With a loss at explaining new record ice over the last week of August and first week of September for Arctic sea ice extent and thickness plus continued growth of Antarctic sea & land ice, excuses and theories fly.
How increasing CO2 leads to an increased negative greenhouse effect in Antarctica http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10…
CO2 cools atmosphere NASA study http://planet.infowars.com/science/na…
Exact Dates Given for Grand Solar Minimum Cooling commencing Globally in a paper by Zharkova, Shepherd, Popova and Zharkov, then the IPCC Tried to Suppress Research by asking the Royal Astronomical Society to remove the findings through the groups of scientific organizations associated with the IPCC. So much research is out in the world about the commencing grand solar minimum, the the lack of government action must have an agenda behind it.
SC 26 Forecast http://www.nature.com/articles/srep15…
Wave Patterns http://www.nature.com/articles/srep15…
IPCC and other scientific bodies try to remove and suppress Zharkova’s research and published papers. http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/09/sci…
“A word-salad of delusional nonsense.”
Piers Corbyn and WeatherAction comment on the #COP21 Climate “Deal”:
“It is a pack of lies, a word-salad of delusional nonsense. It is not science but politics and we challenge David Shukman of BBC and Sir David Attenborough to public debate on their claims and to answer the points made by us and all scientists at the Paris Climate Challenge alternative to UN IPCC held 1-3Dec – http://www.PCC15.org
I. THE FACTS OBSERVED IN THE REAL WORLD, rather than the product of failed models by the self-serving appointees of governments which make-up the IPCC process ARE:
(i) ALL the predictions of the ‘Global Warming’ theory of the UNIPCC have failed.
Real world temperatures as accurately measured by satellites are not rising but falling while the UN-IPCC models based on ‘cretin-Physics’ predicted rising for decades.
Arctic sea ice has now INCREASED to record levels not fallen as required under the UN IPCC model.
An international team of scientists have stunned attendees at the UN’s climate change conference in Paris recently by debunking claims that global warming is man-made.
The scientists say that while the science refutes the UN’s claim that man-made carbon emissions are to blame for global warming, they claim that the UN is pressing ahead with its sinister ‘climate regime’ agenda, which includes: destroying industrial civilization, propping up kleptocrats with Western tax funds, and seizing control of the global economy under the guise of regulating the immensely beneficial “gas of life,” also known as carbon dioxide.
– In Paris, Scientists Debunk UN “Climate” Hysteria (The New American):
PARIS — Amid United Nations efforts to shackle humanity to a UN “climate regime” at the COP21 global-warming summit, an international team of scientists and experts from various fields debunked the hysteria at a separate conference in Paris for realists. Essentially, the prestigious scientists said, there is no man-made global-warming crisis. The UN’s “climate” efforts, meanwhile, have a much more sinister agenda: Destroying industrial civilization, propping up kleptocrats with Western tax funds, and seizing control of the global economy under the guise of regulating the immensely beneficial “gas of life,” also known as carbon dioxide. The top U.S. senator on the Environment Committee also offered a message of hope to climate realists, saying the “climate charade” by the UN and the Obama administration was dead on arrival.
H/t reader squodgy:
“We are being cleverly herded into the pen.”
– 6 Manufactured Problems That Are Behind 6 Major Globalist Agendas (Activist Post, June 14, 2015):
Problem-reaction-solution, the Hegelian Dialectic is that process the globalist ruling class have chosen to use as the primary tool to constantly change society in the direction they want it to go. They manufacture a problem, focus on that problem, then sell the solution. The solution is always the very thing that drives their plan forward.
In this day and age the fundamentals of basic knowledge and awareness of what is happening in the world can be gauged by someone’s awareness of the Hegelian Dialectic. If someone is not aware of this powerful tool used by the controllers it is likely they are not aware of a lot of other things. For this reason the basics of the Hegelian Dialectic cannot be underscored enough in explaining major agendas today. Let’s look at 6 absolutely engineered problems today whose solutions play perfectly into the new world order plans. No one should mistake these for anything other than manufactured problems without which there would be no new world order. For this reason the following manufactured problems will never be solved. These manufactured problems are required and we should not expect them to go away any time soon.
Video Direct Link:https://youtu.be/4Ew05sRDAcU
1 – The Climate is Changing Unexpectedly
- The Global Warming Pause: http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/09/07/global-warming-pause-extends-to-17-years-11-months/
- Forbes Article: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/09/26/as-its-global-warming-narrative-unravels-the-ipcc-is-in-damage-control-mode/
- NASA Data Shows Pause/Ice: http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/17470-nasa-data-global-warming-still-on-pause-sea-ice-hit-record
- Volcano Under Antarctica: http://www.livescience.com/41262-west-antarctica-new-volcano-discovered.html
- NOAA Data: http://www.climate.gov/#climateWatch
- Recent Temp Graph:http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:1995/to:2016/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1995/to:2016/plot/rss/from:1995/to:2016
- US 2014 Temps:http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/national/Statewidetrank/201401-201412.gif
- US Coldest Year 2014: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/national/divisionaltmaxrank/201401-201412.gif
Originally broadcasted March 8, 2007 on British Channel 4.
A documentary, by British television producer Martin Durkin, which argues against the virtually unchallenged consensus that global warming is man-made. A statement from the makers of this film asserts that the scientific theory of anthropogenic global warming could very well be “the biggest scam of modern times.”
– Arctic Ice Brake-up is NASA’s ‘most deluded scare story ever’ (The Real Agenda news, May 14, 2014):
“Unstoppable break-up of SOME Antarctic Ice due to non-existent Global-Warming threatens sea level Rise in 200 years time,” says Piers Corbyn.
Western media alarmism has spiked this month after NASA ‘revealed’ that a large section of the Antarctic shell was breaking off and will soon make sea levels rise to cover us all. The year of mid-term elections seems to be the year of hyped politics as NASA and the U.S. government continues to spread the lies about man-made global warming.
In the most recent example of how out of proportion statements help scare people, NASA used cherry-picked data and speculation to say that a ‘gigantic’ piece of West Antarctica is now melting and falling into the sea. NASA did not mention anything about the state of the whole Antarctic & South Hemisphere, mainly because it does not fit the narrative and scare tactics of the climate change alarmists. One entity that has gone the extra mile to explain the reality of ice caps in the Antarctica was the most-respected National Snow and Ice Data Center.
In the graph below, the organization shows that, at least for the last 35 years, ice has been accumulating, not melting in the Southern Hemisphere.
– The IPCC’s Latest Report Deliberately Excludes And Misrepresents Important Climate Science (Forbes, March 31, 2014):
This week, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is releasing its latest report, the “Working Group II Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report.” Like its past reports, this one predicts apocalyptic consequences if mankind fails to give the UN the power to tax and regulate fossil fuels and subsidize and mandate the use of alternative fuels. But happily, an international group of scientists I have been privileged to work with has conducted an independent review of IPCC’s past and new reports, along with the climate science they deliberately exclude or misrepresent.
YouTube Added: 27.09.2013
– What happened to global warming? The warmest year recorded globally was 1998 (BBC News, Oct.9, 2009):
This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.
Original article (Google translation down below.):
– Die CO2-Lüge „Seit 12 Jahren ist die Erd-Erwärmung gestoppt!“ (BILD, Feb. 7, 2012):
Von PROF. FRITZ VAHRENHOLT und DR. SEBASTIAN LÜNING
Wirbelstürme! Biblische Fluten! Forscher warnen vor dem Klima-Kollaps! Doch Hamburgs Ex-Umweltsenator Fritz Vahrenholt und seine Mitautoren geben in einem neuen Buch* Entwarnung.
Heute Teil 2 der BILD-Serie: Der Einfluss der Ozeane auf unser Wetter
Global warming is a scam. (All links down below.)
Original BILD article here:
Von PROF. WERNER WEBER (TU Dortmund)
Steht die Menschheit vor einer selbstgemachten Klima-Katastrophe? Oder ist die globale Erwärmung nur eine große CO2-Lüge hysterischer Wissenschaftler? Ein Autorenteam um Hamburgs Ex-Umweltsenator Fritz Vahrenholt* gibt Entwarnung!
Die Klima-Katastrophe sei die Erfindung von Politikern und UN-Wetterforschern! In Wahrheit sei die Sonne mindestens genauso verantwortlich für die Temperaturschwankungen der Erde wie CO2! Exklusiv für BILD haben die Autoren ihre Thesen zusammengefasst.
Teil 1: Was der Weltklimarat der UNO verschweigt
Wir schlittern also in eine jahrzehntelange SonnenFLAUTE hinein.
‘NoTricksZone’ has some info and translation of the article (Google translation of the entire article below.):
“THE CO2 LIES … pure fear-mongering … should we blindly trust the experts?”
That’s what Germany’s leading daily Bild (see photo) wrote in its print and online editions today, on the very day that renowned publisher Hoffmann & Campe officially released a skeptic book – one written by a prominent socialist and environmental figure.
YouTube Added: Aug 17, 2011
Global warming is a scam:
Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner:
‘The IPCC group and the Presidents of the Maldives and Tuvalu continue to claim that the flooding is in progress, and will soon flood the islands and wipe those island nations off the surface of the globe (or rather ocean). Already here we are facing a behavior that well might be termed a “sea-level-gate.” In an open letter to the President of the Maldives (Mörner 2009), I addressed the divergence between his claim and our field observations. No reply has come.’
– Make Bono History (Telegraph):
According to the Post, Bono’s anti-poverty ONE foundation received $14,993,873 in donations from philanthropists in 2008, of which just $184,732 was distributed to three charities. (ONE is an “advocacy organisation” whose main purpose is to change policies, not support charities, it says.) So what happened to the rest? More than $8 million was spent on executive and employee salaries.
This isn’t gossip.
Dr. Rajendra Pachauri is an elite puppet (= a currupt liar and fraud).
Why did the Charities Commission let the European wing of Rajendra Pachauri’s empire get away with such poor accounting, asks Christopher Booker.
Next weekend, as delegates from 194 countries gather in South Korea for a crucial meeting of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, their big talking point will be whether the IPCC’s chairman Dr Rajendra Pachauri should resign – as a recent report from the world’s leading scientific academies seemed strongly to hint he should. The delegates face a dilemma. If they sack him, it would be a serious blow to the reputation of the panel, which has been central to the global warming scare since its founding in 1988. If he stays, it could severely damage the authority of its next major report, due in four years’ time.
Last winter, Dr Pachauri’s reputation took a hammering. On the one hand, there was the exposure of all those glaring and alarmist scientific errors in the IPCC’s last major report, produced under his guidance in 2007. On the other was the revelation in this newspaper of how his prestige as the “world’s top climate official” had coincided with a massive expansion in the fortunes of Teri, his Delhi-based research institute. Not only had Pachauri been appointed as an adviser to some of the richest banks and investment funds in the world, but Teri’s empire had mushroomed to include branches in Europe, North America, Dubai, Japan and South-East Asia.
When Dr Richard North and I came to examine this empire, our interest was drawn to Teri Europe, based in a suburban house in south London, which is registered under British law as a charity and is obliged to publish its accounts on the Charity Commission website. When we looked at these, however, they seemed rather odd. The figures showed the charity’s income and expenditure rising steadily in its early years – but from 2006 onwards they suddenly plunged to below £10,000 a year.
This was significant because £10,000 is the threshold below which a charity does not have to publish full accounts. Yet we knew that in these years Teri Europe was rapidly expanding, receiving sums way above that threshold. These included several payments from the UK government, such as £30,000 for the services of an employee of Dr Pachauri’s Delhi office to act as his co-editor on the IPCC’s 2007 Synthesis Report.
When we approached Teri Europe with our evidence, the charity’s secretary immediately admitted that there were “anomalies” in the accounts. The Charity Commission agreed to investigate. Not the least point of interest was that the charity’s trustees – “responsible,” in the commission’s words, “for approving the accounts before submission” – included, alongside Dr Pachauri, two other luminaries of the global warming establishment. Sir John Houghton was a founder of the IPCC, and had long played a key role in it. Sir Crispin Tickell was one of Houghton’s most influential allies back in 1988, as “our man at the UN” and as the adviser who talked Mrs Thatcher into enthusiasm for global warming at that crucial moment (a fervour she later disavowed).
Since it seemed that both Teri Europe and the trustees were in serious breach of the Charity Commission’s rules, this has led over recent months to a protracted series of exchanges with the commission.
First, the names of Houghton and Tickell swiftly disappeared from the list of trustees. Then, in May, after an audit by a firm of accountants, the commission’s website showed dramatically revised figures for one of the three years in question. The charity’s income for 2008 had now risen from £8,000 to £103,980, its expenditure from £3,000 to £97,419. But the figures for the previous two years were unchanged. The commission explained that it had allowed this “to save the charity a considerable amount in accounting fees”. It also claimed that the errors were due to the charity’s “inexperience in preparing accounts”, though the figures for earlier years showed no sign of “inexperience”.
I therefore put 10 searching questions to the commission. Why, for instance, was its website continuing to give false information? Would the commission show equal leniency to other bodies found to have provided misleading accounts, since normally a charity would be severely penalised for such offences?
When eventually I had a lengthy response it didn’t give a direct answer to any of my questions, except to say they were not prepared to disclose the date on which Houghton and Tickell had resigned as trustees. But clearly the commission had been embarrassed by my questions, since over the next few weeks revised figures for two more years appeared online. Income for 2007 rose from £9,000 to £49,878, for 2006 from £7,000 to £16,610 – showing that nearly £150,000 had not previously been disclosed. And, as can be seen from the commission’s website, the accounts are now shown to have been up to “1,246 days overdue”.
Don’t miss: Al Gore’s Enormous Carbon Footprint
Warmists may be winning the big grants, but they’re not winning the argument
Ever more risibly desperate become the efforts of the believers in global warming to hold the line for their religion, after the battering it was given last winter by all those scandals surrounding the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
One familiar technique they use is to attribute to global warming almost any unusual weather event anywhere in the world. Last week, for instance, it was reported that Russia has recently been experiencing its hottest temperatures and longest drought for 130 years. The head of the Russian branch of WWF, the environmental pressure group, was inevitably quick to cite this as evidence of climate change, claiming that in future “such climate abnormalities will only become more frequent”. He didn’t explain what might have caused the similar hot weather 130 years ago.
Meanwhile, notably little attention has been paid to the disastrous chill which has been sweeping South America thanks to an inrush of air from the Antarctic, killing hundreds in the continent’s coldest winter for years.
See also: Cap and Trade Is a Gigantic Scam
Are there really no depths to which ManBearPig-worshippers will not stoop in order to shore up their intellectually, morally and scientifically bankrupt cause?
Apparently not, as we see from the latest “study” – based on a petty, spiteful, Stasi-like blacklist produced by an obscure Canadian warmist – outrageously aggrandised by being published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That)
The study examined 1,372 scientists who had taken part in reviews of climate science or had put their name to statements regarding the key findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Scientists were grouped as “convinced” or “unconvinced”, and researchers examined how many times they had published papers on the climate.
The results showed that “unconvinced” scientists accounted for just three of the 100 most prolific authors on the subject, while papers by “convinced” scientists were more frequently cited in other research.
Well, no s***, Sherlock. And might this have anything to do, perchance, with the fact that – as the Climategate emails made abundantly clear – “unconvinced” scientists were deliberately shut out of the peer-review process by the “convinced” ones?
And how many scientists, with bachelor of science degrees or higher, have signed the Oregon Petition expressing doubts about Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW)? 31,000 plus.
And how many of the supposed 2500 climate scientists responsible for the IPCC “consensus” were actively involved in the sections to do with AGW? 53.
And how many scientists does it require to successfully falsify – ie prove wrong – a shabby, tired old theory like “Phlogiston”, or “Geocentrism”, or “Dangerous, unprecedented Man Made Global Warming?” One.
But guess how BBC Radio 4 reported the story this morning? Yep. “98 per cent of scientists support global warming theory.” (Hat tip: Nick Mabbs)
Then again, since when did we expect any kind of honesty or decency from the Warmists? Have a look, for example, at this great analysis by the National Post’s Lawrence Solomon on how Warmist propagandists are using their useful idiots in the MSM to exaggerate the level of public credulousness in AGW.
YouTube has already almost completely removed the video ‘Hide The Decline’ (right now there is only one uploaded video left) and ‘Hide the Decline II’ has been removed completely.
Climategate: Hide The Decline – the video
Just in case that this last video will also be removed:
Climategate: Hide The Decline – the video
Climate Experts Square Off Over Video
Experts on opposing sides of the global-warming debate are now squaring off against each other over a satirical Internet video.
On one side is Dr. Michael Mann, professor of Meteorology at Penn State University, who has been ensnared in the Climategate scandal. He is threatening to sue Minnesotans for Global Warming (M4GW) after the group produced a satirical video called “Hide the Decline,” which features Mann’s face and makes fun of his scientific findings, and accuses him of covering up evidence of an apparent decline in temperatures over the past decade.
On the other side is Dr. Patrick Michaels, a contributing author and reviewer on the U.N.’s 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and a well-known skeptic of global-warming alarmism. At a National Press Club press conference Tuesday, Michaels criticized Mann for having “very, very, very thin skin.”
The notion that a professor would file a lawsuit over a satirical video “is just quite shocking,” said Dr. Michaels.
Dr. Mann is perhaps most famous for his “hockey stick graph” which showed that mean global temperature changes, which had remained stable for the past millennium, spiked dramatically during the 20th Century. Mann was also involved in controversial e-mails between climate experts, which sat at the center of the Climategate scandal.
“Makin’ up data the old hard way, Fudgin’ the numbers day by day, Ignoring the snow and the cold and a downward line, Hide the decline (hide the decline),” reads the song in the video’s background, critical of Dr. Mann’s alleged manipulation of climate data.
The “Hide the Decline” video garnered more than 500,000 viewers and was featured on the CBS Evening News as well as on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show.
Oops! There go another two bricks, tumbling out of the IPCC wall of deceit on man-made global warming – there is not a lot left now; even the Berlin Wall (to which the AGW construct is ideologically allied) has survived better. Unhappily for Al, Phil, Michael, George and the rest of the scare-mongers, these two discredited components are among the most totemic in the AGW religion.
Firstly, a new study, funded by Nasa (which may be feeling the need to rehabilitate itself post-Climategate) has revealed that the ridiculous claim in the notorious IPCC 2007 report that up to 40 per cent of the Amazon rainforest could be drastically affected by even a small reduction in rainfall caused by climate change, so that the trees would be replaced by tropical grassland, is utter nonsense. That assertion has already been exposed as derived from a single report by the environmentalist lobby group WWF.
Now Dr Jose Marengo, a climate scientist with the Brazilian National Institute for Space Research and himself a member of the IPCC, says: “The way the WWF report calculated this 40 per cent was totally wrong, while (the new) calculations are by far more reliable and correct.” These calculations were done by researchers at Boston University and were published in the scientific journal Geophysical Research Letters. They used satellite data to study the drought of 2005, when rainfall fell to the lowest in living memory, and found that the rainforest suffered no significant effects.
So, the rainforest scare, like the Himalayan glaciers panic, is garbage. A further encouraging feature of this development is that genuine scientists are increasingly becoming emboldened to challenge the IPCC’s junk science: the Academy is beginning to reassert its integrity. AGW without withered rainforests is Hamlet without the prince. It was one of those emotive claims much invoked by priggish children in the voice-overs of nanny-state “green” commercials, lecturing their elders on the stewardship of the planet.
An even bigger tear-jerker was the plight of polar bears, bolstered by carefully cropped photographs of lonely bears stranded on fast-melting icebergs, doomed to extinction. That is the second brick that has fallen out of the IPCC wall. The official legend is that polar bears are threatened with extinction by global warming. The IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group, which has bought into global warming in a big way, has claimed that, of the 19 sub-populations of polar bears (13 of them in Canada, home to 60 per cent of polar bears), eight are declining, three are stable, one is increasing and there is insufficient data on the remaining seven.
Global warming is a scam!
Ignored concerns: Professor Mitchell approved controversial report
The Meteorological Office is blocking public scrutiny of the central role played by its top climate scientist in a highly controversial report by the beleaguered United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Professor John Mitchell, the Met Office’s Director of Climate Science, shared responsibility for the most worrying headline in the 2007 Nobel Prize-winning IPCC report – that the Earth is now hotter than at any time in the past 1,300 years.
And he approved the inclusion in the report of the famous ‘hockey stick’ graph, showing centuries of level or declining temperatures until a steep 20th Century rise.
By the time the 2007 report was being written, the graph had been heavily criticised by climate sceptics who had shown it minimised the ‘medieval warm period’ around 1000AD, when the Vikings established farming settlements in Greenland.
In fact, according to some scientists, the planet was then as warm, or even warmer, than it is today.
Early drafts of the report were fiercely contested by official IPCC reviewers, who cited other scientific papers stating that the 1,300-year claim and the graph were inaccurate.
But the final version, approved by Prof Mitchell, the relevant chapter’s review editor, swept aside these concerns.
Now, the Met Office is refusing to disclose Prof Mitchell’s working papers and correspondence with his IPCC colleagues in response to requests filed under the Freedom of Information Act.
The block has been endorsed in writing by Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth – whose department has responsibility for the Met Office.
Documents obtained by The Mail on Sunday reveal that the Met Office’s stonewalling was part of a co-ordinated, legally questionable strategy by climate change academics linked with the IPCC to block access to outsiders.
Last month, the Information Commissioner ruled that scientists from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia – the source of the leaked ‘Warmergate’ emails – acted unlawfully in refusing FOI requests to share their data.
Some of the FOI requests made to them came from the same person who has made requests to the Met Office.
He is David Holland, an electrical engineer familiar with advanced statistics who has written several papers questioning orthodox thinking on global warming.
The Met Office’s first response to Mr Holland was a claim that Prof Mitchell’s records had been ‘deleted’ from its computers.
Later, officials admitted they did exist after all, but could not be disclosed because they were ‘personal’, and had nothing to do with the professor’s Met Office job.
Finally, they conceded that this too was misleading because Prof Mitchell had been paid by the Met Office for his IPCC work and had received Government expenses to travel to IPCC meetings.