The Lunatic Left’s Never Ending Climate Lie Story
WikiLeaks cables reveal how US manipulated climate accord, World Held Hostage to False Climate Science
WikiLeaks And Claim Of Warmest Year On Record, Expose Climate Criminality
By Dr. Tim Ball Monday, December 6, 2010
Oh what a tangled web
When first we practice to deceive!- Sir Walter Scott (1771-1832)
Question; How and why can a year be claimed as the warmest on record two months before it is over? Answer: To help participants in Cancun Climate Conference desperate because the public don’t believe, funding and power is being lost, as their deceptions are exposed.
Most believe 2010 is the warmest year ever, which is what government weather agencies, proponents of anthropogenic global warming and their supporters want. What is actually claimed is that 2010 is on the way to being the warmest on record, but they know media headlines will distort and USA Today along with others obliges with; 2010: Warmest year on record
Distortion and deception became necessary to support the collapsing exploitation of climate science (Figure 1) faced by all enjoying the warmth of Cancun Mexico while attending the Conference of the Parties (COP) 16 climate meeting. The paradox of record cold wasn’t lost on the public.
Who is making the claim about warmest year while record cold reinforces public cynicism? It’s the same old cast of deceivers identified by BBC reporter Richard Black, who Michael Mann considered reliable. He’s the person they asked to silence BBC reporter Paul Hudson when he produced a skeptical article. Hudson was first recipient of the leaked CRU emails, but did nothing, apparently intimidated by Black.
Black reports; “Temperatures reached record levels in several regions during 2010, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) says, confirming the year is likely to be among the warmest three on record.”
There were also record lows, but the stations they selected bias toward warm.
Black: The global average temperature was 0.58C above the average for 1961-90 according to Nasa, while the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa) put the figure at 0.54 above.
Why is there a difference if there is only one data set? They both over estimate, but NASA GISS, with political scientist James Hansen in charge, are always highest.
Black: The UK record, kept by the Met Office and the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, has 2010 in joint first place with the El Nino-dominated year of 1998.
The UKMO is re-examining its data. The Sunday Times notes,
The new analysis of the data will take three years, meaning that the Met Office will not be able to state with absolute confidence the extent of the warming trend until the end of 2012.
All these groups have actively modified the data to emphasize warming. D’Aleo and Watts’ detailed the extent in their paper, “Surface Temperature Records: Policy-Driven Deception?” Reduction in the number of stations alone created a severe warming distortion. (Figure 2) All government weather offices have adjusted their data to reduce early temperatures, making the current readings seem warmer.
Figure 2: Average temperature versus # of stations, Source
Some accused me of extremism for asking if the deliberate climate deception constituted crimes against humanity. People don’t want to believe such a massive deception could occur, especially if government is involved. It’s why they dismiss those who see what is happening as conspiracy theorists. There are conspiracies, defined as a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful. Cabal may be a better description of their actions; “the artifices and intrigues of a group of persons secretly united in a plot (as to overturn a government); also: a group engaged in such artifices and intrigues.” However, deliberately altering data is unlawful and harmful.
There are two big problems created by the exploitation of climate for a political agenda; lack of scientific understanding and lack of knowledge about the political manipulation and criminality practiced. They are interdependent. People don’t grasp the extent of the criminality because they don’t understand the science. It’s why people didn’t understand the implications of the false IPCC Reports and leaked CRU emails.
Now WikiLeaks reveals the extent of government involvement in the deception. The leftist British paper, The Guardian, blames the US with the headline “WikiLeaks cables reveal how US manipulated climate accord” and the charge that, “Hidden behind the save-the-world rhetoric of the global climate change negotiations lies the mucky realpolitik: money and threats buy political support; spying and cyberwarfare are used to seek out leverage.”
They ignore the fact that all nations are involved. Maurice Strong embroiled all the world’s weather and climate bureaucracies when he organized the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change through the WMO. Anthony Watts describes what the WikiLeaks material exposes. “What really strikes us is the fact that all this Copenhagen/Cancun stuff has nothing to do with the Climate, or saving the World. It’s about political positioning, money, and plain old fascism cult promotion.”
Politicians are involved, but most control and duplicity is by national weather agencies. They’re the majority of the IPCC people and dominate conferences like the travesty in Cancun. Politically biased scientists and environmental groups support them. They know the public is not buying the science any more (Figure 1). They’ve switched to exploiting fear, but that exposes them even more as temperatures plummet. Some are so desperate to achieve their goal they’ve openly abandoned the sinking science ship and revealed the real redistribution of wealth agenda. “Last week the German newspaper NZZ Online quoted German economist Ottmar Edenhofer, who is co-chair of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Working Group III on Mitigation of Climate Change, as saying, “The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War.”
James Taylor of the Heartland Institute provides further evidence.
The UN-sponsored climate talks underway in Cancun are living up to – or down to – expectations. Proving once again that global warming is more a political issue than a scientific one at the UN, and that wealth transfer rather than warming mitigation is the true goal of UN action, Professor Kevin Andersen of the UK’s Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research has submitted a paper saying “rich” nations such as the U.S. should halt economic growth over the next 20 years while allowing developing nations such as China and India to continue their explosive growth and emissions growth. Enforcement of economic growth restrictions in nations such as the U.S. should be enforced by World War II-style rationing, according to Andersen.
My question about crimes against humanity was based on the degree of deliberate deception of climate science practiced. The emails leaked from the CRU alone are sufficient to condemn what has occurred. The scientists involved provided the corrupted science through the IPCC that those led by Maurice Strong needed. They were exploiting climate to destroy developed economies and in doing so have caused untold trauma, disruption, costs and despair. Billions of dollars were wasted on research. False economies were created to promote alternative energy and green jobs. Viable industries and businesses have disappeared or are pushed to the edge with unnecessary costs and regulations. Real problems were ignored. Countries that went further down the false CO2 path, such as Spain, are already paying a high price. Food prices are just one example. They soar as corn is diverted to produce biofuels threatening starvation among people in developing regions. Millions of people including children were driven to fear about the world coming to an end. Progress to deal with real problems and improve economies were set back years because of wrong policies. Credibility of science was seriously undermined.
The only thing that allowed the world to withstand some of the damage was the viability and strength of economies built on fossil fuel energy and free market policies. Hopefully, those who don’t understand the climate science will at least understand the corruption, malfeasance, and deceptions in the CRU emails, the WikiLeaks information and other disclosures. It doesn’t require science to understand the tangled web of those deceptions.
By Alan Caruba Monday, December 6, 2010
The abject desperation and evil intentions of so-called environmentalists can be seen in the call to turn the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) into a national monument on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of its designation.
This would provide ANWR with the same status as the Statue of Liberty—only there aren’t billion of barrels of oil under the Statue, nor at George Washington’s birthplace in Virginia.
The idea of conferring national monument status on ANWR is so stupid that it should be laughed out of existence, but unfortunately we have a President who is so intent on denying Americans access to the vast treasure trove of energy resources—oil, coal, and natural gas—that common sense has nothing to do
Reporting from Anchorage, Alaska, for the Associated Press, Mary Pemberton noted that “National monument status could be an estimated 11 billion barrels of recoverable oil beyond the grasp of oil companies forever.” And that means beyond the use of Americans for the countless uses of oil that they depend upon every day for transportation, heating, lubrication, and the manufacture of thousands of products.
The usual nitwits have sent letters to the President, a combination of 80 members of Congress, 170 unidentified “scientists”, some 300 businesses and organizations (that might benefit if oil was in short supply), and 22 religious organizations. Nobody in Alaska supports this idiocy.
There are some well-known facts worth considering.
The area designated for drilling is far from a “pristine” wonderland. While there are parts of Alaska that are breathtakingly beautiful, ANWR is a perfect definition for “when Hell freezes over.”
After visiting Alaska in 2001, Jonah Goldberg, a nationally syndicated columnist, wrote in 2001 that the more beautiful parts of Alaska are far from ANWR and, in particular, “The oil is on the coastal plain at the very top of ANWR on the coast of the Arctic Ocean. And it ain’t beautiful.” The greatest population of wildlife there are trillions of mosquitoes.
“Winter on the coastal plan lasts for nine months,” noted Goldberg. “Total darkness reigns for 58 straight days. The temperatures drop to 70 degrees below zero without wind chill.”
Far from being a tourist’s mecca, ANWR said Goldberg “is a colossal fetid petri dish for some of the worst flying pestilence you can imagine.” In addition to the mosquitoes, there are nostril flies that infest caribou and parasitic warble flies that make life on the plain a hell for its local fauna. The caribou, by the way, had in 2001 increased their population “fivefold since oil exploration began decades ago in nearby Prudhoe Bay.”
The area of ANWR where the oil is known to exist is a vast frozen tundra. Not the ecological treasure the environmentalists are always braying about. Oil drilling would require roads, drill pads, and pipelines. The 2,000 acres involved is 1/20th the size of Washington, D.C. It’s the equivalent to twenty of the buildings where Boeing manufacturers its 747s.
The latest victim targeted by global warming fascists is Swedish professor, Dr. Claes Johnson who is smacked down for speaking the truth by his employers, the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
It’s no coincidence that Johnson, a world-leading mathematics professor has been silenced in the very week his co-authored climate skeptic book, ‘Slaying the Sky Dragon: Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory’ has stormed the science best seller listings after rave reviews.
Johnson is among 22 leading international experts who have dared to join forces and speak out in a blockbuster of a book that exposes the fraudulent science and calculations built into the theory of man-made global warming. The two-volume publication skillfully shreds the lies of government climatologists that faked the warming effect of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by falsely multiplying the numbers three times over.
The highly-experienced and respected professor has been banned by his bosses from teaching any “part of course material in the course Numerical Methods II.” The material is also found in his ebook, ‘BodyandSoul.’
Dr. Johnson laments, “the course, has been “stopped” by the President of the Royal Technological Institute KTH, because the book contains a mathematical analysis of some models related to climate simulation.”
It appears the blanket ban was precipitated after a small clique of pro-green student activists protested to the university that Johnson was daring to address both sides of the global warming debate. The story is also reported by DN.SE, a popular Scandinavian publication who added, “the school took away pages of the book.”
The ban is likely to be seized upon as yet further proof of undemocratic and politicized corruption of academia; adding strength to claims that global warming propagandists have systematically hijacked educational standards.
A lot of hot air was blowing at the United Nation's Climate Conference in Cancun, and it had nothing to do with the pleasant 80-degree weather in sunny Mexico. Instead, the warmth was emanating was from the mouths of bloviating environmentalist who were trying to maintain their relevance, after a year in which their claims of global warming have fallen flat.
Even the usually in-the-tank-on-global warming New York Times, observed, The apathy is palpable, and a far cry from the atmosphere last year when President Obama and the leaders of more than 100 other nations descended in droves upon the chilly Danish capital of Copenhagen to hawk their views at the climate circus. That conference saw U.S. congressional champions of cap-and-trade legislation as well as skeptics jostling to share their views on the prospects for American domestic action and a new international treaty.
I'd like to claim a little credit for that palpable apathy in Cancun, as my book "Climategate: A Veteran Meteorologist Exposes the Global Warming Scam," blew the lid off the motivations – and the faulty science – of those who claim the earth is about to melt like cheese on a hot plate of nachos. The book, of course, also disclosed the damning e-mails that were leaked from a computer server belonging to the once esteemed Climate Research Unit, or CRU, at the University of East Anglia in the U.K. The communiqués revealed well-known climate researchers speaking in baseless terms about their critics, discussing clever ways to sidestep skeptical colleagues of man-made climate change, devising plans to freeze opponents out of peer-reviewed journals, and systematically manipulating the earth's temperature record. The e-mails became known as "climategate" and led to the title of my hard-hitting book.
All of the
above assertions are bogus. For example, since 1850 – the beginning of the
Industrial Revolution – the earth's average surface temperature has only risen
.7 degrees Celsius (just a bit more than one degree Fahrenheit). Just .7
degrees Celsius in 160 years – that's all the warming planet earth has
experienced; and this minuscule temperature increase coincided with the
proliferation of the train, car, truck and even the lawnmower and leaf blower. Oh, and here's a pill that's tough for the global whiners to
swallow: The bulk of this warming occurred before
The U.N.'s new predicted 6.4 degree Celsius rise in temperature surpasses any of their previous predictions. It's likely the prognosis is the product of a political activist with a PhD who got a turn to play genius with a government computer model.
As for the sea level rise, Al Gore has been showing maps of a similarly predicted deluge for several years. If Gore was so confident of the increase, why did he purchase a multi-million dollar bayside condo in San Francisco? According to the maps, his pad will be swamped. Truth is, the oceans have been steadily rising since the last Ice Age. Take your index finger and place it as close as you can to your thumb, without the two touching. That's how much the oceans rise each year. Over the next 90 years the rise will be no more than several inches, not over six feet.
And about Tuvalu and Maldives? Their surrounding waters show no measurable signs of rising. The problem is the islands of Maldives are relatively flat atolls, composed of coral. Since tourism was first introduced to the nation in 1972, 90 plush resorts have been built, with locally mined coral being the primary aggregate for constructing the resorts. Digging up coral on small islands to build large hotels and conference centers is as stupid as sucking the air out of a lifeboat to breathe. The mining has severely compromised the atolls, creating the impression that the islands are sinking.
Likewise, Tuvalu's problem is not climate change. Tuvalu's mess is that their country was never meant for modern habitation. Their primary indigenous vegetable crop, taro, has been gravely over-farmed. There is no fresh water available – only what can be cached from rain. Much of the population on the main island uses a lagoon for its bathing and toilet facilities. The tiny nation ships its garbage to landfills in Fiji and New Zealand.
Tuvalu is a tropical island mess being run by imbeciles who are using global warming as a shakedown operation, the likes of which would make a Chicago community organizer proud. In a 2007 speech at the United Nations, the Deputy Prime Minister of Tuvalu, Tavau Teii, said that major greenhouse polluters should compensate Tuvalu for the impacts of climate change. "We are seeking new funding arrangements to protect us from the impacts of climate change … we believe that the major greenhouse polluters should pay for the impacts they are causing."
Then there's the claim that the solution to climate change is rationing. This is the most troubling assertion of all, as we have an administration running the White House who believes this plan is worthy. Note President Obama's Director of Science and Technology Policy, John Holdren, who has written, "A massive campaign must be launched in North America to restore a high-quality environment and to de-develop the United States. … This effort must be largely political."
In addition, one year ago, Lisa Jackson, director of the Environmental Protection Agency, issued a statement declaring, "The current and projected concentrations of [carbon dioxide] … threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations."
Indeed, the 2009 House Energy bill calls for an 80 percent reduction in C02 by 2050. By then the United States will have – according to Census figures – 100 million more residents. An 80 percent decrease in carbon-dioxide emissions will mean the end of the coal industry (which supplies energy to 50 percent of our homes), the offshoring of our entire manufacturing sector and the death of the automobile. Thank God the Senate never passed similar legislation or we'd be on our way to – rationing!
And the claim of food shortages? Actually, if the temperatures were to warm a couple degrees, the amount of available land for farming would increase dramatically. For example, in Canada, Russia and China, agriculture would benefit from longer growing seasons. Other benefits would be the expansion of forests and a decrease in heating fuel costs.
The flaming hot rhetoric down in Cancun made this conference more of a circus than ever. It's also interesting to note that the conference was virtually ignored by Congress. Granted, they are embroiled in a lame-duck session back home, but very few congressional staffers were seen at the confab. Usually these bureaucrats are seen bellying up to the bar and hobnobbing with the best of them.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who supported climate legislation last year, admitted that the global negotiations didn't even register a blip on her radar. "I haven't really thought about it, to be honest with you," she said.
The outgoing chair of the Senate Panel on Environment and Public Works, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., didn't even send a representative to the event. Instead, she said, "I'm sending a statement to Cancun."
As most of you know last week I was down in Cancun, Mexico reporting on the U.N. Climate Change Summit (officially called COP16/CMP6). It was several days of sun, surf, and U.N. conmen. I am back in the saddle here at home but Friday I went from the warm white sands of Cancun back to the cold white snow of Chicago. Where’s all that global warming when you need it?
At least I have the modern conveniences of natural gas to keep my house warm and coal and nuclear-fired electric to power my electronic entertainment and work devices both. Unfortunately, if the con in Cancun is successful we may no longer have such luxuries.
One of the last places I visited in Cancun was the Villa de Cambio Climatico — or in English the climate change village. The exhibit was sponsored by the Mexican federal government and was set up in order to indoctrinate Mexico’s school children in the ways of environmental hokum.
At the exhibit we found what was presented as the ideal eco-friendly house. Of course, it was suitably small as the enviro-Nazis most certainly don’t want anyone enjoying a bit of elbowroom in their homes though it did have space for a few modern niceties. It had a tiny computer area, an actual flush toilet, and a four-foot-tall refrigerator that looks like it might be able to store enough food for two or three days.
You see, the enviro-nuts have decided that you should not be allowed to have a washing machine and a dryer, nor much of a water heater (the house featured a tiny five-gallon water heater). Instead of the modern convenience of a washer and dryer they’ve graciously allowed you to have a concrete tub with a washboard built into it. To dry your clothes they want you to use that original solar device: a clothesline.
Additionally, the gray water from washing your clothes is supposed to be diverted to your back yard so that it can water your little subsistence garden — because, you know, you shouldn’t be allowed to buy food. You’ll have to grow it yourself. Grocery stores are déclassé, after all.
So, yes, the enviro-wackos want you to step back in time about a hundred years and eschew the modern convenience of a washer and dryer. I am surprised they didn’t just advise us to take our clothes down to the river and beat them with some rocks.
The eco house of the future looks a lot like the past except bleaker. While the lefties kvetch, hopefully the capitalists are creating some life saving, energy sparing, option-expanding technology. My bet’s on them.
I suppose it is no irony that these techno-luddites held their soiree in the land of the Mayas, famous for their debauchery and bouts of human sacrificing. After all, the enviro-religionistas want to kill us all, too. We evil humans are messing up their beloved Gaia, their Mother Earth, dontcha know!
The Green Energy Collapse
By News on the Net Full Story
The Ontario government paints itself in extreme green. It has outlawed coal — the only jurisdiction on the continent to have done so. It boasts the world’s biggest solar plant. It boasts the western world’s biggest subsidies to the renewables industry. And now, it also boasts the western world’s fastest-growing renewables industry.
But Ontario’s new-found status didn’t arise because Ontario newly increased its level of its subsidies. It arose because the world’s other extreme green jurisdictions — to avert the economic and political ruin that comes of unaffordable green power — recently swallowed their pride, slashed their subsidies and backstabbed their renewables industries. Like its extreme green counterparts elsewhere, Ontario will follow suit soon enough.
The French government is planning to suspend feed-in tariffs for new photovoltaic installations above a capacity of 3 kilowatt hours for a period of four months, according to a draft decree discussed at a government meeting on Thursday.—ENDS Europe, 7 December 2010
Solar developers are set to abandon France following the government’s recent announcement that it will freeze all new projects larger than 3kW in order to prick the “speculative bubble” building up around the industry.—ReCharge News, 6 December 2010
The government reduced the subsidies earned by wind-power generators registered under the 2007 Royal Decree 661 by 35 percent until 2013 and eliminated support for solar thermal plants during their first year of operation at a cabinet meeting in Madrid today, the Industry Ministry said in an e-mailed statement. Both technologies will face limits on the number of hours they can earn subsidized rates.
Britain needs to go back to old-style central planning of its electricity market, with the Government deciding who builds power stations where, so that it can take on the world’s toughest target to cut its emissions of the greenhouse gases causing global warming, the independent Committee on Climate Change tells the Government today.
The only way of getting the £150bn worth of new low-carbon energy generating plant – whether offshore windfarms, nuclear power stations or loaw-carbon and gas plants – will be for the Government to offer contracts with guaranteed prices for the electricity, the committee says.
In pursuit of its ultimate goal of slashing carbon dioxide by 80 per cent by 2050, the Government should now set a new, legally-binding interim target of a 60 per cent cut by 2030, the committee says in its latest report – which would be far and away the most demanding emissions target anywhere.