid mechanics at the University of St. Thomas, Minnesota.

Professor Abraham's 83-minute lecture with 115 slides purported to demolish a talk about climate change that Lord Monckton had given in St. Paul, Minnesota, in October 2009. More than 2.5 million people have seen Monckton's talk on YouTube, making it one of the most popular viewings on the web.

In June 2010, John Abraham posted up an attack on the internet via the servers of the University of St. Thomas. Within a week, Monckton's response letter with its near-500 questions was in Abraham's hands, to which he has not responded as challenged.

Monckton publicly accuses Abraham of -

Bad faith in having "furtively" spent eight months preparing his savage personal attack behind Monckton's back, entirely contrary to accepted academic practice;

Malice in having made dozens of serious allegations about Monckton when he knew the allegations he had made were false in every material particular, or had no reason to believe the allegations were true;

Appealing to a false authority on the subject of the climate that, as a lecturer in fluid mechanics, he did not possess (Monckton demonstrates Abraham appears at times incompetent even in arithmetic);

Academic dishonesty in having repeatedly made up statements that Monckton had not made, having put those statements to other scientists, having obtained hostile responses from those scientists, and having included those hostile responses in his attack as though they were responses to what Monckton had said; and

Lying repeatedly by misstating what Monckton had said and then attacking those misstatements; by falsely and repeatedly alleging that Monckton had misrepresented scientists' results when Monckton had either accurately represented the results or not cited the scientists he was alleged to have misrepresented at all; by unjustifiably and repeatedly impugning Monckton's integrity, qualifications, experience, and competence in a manner that he knew to be inaccurate; and by repeatedly taking Monckton's words out of their context and making a willful nonsense of them.

Download Monckton's critique.

By Jeremy A. Kaplan, FoxNews.com

Michael Mann, the author of a notorious scientific study that is a tent pole of global warming public policy, has been found innocent of charges of improper conduct.

Once again.

Mann's seminal work was a 1998 climate study that showed a sharp, hockey-stick-shaped increase in the world's temperatures based on an analysis of age rings in trees. Despite ongoing criticism, the study formed the backbone of global warming theories -- until leaked e-mails from top climate scientists cast fresh doubt on Mann's methodology and integrity, notably "the trick" he used to make his data so compelling.

A group of six of Mann's Penn State colleagues found him innocent of 3 out of 4 charges on February 3, but the investigative panel requested a deeper, more thorough look into whether his conduct deviated from standard scientific practice.

So the panel asked Mann five questions, spoke with his boss, and interviewed three other climate scientists. Case closed.

Rest of the article.

Found this at the Orange County Register

Environmental issues dominated the last portion of the questioning, with Feinstein asking about the reach of the Environmental Protection Agency and the ability of citizens to sue companies for contributing to pollution and global warming. Normally, citizens can only bring cases if they have been personally "injured," but environmental injury is a gray area.

"Do you believe it's possible for citizens to demonstrate that environmental harms have injured them for constitutional purposes?" Feinstein asked.

"The answer is yes, much depending on what Congress does," Kagan replied.

By Elmer Beauregard

The number of Scientist who still believe in global warming continues to drop.

There used to be 2,500 scientists who said they believed in man-made global warming, now in a new study done by the The National Academy of Sciences, that number is down to only 1,372. And of that number 3% now don't believe in man-made Global Warming anymore.

Of course this number pails in comparison to the 31,000 scientist who have signed a petition saying they don't believe in man-made global warming.

Let's see 97% of 1,372 is 1,330 who still believe in the myth, compared to 31,487 who don't. So only 1 out 24 scientists still believes in man-made global warming

By Elmer Beauregard

The Good: Obama Did Not Mention Global Warming Once. He didn't say anything about a consensus or overwhelming evidence, we seem to be winning on this issue

The Bad: He still calls the energy bill a "Climate" bill. Even though Global Warming is a dead issue Obama is still going to tax us for emitting CO2.

The Good: No Mention of "Peak Oil". It's hard to say we're running out of oil when its covering most of the Gulf of Mexico (from one well). Just like its hard to believe in Global Warming when your freezing to death.

The Bad: Obama did say that there is no more oil on dry land. Excuse me, what about ANWR?

& The Ugly: Said he will have to tax energy! Sure Obama is going to make BP pay for their misdeeds, but BP will also benefit greatly from the new energy bill. BP is a huge player in "Green" energy, so what they lose on the oil spill side they will more than make up for on the Cap & Trade side. Plus, when gas goes to $5 a gallon BP will double their profits without lifting a finger. And who is going to pay for all this? The American people.

By Paul Chapman in Wellington, Telegraph

Low-lying Pacific islands regarded as "poster child" examples of the threat from rising sea levels are expanding not sinking, a new study has revealed.

Scientists have been surprised by the findings, which show that some islands have grown by almost one-third over the past 60 years.

Among the island chains to have increased in land area are Tuvalu and neighbouring Kiribati, both of which attracted attention at last year's Copenhagen climate summit.

In the study, researchers compared aerial photographs and high-resolution satellite images of 27 islands taken since the 1950s.

Only four islands, mostly uninhabited, had decreased in area despite local sea level rises of almost five inches in that time, while 23 stayed the same or grew.

Seven islands in Tuvalu grew, one by 30 per cent, although the study did not include the most populous island.

In Kiribati, the three of the most densely populated islands, Betio, Bairiki and Nanikai, also grew by between 12.5 and 30 per cent.

Rest of the article.

By Gabriel Nelson, New York times, Greenwire

After an unusual about-face prompted by a late recusal, a federal appeals court has scrapped a ruling that said the nation's largest producers of greenhouse gas emissions could be sued for the damage caused by global warming.

The case, Comer v. Murphy Oil, started with a lawsuit by Gulf Coast residents affected by Hurricane Katrina. Claiming that global warming contributed to the severity of the storm, the plaintiffs sued dozens of the nation's largest polluters -- a veritable who's who of utilities, chemical companies and the oil industry.

The Comer case is one of several pioneering climate change cases based on claims of public nuisance, a centuries-old mainstay of common law that allows people to sue their neighbors for nuisances such as foul smells, loud noises or overgrown trees. A three-judge panel from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year that the plaintiffs could proceed with their lawsuit, but that ruling is now out of play unless the plaintiffs appeal to the Supreme Court and the justices decide to intervene.

Rest of the article.

By Elmer Beauregard

ABC put out a hit piece last Sunday basically saying that skeptics are racists.

ABC in this piece uses the same logic that was used in developing the Hockey Stick Chart.

If you find one tree whose rings are Hockey Stick shaped, then all tree rings must be Hockey stick shaped.

ABC in their piece found a white supremacist who is a Global Warming Skeptic, so therefore all Global Warming Skeptics must be white supremacists.

He discusses his new book Power Grab plus other recent events on the Alex Jones Show.

Attorney and author Christopher C. Horner, a Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Mr. Horner has represented CEI as well as scientists and members of the U.S. House and Senate on matters of environmental policy in the federal courts including the Supreme Court. He writes for legal and industrial trade journals and online opinion pages. Mr. Horner is the author of two best-selling books: Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud and Deception to Keep You Misinformed and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism, which spent half of 2007 on the New York Times bestseller list.

Power Grab: How Obama's Green Policies Will Steal Your Freedom and Bankrupt America

Listen to his radio Interview here.

Source: SPPI

For what is believed to be the first time ever in England, an audience of university undergraduates has decisively rejected the notion that "global warming" is or could become a global crisis. The only previous defeat for climate extremism among an undergraduate audience was at St. Andrew's University, Scotland, in the spring of 2009, when the climate extremists were defeated by three votes.

Last week, members of the historic Oxford Union Society, the world's premier debating society, carried the motion "That this House would put economic growth before combating climate change" by 135 votes to 110. The debate was sponsored by the Science and Public Policy Institute, Washington DC.

Serious observers are interpreting this shock result as a sign that students are now impatiently rejecting the relentless extremist propaganda taught under the guise of compulsory environmental-studies classes in British schools, confirming opinion-poll findings that the voters are no longer frightened by "global warming" scare stories, if they ever were.

Investigation "prudent" says A-G

No infringement on academic freedom
Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli said Wednesday the investigation by his office into the research activities of a former UVA scientist is about possible fraud and is in no way an infringement on academic freedom Cuccinelli said that he is not investigating Dr. Michael Mann's scientific conclusions and that the legal standards for the misuse of taxpayer dollars apply the same at universities as they do any other agency of state government.

The Attorney General stated that it was not normal policy to comment on open investigations for the sake of the individuals involved as well as the investigative process. The Office had sent a Civil Investigative Demand to the University of Virginia to obtain documents related to the work of Dr. Mann who is a leading researcher in climate change and was part of the University's faculty between 1999 and 2005.

The C.I.D. was made public on The Hook website by someone other than the office of the attorney general though they have now confirmed the documentation is authentic.
A statement issued said: "The revelations of the so-called Climate-gate indicate that some data may have been deliberately manipulated to arrive at pre-set conclusions. The use of manipulated data to apply for taxpayer-funded research grants in Virginia is potentially fraud. Given this, the only prudent thing to do was to look into it."
"The same legal standards for fraud apply to the academic setting that apply elsewhere," said Cuccinelli. "The same rule of law, the same objective fact-finding process will take place."

U.Va. has hired a law firm to explore legal options - agreed to by the Attorney General - signaling a possible fight regarding the demand.

According to the C.I.D., the equivalent of a subpoena, the Attorney General is investigating the possibility Dr. Mann is in violation of the Fraud against Taxpayers Act because he may have presented false or misleading data relating to climate change while seeking state-funded research grants.

This could be good news for M4GW  because everyone would have to link to us because we are the only Pro Global Warming Blog out there.

Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet.com

Cass Sunstein, who wrote a white paper calling for "conspiracy theories" to be banned, wants to legally force Americans to "do what's best for our society" and dilute their own free speech

Disturbing audio has emerged of White House information czar Cass Sunstein, who in a previous white paper called for banning "conspiracy theories," demanding that websites be mandated by law to link to opposing information or that pop ups containing government propaganda be forcibly included on political blogs.

In an audio excerpt of an interview which was posted on the Breitbart.tv website today, Sunstein discusses how conservative websites should provide links to liberal websites and vice versa or even how political blogs should be made to include pop ups that show "a quick argument for a competing view".

Sunstein said that if this system couldn't be implemented voluntarily, "Congress should hold hearings about mandates," which would legally force people to dilute their own free speech. The Harvard Professor also said that blogs should be forced to list a random draw of 25 popular websites, such as CNN.com.

Investors Business Daily

Regulations: Call it cap-and-trade or bait-and-switch, but John Kerry and Joe Lieberman continue to tilt at windmills with a bill to restrain energy growth in the name of saving the planet.

The bill introduced Wednesday and sponsored by the two senators is called the American Power Act, an Orwellian phrase if ever there was one. Like President Obama's offshore drilling program, for every "incentive" there is a restriction. It's as if Hamlet were to be appointed Secretary of Energy.

The legislation has little to do with developing America's vast domestic energy supply. It's cap-and-trade meets pork-barrel spending. It's about regulations, restrictions and research. It does not deal with exploiting America's vast energy reserves but with finding ways to mitigate their alleged harmful effect.

Rest of the article.

By Roger F. Gay, mensnewsdaily.com/

It's official. Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman have signaled the end of their political careers. The two have introduced what they've titled the "American Power Act." Yep, it's a global warming bill - Cap-n-Trade, Cap-n-Tax, etc. The premise for this bill is that the industrial emissions of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) are causing global temperatures to rise and to prevent global catastrophe the industrialized world must reduce its emissions of CO2.

A pork and power bill based on global warming propaganda has been a priority for the Obama administration. Given that it has already been established, absolutely, that predictions of catastrophic man-made global warming are a scam, you might question the two senators' sanity for introducing one. But new benefits to Israel have recently been negotiated, which might be all it takes to make Joe Lieberman happy. And it's very easy to imagine a chat between John Kerry and Al Gore that ends with Al Gore saying, "Yah, but the money is good."

Kerry's term isn't over until 2014, when he will be 71 years old, so retirement isn't an unreasonable choice anyway. Lieberman is about the same age with his current term ending two years earlier.

Investor's Business Daily describes the bill as "cap-and-trade meets pork-barrel spending." It's about regulations, restrictions and research. The bill creates some 60 new agencies and projects to eat up our tax dollars and buy support.

Rest of the article.

By Elmer Beauregard

The problem with the Senate's New Climate Bill is that it still uses the word "Climate".

This bill was written with the false assumption that CO2 is responsible for Global Warming and we now know that it isn't. 12 out of 13 scientists don't believe in Global Warming anymore but Kerry and Lieberman still do. They must get their news from NPR.

The Kerry and Lieberman's bill aims to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions to 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, and ultimately, 80% below those levels by mid-century. Doing this will have no effect on the climate, but it will put a burden on the U.S. economy based on a fictitious problem.

The bill does have some provisions for nuclear plants and offshore drilling to lure conservatives into supporting this bill, but the main thing this bill does is install an Enron style form of Carbon Credit Trading or "Cap and Trade".

The bill also allows states to opt out of offshore drilling in their own waters if they wish, but it doesn't allow states the autonomy to drill on their own dry land if they want to.

To avoid disasters like the oil spill in the Gulf, I think states like Alaska should be allowed to drill for their own oil on dry land and maybe use American companies, instead of having foreign companies drilling in our waters a mile deep.

If our Government would have allowed drilling in ANWR, we wouldn't need any oil from the middle east and the Gulf disaster could have been avoided. Plus, it would have a smaller footprint than one wind farm or solar plant.

By Brian Sussman, American Thinker

Cap-and-Trade Is Back
On Wednesday, Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) plan to introduce legislation designed to inflate the cost of energy, strain family budgets, and decimate America's manufacturing sector -- all in the name of supposedly saving the climate.

Kerry and Lieberman have been revamping legislation that narrowly passed the House of Representatives last year. The House bill imposes oppressive limits on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and establishes a complex cap-and-trade scheme in which the federal government determines how much CO2 a business may emit. If a business exceeds its allowance, it may purchase additional "carbon credits" from an exchange, where the credits will be traded like a commodity. Rules for the exchange of carbon credits, including the trading of carbon derivatives, are addressed in the House bill, and my sources tell me that the Senate version will include these same stratagems.

n an e-mail sent to the media last week regarding their plans, Kerry and Lieberman said, "We can no longer wait to solve this problem which threatens our economy, our security and our environment."

My insiders also say the new Kerry-Lieberman proposal will keep the House bill's goal of attaining a 17-percent reduction of greenhouse gases (below their 2005 level) by 2020. Apparently the Senate bill will allow cap-and-trade to hit power companies first, and then within six years include the manufacturing sector.

Rest of the article.

By Elmer Beauregard

There used to be 2,500 scientist who believe in Global Warming now there are only 250.

Today in a desperate attempt to restore their reputations a mere 250 scientists came forward to do damage control from the hacked emails that exposed their Ponzi scheme last fall.

The open letter, signed by only 11 Nobel laureates, and published in the May 7 issue of the journal Science, reads, "When someone says that society should wait until scientists are absolutely certain before taking any action, it is the same as saying society should never take action."

It seems they have also created a new category of scientist, they call themselves "Climate Change Scientists". Which I think makes them seem more like a political group then a scientific one, because they are already assuming the science is proven and are moving on with a political agenda.

On the other side of the debate 31,000 regular old "Scientists" have signed a petition saying they don't believe in Global Warming.

So let's see, that means 123 Out Of 124 Scientist DON'T Believe in Global Warming!