Posts

France’s Leading Meteorologist Denies Reality of Climate Change [+Video]

Philippe Verdier

Philippe Verdier

France’s top meteorologist Mr  Philippe Verdier has been fired claims in his new book Climat Investigation (Climate Investigation) that leading climatologists and political leaders have “taken the world hostage” with misleading data.

“Every night I address five million French people to talk to you about the wind, the clouds and the sun. And yet there is something important, very important that I haven’t been able to tell you, because it’s neither the time nor the place to do so,” he said in a promotional video.

He added: “We are hostage to a planetary scandal over climate change – a war machine whose aim is to keep us in fear.”

The outspoken views led France 2 to take him off the air this past Monday. “I received a letter telling me not to come. I’m in shock,” he told RTL radio reporters. “This is a direct extension of what I say in my book, namely that any contrary views must be eliminated.”

RELATED VIDEO:

ABOUT GENE KAPROWSKI

Gene Koprowski is the director of marketing at The Heartland Institute. Koprowski is the author of two books, co-author of another two books, and has been a journalist covering science and health policy since the 1980s. He has been a regular, contributing writer to The Wall Street Journal, Investor’s Business Daily, and Entrepreneur magazine, a staff writer for Forbes ASAP, and a columnist for United Press International (UPI). He earned an Emmy Award nomination for his work for Foxnews.com in 2008 from the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences (Chicago) and an investigative reporting award from the Associated Press Editors in 1988. Overall, he has published under his byline nearly 4,000 reports, op/eds, and features during his extensive journalism career. He served as a health policy adviser to the governor of Virginia, Robert F. McDonnell, from 2010-2014. He’s pictured here with his daughter, Katherine, outside the governor’s mansion in Richmond, Virginia. He is a former U.S. Naval Reserve officer and served in the Supreme Allied Command/Atlantic Headquarters and NATO. He holds degrees from The University of Chicago, and Northwestern University, and completed fellowships at the University of London, King’s College, Institute of Psychiatry, and at the Stanford University School of Medicine. He earned a professional degree in medicine with honors. Koprowski also completed a fellowship at the Institute of Psychoanalysis.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Top U.S. Scientist Resigns Admitting Global Warming Is A Big Scam

Perth electrical engineer’s discovery will change climate change debate

Icelandic volcano’s toxic gas is triple that of Europe’s industry

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Somewhat Reasonable.

What? Susan Rice Blames Syrian Muslim Jihad on Climate Change

“In the years prior to civil war breaking out in Syria, that country also experienced its worst drought on record. Farming families moved en masse into urban centers, increasing political unrest and further priming the country for conflict.”

There was a massive movement from rural areas to urban centers in the early 20th century in the U.S. Yet it did not create anything like the Islamic State. Rice’s is a pseudo-analysis that sounds superficially plausible until one realizes that it depends for its appearance of cogency on a proposition she denies: that Islamic texts, and the clerics who teach from them, incite believers to violence. For without the influence of those texts, there would be no necessary reason why the movement to urban centers would have touched off the present conflict we see in Syria.

“Susan Rice Blames Climate Change For Conflict in Syria,” by Charlie Spiering, Breitbart, October 13, 2015:

In her most dramatic speech to date about climate change, National Security Advisor Susan Rice suggests climate change was partially responsible for the conflict in Syria and represents a looming threat to the entire world.

“In the years prior to civil war breaking out in Syria, that country also experienced its worst drought on record,” she said during a political speech at Stanford University. “Farming families moved en masse into urban centers, increasing political unrest and further priming the country for conflict.”

An alarmed Rice warned that climate change was “an advancing menace” that portended doom for the nations around the world.

“Today, we face no greater long-term challenge than climate change, an advancing menace that imperils so many of the other things we hope to achieve,” she said according to advance text of her speech.

Rice echoed many themes promulgated by the Obama administration but ratcheted up the alarmist rhetoric to a fever pitch.

“Consider the impacts—to the global economy and to our shared security—when rising seas begin to swallow nations whole,” she explained while discussing rising sea levels of “as much as 20 feet.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Because of Defense Spending Cuts, Navy Won’t Have Aircraft Carrier in Middle East Anymore

3 Dead, Dozens Wounded, in 4 Islamic Terror Attacks in Israel

Texas Muslim lied to U.S. agents about allegiance to the Islamic State

Video: “Palestinian” Muslim hits pedestrians with car, attacks them with meat cleaver

New members added to Senate Jihad Caucus as legislators tell Obama to speed up screening of Syrians

Data: ‘Global warming’ NOT behind California drought

The media is once again attempting to portray the current California drought as historically unprecedented. See: Californian water source at 500-year low: “We should be prepared for this type of snow drought to occur much more frequently because of rising temperatures,” lead author Valerie Trouet, a professor at the University of Arizona, said in a statement. “Anthropogenic” –- or manmade –- global warming “is making the drought more severe,” she added. 

But recent peer-reviewed studies and historical data refute these drought claims.

Two new studies show that global warming is not behind California drought – there is a gigantic warm blob in the Pacific Ocean that is fueling California’s four-year-long drought, and it has nothing to do with global warming. Two new studiesreleased in the journal “Geophysical Research Letters”, explain how this large expanse of warm ocean water is affecting California’s weather as well as the East Coast’s past two brutal winters. Read more here.

Other studies counter the notion that California is experiencing unprecedented drought.

AMS Journal study finds California drought is ‘not unprecedented’ over past 440 years: 9 other droughts as bad or worse – Published in American Meteorological Society journal – Study: ‘An analysis of the October 2013–September 2014 precipitation in the western United States and in particular over the California-Nevada region suggests this anomalously dry season, while extreme, is not unprecedented in comparison with the ~120-year long instrumental record of water year (WY, October–September) totals, and in comparison with a 407-year WY precipitation reconstruction back to 1571. Over this longer period nine other years are known or estimated to have been nearly as dry or drier than WY 2014. The three-year deficit for WY’s 2012–2014, which in the California-Nevada region exceeded the annual mean precipitation, is more extreme but also not unprecedented, occurring three other times over the past ~ 440 years in the reconstruction.’

NOAA Study: Causes of Calif. drought are natural, not man-made – Natural weather patterns and climate variability, not man-made global warming, are causing the historic drought that’s parching California, says a study out today from federal scientists. “It’s important to note that California’s drought, while extreme, is not an uncommon occurrence for the state,” said Richard Seager, report lead author and professor with Columbia University’s Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory. The report, “Causes and Predictability of the 2011-14 California Drought,” was sponsored by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

California drought: Past dry periods have lasted more than 200 years, scientists say – ‘The state has been parched for much longer stretches before that 163-year historical period began’ – Scientists who study the West’s long-term climate patterns say the state has been parched for much longer stretches before that 163-year historical period began. Through studies of tree rings, sediment and other natural evidence, researchers have documented multiple droughts in California that lasted 10 or 20 years in a row during the past 1,000 years — compared to the mere three-year duration of the current dry spell. The two most severe megadroughts make the Dust Bowl of the 1930s look tame: a 240-year-long drought that started in 850 and, 50 years after the conclusion of that one, another that stretched at least 180 years.’

E&E News on 2012 U.S. drought: ‘For the scientists who take the long view of history, it’s merely a climatological blip’ — 1930s ‘Dust Bowl & 1988 both eclipse 2012 drought, scientists say’ – ‘Scientists say [2012] drought is practically embryonic compared with severity & extent of others in America’s past…The Dust Bowl held on for as many as 8 years in some parts of Great Plains, with successive dry spells hitting in 1934, 1936 & 1939-1940. The multiyear drought of 1950s began in SW but eventually spread to cover 10 states before it ebbed in 1957. The current drought, in contrast, is just about 2 months old’

In addition, many other peer-‘reviewed studies and data refute the notion of unprecedented drought in California or elsewhere.

Extreme weather failing to follow ‘global warming’ predictions: Hurricanes, Tornadoes, Droughts, Floods, Wildfires, all see no trend or declining trends – Extreme weather at or near historic lows.

NPR: 3 new papers make the case that forest fires in the West today burn less than in historical times

New Research Confirms Human CO2 Not Causing A Global Drought Increase

New Research Confirms Human CO2 Not Causing A Global Drought Increase – ‘Droughts in the U.S. are more frequent and more intense during COLDER periods’

New study finds drought 1100 years ago in southwest US was much more severe & extreme than any drought since – Published in PNAS

New paper debunked: Claims AGW pushed the ‘Western US toward the driest period in 1,000 years’ – The claim that AGW has “pushed the Western US toward the driest period in 1,000 years” is not supported by the proxy data shown in the paper. In addition, the modeling claim that AGW will cause “unprecedented risk of drought in the 21st century” is entirely based upon overheated climate models which have been falsified at confidence levels exceeding 98%.
Hillary Clinton’s ‘Drought’ debunked: Claimed ‘climate change was causing extreme weather and droughts’

Climatologist Dr. John Christy in testimony to Congress: ‘Extreme events, like the recent U.S. drought, will continue to occur, with or without human causation’ — ‘These recent U.S. ‘extremes’ were exceeded in previous decades’ — ‘The expression of ‘worse than we thought’ climate change as documented in [James] Hansen’s OpEd does not stand up to scrutiny’

Prof. Pielke Jr. on new Nature drought study: ‘It means that a widely accepted and oft-repeated consensus position expressed in IPCC 2007 now appears to have been incorrect’ — Pielke Jr.: ‘This should not be unexpected as a consensus position is a snapshot of perspectives, and in science, perspectives can change based on new evidence and study…This places drought into a category with tropical cyclones, floods, tornadoes & other phenomena where the evidence does not support claims that things are progressively getting worse — with more frequent and intense extreme events on climate time scales’

Prof. Pielke Jr. on new Nature drought study: ‘Once again the lesson is that if you are looking for a signal of human-caused climate change, it is best not to look at such extremes’ — Pielke Jr.:’There is very little evidence to support claims that the influence of such changes can be observed
in the observational record of extreme events. Advocates who justify action on climate change by appeals to the latest extreme event go well beyond what science can support, and in the process undercut the very cause that they are advocating for’

Nature paper: Global droughts unchanged in 60 years: ‘Worldwide drought is about the same now as it was in 1950′ — ‘Researchers finally accounting for fact that warmer world usually means more evaporation (especially from oceans) & thus more rain’ — ‘How many images have we seen of drought-stricken cracked land, or been told this is future?…Since end of WWII humans have produced 85% of all their CO2 emissions, but here is a new study showing that for all those emissions, & for all that warming, droughts back then were just as bad globally as they are today’

Prof. Roger Pielke Jr.: Over the climate time scales ‘droughts have, for the most part, become shorter, less frequent, and cover a smaller portion of the U. S. over the last century’ — ‘Some places have become dryer, others wetter, and not much confidence in asserting the presence of any trends at the global scale.’ — Pielke Jr. summarizing the bottom-line conclusions of two of the most recent major scientific assessments of extreme events and climate change, one by the US govt. released in 2008 then reaffirmed in the CCSP Unified Synthesis under the Obama Admin., and the 2nd from the UN IPCC.

Article in Nature says extreme weather events can’t currently be attributed to global warming — An editorial published in the current issue of nature notes that ‘Better models are needed before exceptional events can be reliably linked to global warming.’ — ‘One critic argued that, given the insufficient observational data and the coarse and mathematically far-from-perfect climate models used to generate attribution claims, they are unjustifiably speculative, basically unverifiable and better not made at all.’

1974: Flooding, Drought, Crop Loss And Mild Winters Blamed On Global Cooling: TIME Magazine June 1974: ‘Another Ice Age?’: ‘In Africa, drought continues for the sixth consecutive year, adding terribly to the toll of famine victims. During 1972 record rains in parts of the U.S.,
Pakistan and Japan caused some of the worst flooding in centuries. In Canada’s wheat belt, a particularly chilly and rainy spring has delayed planting and may well bring a disappointingly small harvest’

1976 CIA Shock News: Global Cooling To Kill Us All – ‘The CIA warned in 1976 that global cooling will increase the frequency of droughts’

1975: Newsweek Explained How Global Cooling Causes Extreme Droughts, Floods, Dry Spells And Heatwaves -Global cooling ’causes an increase in extremes of local weather such as droughts, floods, extended dry spells, long freezes, delayed monsoons and even local temperature increases – all of which have a direct impact on food supplies’
Scientists reject notion that human-caused climate change led to war in Syria – ‘Human-influenced climate change impact on the drought conditions was almost certainly too small to have mattered’

2014 Study: ‘The humanitarian crisis of the late 2000s largely predated the drought period.Focusing on external factors like drought and climate change in the context of the Syrian uprising is counterproductive as it diverts attention from more fundamental political and economic motives behind the protests and shifts responsibility away from the Syrian government.

Study: Drought Of 1934 In North America, During The Dust Bowl, Was The Worst In Thousand Years – ‘The drought of 1934 in North America was the driest and the most widespread of the last millennium, according to a new study based on a reconstruction of North America’s history of drought over the last 1,000 years. – Study published in the Oct. 17 edition of Geophysical Research Letters by researchers from NASA and Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.

“It was the worst by a large margin, falling pretty far outside the normal range of variability that we see in the record,” Ben Cook, a climate scientist at NASA and the study’s lead author, said in a statement.

Top UN scientists call for RICO investigation of climate skeptics in letter to Obama

Top UN scientist Dr. Kevin Trenberth and 19 other scientists have become so tired of debating global warming that they are now apparently seeking to jail those who disagree with them. One of the scientists who signed the letter was Alan Robock of Rutgers University. Robock has expressed very positive views of Cuba’s Fidel Castro after trips there in 2010 and 2011. See: Rutger’s Prof. Alan Robock drools over Castro and his VIP treatment in 2010 trip to Cuba robock@envsci.rutgers.edu – Robock’s enchanted meeting with Castro: I stayed at ‘nicest hotel…I went in a black Mercedes…I went to private meeting with Fidel & his family…we had photo taken together’

Prof. Robock & Fidel Castro in 2010.2011 Trip.

[Note: This call for treating skeptics as racketeers comes the same week that the New York Times promoted equating climate skeptics to Hitler. See: ‘The Next Genocide’- NYT OpEd: Climate ‘deniers’ present ‘intellectual stance that is uncomfortably close to Hitler’s’ ]

 

Climate skeptics heading to jail?

Letter reproduced in full:

Letter to President Obama, Attorney General Lynch, and OSTP Director Holdren

September 1, 2015

Dear President Obama, Attorney General Lynch, and OSTP Director Holdren,

As you Democrat Sen. Whitehouse: Use RICO Laws to Prosecute Global Warming Skepticsknow, an overwhelming majority of climate scientists are convinced about the potentially serious adverse effects of human-induced climate change on human health, agriculture, and biodiversity. We applaud your efforts to regulate emissions and the other steps you are taking. Nonetheless, as climate scientists we are exceedingly concerned that America’s response to climate change – indeed, the world’s response to climate change – is insufficient. The risks posed by climate change, including increasing extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and increasing ocean acidity – and potential strategies for addressing them – are detailed in the Third National Climate Assessment (2014), Climate Change Impacts in the United States. The stability of the Earth’s climate over the past ten thousand years contributed to the growth of agriculture and therefore, a thriving human civilization. We are now at high risk of seriously destabilizing the Earth’s climate and irreparably harming people around the world, especially the world’s poorest people.

We appreciate that you are making aggressive and imaginative use of the limited tools available to you in the face of a recalcitrant Congress. One additional tool – recently proposed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse – is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change. The actions of these organizations have been extensively documented in peerreviewed academic research (Brulle, 2013) and in recent books including: Doubt is their Product (Michaels, 2008), Climate Cover-Up (Hoggan & Littlemore, 2009), Merchants of Doubt (Oreskes & Conway, 2010), The Climate War (Pooley, 2010), and in The Climate Deception Dossiers (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2015). We strongly endorse Senator Whitehouse’s call for a RICO investigation.

The methods of these organizations are quite similar to those used earlier by the tobacco industry. A RICO investigation (1999 to 2006) played an important role in stopping the tobacco industry from continuing to deceive the American people about the dangers of smoking. If corporations in the fossil fuel industry and their supporters are guilty of the misdeeds that have been documented in books and journal articles, it is imperative that these misdeeds be stopped as soon as possible so that America and the world can get on with the critically important business of finding effective ways to restabilize the Earth’s climate, before even more lasting damage is done.

Sincerely,

Jagadish Shukla, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
Edward Maibach, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
Paul Dirmeyer, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
Barry Klinger, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
Paul Schopf, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
David Straus, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
Edward Sarachik, University of Washington, Seattle, W
Michael Wallace, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
Alan Robock, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ
Eugenia Kalnay, University of Maryland, College Park, MD
William Lau, University of Maryland, College Park, MD
Kevin Trenberth, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO
T.N. Krishnamurti, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL
Vasu Misra, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL
Ben Kirtman, University of Miami, Miami, FL
Robert Dickinson, University of Texas, Austin, TX
Michela Biasutti, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY
Mark Cane, Columbia University, New York, NY
Lisa Goddard, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY
Alan Betts, Atmospheric Research, Pittsford, VT

End letter

Related Links:

UN IPCC’s Kevin Trenberth’s History Of Making Bold Claims Which Contradict Science

Democrat Sen. Whitehouse: Use RICO Laws to Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on ClimateDepot.com.

Obama’s Mountain Sized Climate Denial

mountain of climate evidence obamaPresident Obama seems to have missed the three absolutes about the climate: 1) the climate changes; 2) the changes are cyclical; and 3) there is nothing mankind can do to change these natural cycles.

President Obama issued dire warnings of the climate changes such as famine, migration, melting ice, sea level changes, natural disasters and flooding. These all are the effects of the climate changing. The cause is the natural cycles of the climate changing.

The only thing mankind can do about climate change is prepare for the changes.

Paul Driessen, TownHall, in a column titled “Climate issues we do need to address” writes:

We need to fix the climate of fraud, corruption, and policies that kill jobs, hope and people.

[ … ]

Battered economies continue to struggle. Investment banks are pulling out of developing countries. An already exploding and imploding Middle East now confronts a nuclear arms race and human exodus.

Complying just with federal regulations already costs American businesses and families $1.9 trillion per year, the Competitive Enterprise Institute calculates. That’s more than all 2014 personal and corporate income tax receipts combined – and Obama bureaucrats issued 3,554 new rules and regulations last year.

EPA’s 2,691-page Clean Power Plan is designed to eliminate coal mining and coal-fired power plants – and minimize natural gas substitutes. The CPP requires that gas use can increase by only 22% above 2012 levels by 2022, and just 5% per year thereafter. On top of that, new natural gas-fueled generating units that replace coal-fired power plants absurdly do not count toward state CO2 reduction mandates.

The Daily Signal reports:

Katie Tubb wrote earlier this week on President Obama’s trip to Alaska:

President Obama gave a doom and gloom speech yesterday at the Global Leadership in the Arctic (GLACIER) conference in Alaska to build momentum for the U.N. climate deal in Paris this December.

So far less than one third of countries have submitted plans to cut carbon dioxide emissions by the Wall Street Journal’s count.

According to Obama, “Climate change is happening faster than we’re acting” and the world is facing a future of more fires, more melting, more warming, more suffering.

But there are at least two major problems with his focus on global warming as he’s presented it in Alaska.

  1. Ignoring Evidence On Climate Change

Obama continues to ignore science that doesn’t fit his narrative and has ignored sound evidence from people who disagree with him. Many of the environmental trends Obama has warned of do not appear to fit current realities.

In his speech he warned that,

“If [current] trend lines continue the way they are, there’s not going to be a nation on this earth that’s not going to be impacted negatively…More drought, more floods, rising sea levels, greater migration, more refugees, more scarcity, more conflict.”

global-warming-lies-heartland-institute

Click on the image for the full Heartland Institute report.

However, Judith Curry, professor at Georgia Institute for Technology and participant in the International Panel on Climate Change and National Academy of Sciences, writes that when politicians talk about an undeniable climate “consensus” they are brushing over “very substantial disagreement about climate change that arises from:

  • Insufficient observational evidence
  • Disagreement about the value of different classes of evidence (e.g. models)
  • Disagreement about the appropriate logical framework for linking and assessing the evidence
  • Assessments of areas of ambiguity and ignorance
  • Belief polarization as a result of politicization of the science

All this leaves multiple ways to interpret and reason about the available evidence.”

Read more.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Mt. Baker glaciers disappearing? A response to the Seattle Times

Report: The Top 10 Global Warming Lies of the Left

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of President Barack Obama, right, accompanied by Secretary of State John Kerry, left, speaking at the Global Leadership in the Arctic: Cooperation, Innovation, Engagement and Resilience (GLACIER) Conference at Dena’ina Civic and Convention Center in Anchorage, Alaska, Monday, Aug. 31, 2015. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

The War on Air Conditioning Heats Up: Is Climate Control Immoral? by Sarah Skwire

It started with the pope. In his recent encyclical, Laudato Si’, he singled out air conditioning as a particularly good example of wasteful habits and excessive consumption that overcome our better natures:

People may well have a growing ecological sensitivity but it has not succeeded in changing their harmful habits of consumption which, rather than decreasing, appear to be growing all the more. A simple example is the increasing use and power of air-conditioning.

Now, it seems to be open season on air conditioning. From a raging Facebook debate over an article that claims that air conditioning is an oppressive tool of the patriarchy to an article in the Washington Post that calls the American use of air conditioning an “addiction” and compares it unfavorably to the European willingness to sweat through the heat of summer, air conditioning is under attack. So I want to defend it.

Understand that when I defend air conditioning, I do so as something of a reluctant proponent. I grew up in the Midwest, and I have always loved sitting on the screened-in porch, rocking on the porch swing, drinking a glass of something cold. I worked in Key West during the summer after my sophomore year of college, lived in an apartment with no air conditioning, and discovered the enormous value of ceiling fans. A lazy, hot summer day can be a real pleasure.

However, let’s not kid ourselves. There were frequent nights in my childhood when it was just too hot to sleep, and the entire family would hunker down in the one air-conditioned room of the house — my father’s attic study — to cool off at night. When we moved from that house to a place that had central air, none of us complained.

And after my recent article on home canning, my friend Kathryn wrote to say,

When I was growing up in the Deep South, everybody I knew had a garden, shelled beans and peas, and canned. It could have been an Olympic event. What I remember most — besides how good the food was — is how hot it was, all those hours spent over huge pots of boiling something or other on the stove in a house with no air conditioning.

There’s a lot to be said for being able to cook in comfort and to enjoy the screened-in porch by choice rather than necessity. Making your family more comfortable is one of the great advantages of an increasingly wealthy society, after all.

So when I read that the US Department of Energy says that you can save about 11 percent on your electric bill by raising the thermostat from 72 to 77 degrees, mostly I want to invite the Department of Energy to come over to my 1929 bungalow and see if they can get any sleep in my refinished attic bedroom when the thermostat is set to 77 degrees, but the room temperature is a cozy 80-something.

And when I read Petula Dvorak arguing that air conditioning is a tool of sexism because “all these women [are freezing] who actually dress for the season — linens, sundresses, flowy silk shirts, short-sleeve tops — changing their wardrobes to fit the sweltering temperatures around them. … And then there are the men, stalwart in their business armor, manipulating their environment for their own comfort, heaven forbid they make any adjustments in what they wear,” mostly I want to ask her if she’s read the dress codes for most professional offices. In my office, women can wear sleeveless tops and open-toed shoes in the summer. Men have to wear a jacket and tie. Air conditioning isn’t sexist. Modern dress codes very well might be.

But arguments based on nostalgia or gender are mostly easily dismissed. Moral arguments, like those made by Pope Francis or by those who are concerned about the environmental and energy impact of air conditioning, are more serious and require real attention.

Is it immoral to use air conditioning?

Pope Francis certainly suggests it is. And the article in the Washington Post that compares US and European air conditioning use agrees, suggesting that the United States prefers the short-term benefits of air conditioning over the long-term dangers of potential global warming — and that our air conditioning use “will make it harder for the US to ask other countries to continue to abstain from using it to save energy.” We are meant to be deeply concerned about the global environmental impact as countries like India, Indonesia, and Brazil become wealthy enough to afford widespread air conditioning. We are meant to set a good example.

But two months before the Washington Post worried that the United States has made it difficult to persuade India not to use air conditioning, 2,500 Indians died in one of the worst heat waves in the country’s history. This June, 780 people died in a four-day heat wave in Karachi, Pakistan. And in 2003, a heat wave that spanned Europe killed 70,000. Meanwhile, in the United States, heat causes an average of only 618 deaths per year, and the more than 5,000 North American deaths in the un-air-conditioned days of 1936 remain a grim outlier.

Air conditioning is not immoral. Possessing a technology that can prevent mortality numbers like these and not using it? That’s immoral.

Air conditioning is, for most of us, a small summertime luxury. For others, it is a life-saving necessity. I am sure that it has environmental effects. Benefits always have costs, and there’s no such thing as a free climate-controlled lunch. But rather than addressing those costs by trying to limit the use of air conditioning and by insisting that developing nations not use the technologies that rocketed the developed world to success, perhaps we should be focusing on innovating new kinds of air conditioning that can keep us cool at a lesser cost.

I bet the kids who will invent that technology have already been born. I pray that they do not die in a heat wave before they can share it with us.


Sarah Skwire

Sarah Skwire is a senior fellow at Liberty Fund, Inc. She is a poet and author of the writing textbook Writing with a Thesis.

Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago has $100 Million Worth of Fossil Fuel Investments

The “Green” Pope Francis seems to be a bit of a hypocrite when it comes to the Catholic Church’s investment in fossil fuels. His push to impact climate change appears to apply to everyone but the Catholic Church.

Richard Valdmanis from Reuters reports:

[S]ome of the largest American Catholic organizations have millions of dollars invested in energy companies, from hydraulic fracturing firms to oil sands producers, according to their own disclosures, through many portfolios intended to fund church operations and pay clergy salaries.

This discrepancy between the church’s leadership and its financial activities in the United States has prompted at least one significant review of investments. The Archdiocese of Chicago, America’s third largest by Catholic population, told Reuters it will reexamine its more than $100 million worth of fossil fuel investments.

“We are beginning to evaluate the implications of the encyclical across multiple areas, including investments and also including areas such as energy usage and building materials,” Betsy Bohlen, chief operating officer for the Archdiocese, said in an email.

[ … ]

Dioceses covering Boston, Rockville Centre on Long Island, Baltimore, Toledo, and much of Minnesota have all reported millions of dollars in holdings in oil and gas stocks in recent years, according to documents reviewed by Reuters.

The holdings tend to make up between 5 and 10 percent of the dioceses’ overall equities investments, similar to the 7.1 percent weighting of energy companies on the S&P 500 index, according to the documents.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ guidelines on ethical investing warn Catholics and Catholic institutions against investing in companies related to abortion, contraception, pornography, tobacco, and war, but do not suggest avoiding energy stocks.

Read more.

Will all Catholic churches, schools, hospitals and related organizations stop using fossil fuels to save the planet?

It would seem that Pope Francis has yet to walk the walk but he is good at talking the talk. To meet Pope Francis’ encyclical it would be necessary to, as Jesus did, shed all the trapping of fossil fuels.

I wonder if fossil fuels were used to cook the last supper?

Alaskan Island Residents Looking to Become First American ‘Climate Refugees’

The people who chose to build their town on an island are now whining that the bad old USA needs to save them as the island is supposedly sinking.

News flash! Islands submerge and often reappear again over centuries the world over as part of the dynamism that is our planet.

Back in the ’70’s I wrote a report about islands off the coast of Virginia that had whole towns on them (hotels, schools, cemeteries) that began to be uninhabitable by the early 1900’s as they were buffeted by major east coast storms (before cars were widely used! before global warming!).  The people simply recognized that it would be foolish to stay, and moved inland.   They didn’t cry out to the federal government to save them from their original choice.

Now we have these whiny Alaskan islanders who wonder if the federal government will leave them there to die!

kivalina

Alaska’s Kivalina Island.

Here is the news at HNGN:

Kivalina is located on a very thin barrier reef island between the Chukchi Sea and the Kivalina Lagoon, in the northwest of Alaska, above the Arctic Circle. And it may not be there in a decade, thanks to climate change.

In approximately 10 years, the village of Kivalina in northwestern Alaska could be submerged, giving its approximately 400 residents the ubiquitous honor of becoming the first climate change refugees of America, so much so that the U.S. government says it may be too dangerous to live there.

Waahhhh! Is the U.S. government going to leave us here to die?

“If we’re still here in 10 years time we either wait for the flood and die, or just walk away and go someplace else. The U.S. government imposed this Western lifestyle on us, gave us their burdens and now they expect us to pick everything up and move it ourselves. What kind of government does that?” Swan (a local elected official) asked while speaking to the BBC.

You pick it up and move it yourself!  And, maybe whaling is going the way of the buggy whip anyway!

One more case in the PR campaign that is building for governments (the US taxpayer mostly!) to take care of ‘helpless’ people worldwide while they bash America!

See our category—Climate refugees for more on this newest excuse for the redistribution of wealth and people.

RELATED ARTICLE: Idaho legislator calls for more transparency by resettlement agency in Twin Falls

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of two teenagers in Kivalina, Alaska, playing near a skinned polar bear.

As EPA Tries to Control Climate, Global Warming ‘Pause’ Extends to Record Length – 18 years 7 months!

A new record Pause length: no warming for 18 years 7 months

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

For 223 months, since January 1997, there has been no global warming at all (Fig. 1 below). This month’s RSS temperature shows the Pause setting a new record at 18 years 7 months.

It is becoming ever more likely that the temperature increase that usually accompanies an el Niño will begin to shorten the Pause somewhat, just in time for the Paris climate summit, though a subsequent La Niña would be likely to bring about a resumption and perhaps even a lengthening of the Pause.

Figure 1. The least-squares linear-regression trend on the RSS satellite monthly global mean surface temperature anomaly dataset shows no global warming for 18 years 7 months since January 1997.

The hiatus period of 18 years 7 months is the farthest back one can go in the RSS satellite temperature record and still show a sub-zero trend. The start date is not cherry-picked: it is calculated. And the graph does not mean there is no such thing as global warming. Going back further shows a small warming rate.

The Pause has now drawn blood. In the run-up to the world-government “climate” conference in Paris this December, the failure of the world to warm at all for well over half the satellite record has provoked the climate extremists to resort to desperate measures to try to do away with the Pause.

To Read Complete article by Lord Christopher Monckton on the new record length ‘Pause’ in global warming see here: http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/08/06/a-new-record-pause-length-no-global-warming-for-18-years-7-months-temperature-standstill-extends-to-233-months/

Other Climate Depot news items of this week:

Fmr. NASA Scientist James Hansen: Obama’s climate policy is ‘practically worthless’ – ‘You’ve got to be kidding’ – Hansen on Obama EPA climate regs: ‘The actions are practically worthless. They do nothing to attack the fundamental problem.’ “You’ve got to be kidding,” Hansen wrote, when asked if the plan would make continued climate activism unnecessary. Obama’s plan, and for that matter the proposed plan Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, he continued, “is like the fellow who walks to work instead of driving, and thinks he is saving the world.”

Watch: Morano on Fox on EPA ‘Climate’ Plan: ‘This is a nonsensical plan when it comes to climate with a lot of economic pain’ – Fox Business Host Stuart Varney – ‘Varney & Company’ – August 5, 2015

Morano on Obama’s EPA ‘Climate’ Plan: ‘They are selling us a bill of goods. Even if you believed it, this is a nonsensical plan when it comes to climate with a lot of economic pain.’ – ‘NASA’s former lead global warming scientist James Hansen came and said this plan is ‘practically worthless’ and he said ‘you’ve got to be kidding me’. Obama’s own EPA chief admitted it would have no impact on global temperature let alone impacts on global CO2 levels. It’s pure symbolism.’

Watch: Morano on Fox debates warmist over EPA regs: ‘The government is now further centrally planning our energy economy’ –

MORANO: “The EIA (U.S. Energy Information Agency – 2013) estimates that wind is about 4% of our energy and solar is about .25 of one percent! So you are asking for less than 5% of energy to somehow cover all of these carbon based regulations. We have Obama administration officials like White House Science Czar John Holdren who openly talk about cheap energy being a threat or a hazard to a free society.”

MORANO: “We do know one thing that there will be no climate impact form these bills.”

GOULD: “That is completely false. That is completely false.”

MORANO: “The EPA administrator admitted that.” See: EPA Chief Admits Obama Regs Have No Measurable Climate Impact: ‘One one-hundredth of a degree?’ EPA Chief McCarthy defends regs as ‘enormously beneficial’ – Symbolic impact

Watch Now: Morano on BBC TV on Obama EPA climate regs: ‘Even if we faced a climate crisis, these regs would have no impact. It’s pure symbolism’ – BBC World News – August 3, 2015 – Climate Depot Publisher Marc Morano – Selected Highlights of Morano’s comments: “Even if we faced a climate crisis, these regulations would have no impact. It’s pure symbolism. Its going to have a huge economic impact, jobs impact and no climate impact. Even warmists’ are saying this is not going to have any impact, that Obama way off base (and not being ambitious enough.)

Fmr. NASA Scientist James Hansen: Obama’s climate policy is ‘practically worthless’ – ‘You’ve got to be kidding’

EPA Chief Admits Obama Regs Have No Measurable Climate Impact: ‘One one-hundredth of a degree?’ EPA Chief McCarthy defends regs as ‘enormously beneficial’ – Symbolic impact

‘The number is so small as to be undetectable’ – Pure Symbolism – EPA Climate Regs Avert 0.018°C Temperature Rise – That’s ‘less than two one-hundredths of a degree C’ – We’re not even sure how to put such a small number into practical terms, because, basically, the number is so small as to be undetectable.’

Chip Knappenberger on CNN: Obama plan’s ‘impact on climate turns out to be largely undetectable and the public health benefits tenuous, at best’ – ‘The human health benefits of the President’s plan do not largely stem from the reduction in carbon dioxide emissions. After all, carbon dioxide is a colorless, odorless gas that is not dangerous to breathe. Instead, they are to come from the “co-benefits” of reducing some forms of air pollution that are emitted when fossil fuels are burned. But these by-product emissions are already subject to existing regulations and are being double-counted by the President. Further, direct health impacts from climate change are difficult to pin down — and ethereal — as adaptive measures can more than erase them.’

Obama spurns natural gas in climate rule

Analysis: EPA ‘climate’ plan will take ‘33% of productive electrical capacity off the grid by 2020′

Key Points: ‘Report shows that the plan would close 48% of all coal-fired plants in the country.’

This plan is “regulation without representation.”

‘The president’s rules would usurp the traditional role of states in managing their own electrical generation and saddle the economy with enormous costs while empowering the EPA to control vast swaths of the American economy.’

‘Coal-fired power will be the first to be shot, but the EPA is targeting all sources of carbon energy.’

Climate Scientists Rip Apart EPA’s Global Warming Rule – “Well the one thing you don’t hear President [Barack] Obama mention is how much his proposed emissions reductions will reduce global warming,” wrote Dr. Judith Curry, a climatologist at Georgia Tech. “It has been estimated that the U.S. [climate plan] of 28% emissions reduction by 2025 will prevent 0.03 [degrees Celsius] in warming by 2100.” “And these estimates assume that climate model projections are correct,” Curry wrote, “if the climate models are over-sensitive to CO2, the amount of warming prevented will be even smaller.”

Environmentalists, EPA Force The 200th US Coal Plant To Retire

Obama unleashes energy crippling climate plan to cut greenhouse gases by 32% in 2030

‘Obama To Announce Job Killing, Inflation Producing, Economy Slowing, Clean Energy, Plan’

Coal Left Fighting Over America’s Last Plants as Rules Mount

Factbox: Obama’s Clean Power Plan faces tough legal scrutiny

It’s Here! Obama’s EPA Sets Forth ‘global warming’ regulations on America! ‘Mandate even steeper emissions cuts from US power plants’

Obama Sends ‘Memo To America’ On Climate Change

Pay climate protection money or else! ‘Inaction on climate change would cost billions’, major EPA study finds

EPA Claims That ‘Global Action’ On Global Warming Will Stop ‘Extreme Weather’

Asthma prevalence has increased in the U.S. while major air pollutants like ozone, particulate matter and carbon monoxide have fallen dramatically, according to government data.

A study by John’s Hopkins Children’s Center published in January found there is no link between air pollution and childhood asthma.

Global warming threat? Now it’s asthma: Morano: ‘This is pure propaganda’ – ‘Obama has shifted the debate to children and asthma because he knows the public is not buying global warming’

Watch Now: Prof. Ross McKitrick on Obama EPA regs: The health claims ‘are groundless’ – ‘Carbon dioxide is not a factor in smog or lung issues’ – Rips Obama for deceptive language: ‘Instead of calling it carbon dioxide, we are just going to call it ‘carbon pollution’

McKitrick on Sun News on June 2, 2014 – McKitrick on Air Pollution: The models get ‘more deaths from air pollution than you were death from all causes’- ‘Particulates and soot are at such low levels in the U.S. — levels well below what they were in the 1970s. The health claims at this point are groundless coming from this administration. I noticed these numbers coming up for Ontario for how many deaths were caused by air pollution. What struck me — was knowing that air pollution levels were very low in Ontario — but they were extremely high in 1960s. So I took the same model and fed in the 1960s air pollution levels into it: How many deaths would you get? I did the calculations and you quickly get more deaths from air pollution than you were death from all causes. In other words, the streets would have been littered with bodies from air pollution if it was actually that lethal. The problem with all of these models is they are not based on an actual examination of death certificates or looking at what people actually died of — these are just statistical models where people have a spreadsheet and they take in an air pollution level and it pops out a number of deaths. But there are no actual bodies there, it is all just extrapolation.’

Obama Moves To Regulate CO2 From Airplanes – First tailpipes, then power plants and now airplanes. The Obama administration announced another major effort to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from airplanes after the Environmental Protection Agency linked airliners to global warming. The EPA issued a proposal Wednesday declaring that CO2 from airliners threatens public health because it contributes to global warming. The agency says it’s doing this in conjunction with an international effort to bring the airline industry under global carbon dioxide standards for commercial jets.

Obama Harvard Law School Prof Lawrence Tribe on EPA Climate Regs: ‘BURNING THE CONSTITUTION CANNOT BE PART OF OUR NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY’ – Laurence Tribe, a liberal constitutional scholar at Harvard University: “EPA possesses only the authority granted to it by Congress,” Tribe told lawmakers in a hearing Tuesday. “Its gambit here raises serious questions under the separation of powers… because EPA is attempting to exercise lawmaking power that belongs to Congress and judicial power that belongs to the federal courts.”

The term ‘carbon pollution’ is unscientific and misleading: ‘Phrase conflates carbon dioxide with noxious chemicals like carbon monoxide and black carbon’ – ‘The phrase ‘carbon pollution’ is scientifically inaccurate because there are more than ten million different carbon compounds, and the word ‘carbon’ could refer to any of them. Some of the more notorious of these compounds are highly poisonous, such as carbon monoxide (a deadly gas) and black carbon (the primary ingredient of cancerous and mutagenic soot). Using a phrase that does not distinguish between such drastically different substances is a sure way to misinform people.’

EPA regulations on CO2 will accomplish nothing for climate or public health: Obama using ‘diversionary tactic to conflate CO2 with the actual ‘carbon pollution’ of atmospheric particulate matter, to deflect criticism from Obama’s draconian CO2 proposals’

Warmists: ‘Obama Wants You to Think His Climate Plan Is Bold. It’s Not.’ – By Eric Holthaus – Vox’s Brad Plumer has calculated that the president’s rule would shave just 6 percent from U.S. carbon emissions by 2030. Climate science and international equitydemand the U.S. cut emissions 80 percent by then. We’re nowhere near that pace. Still, this plan is not nothing. In its coverage, the Times includes this hopeful gem: But experts say that if the rules are combined with similar action from the world’s other major economies, as well as additional action by the next American president, emissions could level off enough to prevent the worst effects of climate change. That’s a lot of hedging on which to base a climate legacy.  In fact, when compared with the climate plans of his would-be successors on the left—Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Martin O’Malley—Obama ranks last in terms of ambition. Clinton, who has frequently aligned herself with the president on climate, announced a preview of her own climate plan last week. It’s fractionally more ambitious than Obama’s, but it essentially just kicks the can forward another few years.

Watch: Morano on Fox on new Fed fracking regs: ‘They are going after the foundation of fracking’s success’ – Watch Video here: Fox Business ‘Varney & Co.’ w/ Stuart Varney – March 20, 2015 – ‘Will new fracking regulations kill the industry?’ (See: Obama Admin Imposes New Regulations On Fracking) – Morano selected excerpts: It’s the first step to the death of a thousand cuts, and this is probably the first 200 or 300 blades being introduced by the federal government — but it’s not going to kill fracking now. This will impose a one size fits all federal government solution.

They are going after the foundation of fracking’s success. Obama is already taking out coal, they’ve stopped keystone pipeline, they are preventing oil drilling in places like Alaska. What’s left? Fracking. Solar is .23% of our electricity (EIA 2013), wind power is barely over 4% and their implication is they will replace carbon based fuels with solar and wind.

Morano: ‘It’s the agenda here: John Holdren said in 1970s that energy that is too cheap is one of the greatest hazards to society and the more we get away from energy, the more jobs we will have. (See: Flashback 1975: Obama Science Czar John Holdren warned U.S. ‘threatened’ by ‘the hazards of too much energy’ – Holdren: ‘Less energy can mean more employment.’)

The Energy Sec. Moniz has said he wants to make ‘dirty fuels’ three times more expensive. This is the first step towards that. (See: Obama Energy Dept. nominee favors TRIPLING the cost of fossil fuels – Energy Nominee Moniz: We Need Carbon Price To Double Or Triple Cost Of Dirty Energy)

Look to Europe to see America’s Energy Future:

Flashback 2011: ‘Era of Constant Electricity at Home is Ending, says UK power chief’ — ‘Families would have to get used to only using power when it was available’

Flashback 2011: ‘Era of Constant Electricity at Home is Ending, says UK power chief’ — ‘Families would have to get used to only using power when it was available’

Watch: Climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer on Gore’s ‘extreme weather’ claims: ‘Bullsh*t!’ – John Stossel’s “Science Wars”

Why Is the Vatican Pushing Communist Goals? by Michael Hichborn

This coming November, the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Science is holding a workshop intended to figure out how to indoctrinate your children in the Sustainable Development Goals [SDGs]. This comes on the heels of the Vatican nuncio to the United Nations announcing “verbatim” support for the SDGs, and after Catholic Relief Services president Dr. Carolyn Woo echoed Pope Francis’ call for support for the SDGs as well.

So, what are the Sustainable Development Goals?

They’re a United Nations plan for the creation of a global socialist utopia thinly disguised as a poverty reduction program. In short, the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals are the first step in achieving several of the goals laid out in Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto. In truth, these goals are Communist goals, through and through. Here’s a snapshot of how specific portions of the SDGs line up with identified Communist goals:

Sustainable Development Goals:

  • Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere
    • Communists have always used the plight of the poor as justification for the implementation of their nefarious schemes
  • Goal 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
    • Plank 7 of the Communist Manifesto calls for a top-down approach to industry and agriculture
  • Goal 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
    • A 1938 issue of a Communist publication concluded that “only through the final victory of world socialism can the vast stores of available scientific knowledge really be put to work for the full benefit of humanity. ‘Socialized medicine’ is a meaningless phrase except in a socialized society.”
  • Goal 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
    • Plank 10 of the Communist Manifesto is “free education for all children in public schools.”
  • Goal 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
    • Communism has pushed for working women since the beginning of the Revolution in Russia.
  • Goal 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
    • Plank 8 of the Communist Manifesto: Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
  • Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
    • Plank 9 of the Communist Manifesto: Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
  • Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
    • This is an echo of Karl Marx’s mandate, “From each according to his ability to each according to his needs.”
  • Goal 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development
    • This is pure global governance orchestrated by an entity with authority above national sovereignty.

This summary is not intended to be exhaustive, but should provide enough information to alarm even the most lukewarm of patriots and faithful Christians. But the Catholic Church, which has issued full and unqualified condemnations of Communism and Socialism should have nothing to do with the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals … and yet, “Catholic” social justice organizations and its leaders have hijacked key positions in the Vatican and are using their influence and authority to fast-track programs to get the faithful to fully support and work for the implementation of the SDGs. This is extremely dangerous and must be forcefully resisted by all faithful Catholics. What follows is a general overview of some of the more egregious of the SDGs in their audacious push for global Communist governance.

Read the rest at http://www.lepantoinstitute.org/.

Hichborn_headshot300ABOUT MICHAEL HICHBORN

Michael Hichborn is the president of the Lepanto Insitute. Formerly, Michael spent nearly eight years as American Life League’s Director of the Defend the Faith project. He has researched and produced countless articles and reports on the funding of abortion, birth control, homosexuality and Marxism by Catholic Relief Servies and the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD). Michael holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Christendom College in Political Science and Economics and a Master’s degree in Education from American Intercontinental University. Michael lives in Virginia with his wife, Alyssa, and their five children.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pope’s climate push at odds with U.S. Catholic oil investments

Vatican Representative Endorses UN Sustainable Development Goals, “Verbatim”

405,000 people, 104 bishops sign petition to Pope Francis asking for ‘clarification’ on marriage

NASA’s James Hansen Gets Dissed by Global Warming Establishment!

Former Top NASA Scientist James Hansen Predicts Catastrophic Rise In Sea Levels – ‘Projects sea levels rising as much as 10 feet in the next 50 years.’ The paper has already ruffled some, including Associated Press science writer Seth Borenstein, who said on Twitter that he would not cover it — primarily because it had not yet been peer-reviewed, a process that allows other scientists to critique the work. The Washington Post’s Chris Mooney asked other climate experts to weigh in on the paper. While many said it raised key discussion points, Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research called it “provocative and intriguing but rife with speculation and ‘what if’ scenarios.”

“James Hansen’s new paper ratcheting up future sea level rise numbers is consistent with the new strategy of the global warming activists. Given that current sea level rise rates are not alarming, the only way climate activists can claim anything is ‘worse than we thought’ is to make more dire predictions of the future.

Simply making scarier predictions of the future in order to alarm policymakers is not ‘good science.’ Claiming that climate change impacts are ‘worse than we thought’ because predictions are now more frightening is a well worn playbook of the climate movement.

Simply put, when current reality fails to alarm, make scarier and scarier predictions of the distant future.

It is not surprising that James Hansen — a man who has been arrested nearly half a dozen times protesting ‘global warming’ and who has endorsed a book calling for ridding the world of industrial civilization — would continue to make scary predictions. The world needs to take a collective yawn at Hansen’s latest claims and ask how in the world was this man ever allowed to be in charge of the NASA temperature datasets!” – End Morano statement.

Global Warming Establishment severs ties with Hansen on sea level rise scare study: 

Warmist publication Mashable on James Hansen’s new sea level scare paper: “..red flag..study’s conclusions so contradict [UN IPCC] consensus views expressed last year.”

Mashable’s Andrew Freedman: ‘The godfather of global warming’s scary sea level rise prediction is getting the cold shoulder.”

NYT’s Andrew Revkin on Hansen’s sea level scare paper: “Associated Press, The New York Times, the BBC and The Guardian..among those who steered clear of [Hansen] study”

NYT: UN IPCC Lead Author Kevin Trenberth on Hansen sea level rise paper: “Rife with speculation..many conjectures & huge extrapolation based on quite flimsy evidence.”

Michael Mann admits Hansen’s SLR estimates “prone to a very large “extrapolation error”

Embedded image permalink

Science by press release: Journalists received “summary” of Hansen’s paper via PR firm

Scientists: Hansen’s wild sea level rise claims are hardly new. We’ve debunked them before here: Current Wisdom: Hansen’s Extreme Sea Level Rise Projections Drowning…

New scientific findings undermine James Hansen’s extreme sea level rise projections from human-caused climate change.

Hansen’s “scientific” paper prescribes global political policy of “near-global” “carbon fee or tax”:

Embedded image permalink

Ironic: New James Hansen study contradicts climate ‘consensus’ so warmists shun itEmbedded image permalink

Warming leads to Cooling: Sea level rise could lead to a cooler, stormier world — Says unpublished work from NASA’s Jim Hansen – ‘A catastrophic rise in sea level before the end of the century could have a hitherto-unforeseen side effect. Melting icebergs might cool the seas around Greenland and Antarctica so much that the average surface temperature of the entire planet falls by a few degrees’.

RELATED LINKS:

NASA scientist James Hansen endorses book which calls for ‘ridding the world of Industrial Civilization’ – Hansen declares author ‘has it right…the system is the problem’ – Book proposes ‘razing cities to the ground, blowing up dams and switching off the greenhouse gas emissions machine’

Hansen Arrested (Again) — ‘For over a month now, much of the GISS website has been down due to technical problems. But apparently James Hansen has time to get himself arrested

NASA’s resident ex-con: Top NASA global warming scientist James Hansen arrested (again) in White House protest over pipeline — $180,000 taxpayer-paid salary – ‘Arrested alongside actress Daryl Hannah; Adam Werbach, founder of Sierra Club; Bill McKibben’ — ‘Hansen has been arrested at least 3 times before in protests over climate issues, in 2009, 2010, & 2011′

Flashback 2010: David Roberts of Grist: ‘I know I’m not supposed to say this, but Hansen managed his transition from scientist to activist *terribly*. All influence lost’

Hansen Back in Jail! NASA’s James Hansen Arrested (Again) Outside White House at Pipeline Protest — Implores Obama to act for ‘sake of your children and grandchildren’

Off the Deep End? NASA’s Rev. James Hansen arrested (again) in coal protest at the White House 

NASA’s Hansen’s Arrested Development: Hansen claims ‘instrumentation calibration factors were introduced to reduce the imbalance to the imbalance suggested by climate models’

NASA scientist Hansen wants Obama arrested: ‘No news on whether Secret Service will be raiding NASA…Why bother going to moon when the moonbats already work for you?’

NASA scientist Hansen wants Obama arrested: ‘No news on whether Secret Service will be raiding NASA…Why bother going to moon when the moonbats already work for you?’

NASA Warming Activist/Scientist James Hansen and Actress Daryl Hannah Arrested in Green Protest

Warmist New claim: ‘Recent sea level rise is highest in 6,000 years’ — DEBUNKED

Latest warmist claim on sea level here.

Debunking here  – Also see: Claim: ‘No change in sea level until modern times – but that change is dwarfed by sea levels of the past

Rebuttal: Examination of the data from the paper, however, shows the range of proxy sea levels is approximately 10 meters, far too large to discern the tiny ~1.5 mm/yr sea level rise over the past 150 years. The authors instead assume from other published studies of tide gauge measurements that the ~1.5 mm/yr sea level rise over the past 150+ years began at that point in time. Other papers find sea levels rising only 1.1-1.3 mm/yr over the past 203 years, and without acceleration. 

Regardless, even the IPCC concedes that there was no significant anthropogenic influence on climate prior to 1950, thus man is not be responsible for sea level rise beginning 150-200 years ago, at the end of the Little Ice Age.

The sea level rise over the past ~200 years shows no evidence of acceleration, which is necessary to assume a man-made influence. Sea level rise instead decelerated over the 20th centurydecelerated 31% since 2002 and decelerated 44% since 2004 to less than 7 inches per century. There is no evidence of an acceleration of sea level rise, and therefore no evidence of any man-made effect on sea levels. Sea level rise is primarily a local phenomenon related to land subsidence, not CO2 levels. Therefore, areas with groundwater depletion and land subsidence have much higher rates of relative sea level rise, but this has absolutely nothing to do with man-made CO2.

– [Climate Depot Note: According to tide gauges, Sea Level is rising LESS than the thickness of one nickel (1.95 mm thick) per year or about the thickness of one penny (1.52 mm thick) a year. According to satellite info it is rising slightly more than two pennies a year (3.04 mm)]

More Background on James Hansen:

NASA’s James Hansen to Retire – Marc Morano Statement: ‘Celebrate! It’s A Happy Day for Science! Hansen’s sad legacy will serve as a cautionary tale for future scientists. Hansen chose ideology, activism, stagecraft and handcuffs over science. He will be sorely missed by global warming skeptics, as he made our life so much easier by just being himself. NASA & Science deserved much better than James Hansen.’

Background on Hansen: 1) NASA’s James Hansen, a muse to Eco-Terrorists?! Watch Now:Morano on Fox News: ‘NASA’s resident ex-con James Hansen is inspiring these people to potential acts of eco terrorism’ — Morano: ‘He was arrested for the 3rd or 4th time this past week protesting the pipeline. Hansen has endorsed a book calling for ridding the world of industrial civilization, for blowing up dams and razing cities to the ground and turning off our greenhouse gas machine’  —

2) Flashback: NASA scientist James Hansen endorses book which calls for ‘ridding the world of Industrial Civilization’ – Hansen declares author ‘has it right…the system is the problem’ — Book proposes ‘razing cities to the ground, blowing up dams and switching off the greenhouse gas emissions machine   —    

3) Flashback: Greenie David Roberts of Grist turns on NASA’s Hansen: ‘I know I’m not supposed to say this, but Hansen managed his transition from scientist to activist *terribly*. All influence lost’ —

4) Flashback 2009: One of James Hansen’s Former NASA Supervisor Declares Himself a Skeptic — Says Hansen ‘Embarrassed NASA’ & ‘Was Never Muzzled’   —

5) Alert: NASA’s James Hansen Declared Obama Has One Week Left To Save The Planet! — ‘On Jan. 17, 2009 Hansen declared Obama only ‘has four years to save Earth’ — Only 7 Days left!  —   

6)  Watch Now: Morano rips NASA’s James Hansen: ‘Hansen said we only have 4 years left to save the planet in Jan.2009, We passed another Mayan calendar deadline’  —

7) Flashback 2008: Don’t Panic Over Predictions of Climate Doom -Get the Facts on James Hansen— ‘High Crimes Against Humanity’ Trial for Climate Skeptics?

Former NASA scientist James Hansen in 1986 Warned of Up to Five degrees F warming by 2010

New York Times – June 11, 1986: “Average global temperatures would rise by one-half a degree to one degree Fahrenheit from 1990 to 2000 if current trends are unchanged, according to Hansen’s findings. Dr. Hansen said the global temperature would rise another 2 to 4 degrees in the following decade.”

Embedded image permalink

 Reality Check on Hansen in 2013:  ‘No global warming for 17 years 3 months’

In 1986, The World’s Greatest Climatologist James Hansen Predicted Nine Degrees US Warming By The 2020′s

ScreenHunter_406 Dec. 07 05.21Former NASA global warming scientist James Hansen finally admits part of green movement operates like a ‘a religion of sorts’

Hansen to CNN: Selling nuclear energy to environmentalists is a tough pitch. Hansen acknowledged that many of them won’t easily buy into it. Parts of the community operate like ‘a religion of sorts, which makes it very difficult,’ Hansen said. ‘They’re not all objectively looking at the pros and cons.’

‘Only NUCLEAR power can SAVE HUMANITY’, say Global Warming high priests – Schism within the environmental ‘religion’

Former NASA Scientist James Hansen urges young people to threaten fossil fuel CEOs with criminal prosecution for supporting skeptics – Hansen: ‘Young people can sue governments, industry or individuals for violating their rights’ — ‘Human-made climate change…has become a clear case of intergenerational injustice; these fundamental rights could be the basis for forcing government actions’

James Hansen ADMITS: Notion that 2°C global temp target is scientifically established is ‘UNADULTERATED HOGWASH’

James Hansen denounces ‘big green’: ‘Large environmental orgs have become one of the biggest obstacles to solving the climate problem’ – Hansen: ‘After I joined other scientists in requesting the leaders of Big Green to reconsider their adamant opposition to nuclear power, and was rebuffed, I learned from discussions with them the major reason: They feared losing donor support. Money, it seems, is the language they understand. Thus my suggestion: The next time you receive a donation request, doubtless accompanied with a photo of a cuddly bear or the like, toss it in the waste bin and return a note saying that you will consider a donation in the future, if they objectively evaluate the best interests of young people and nature.’

EDITORS NOTE: Marc Morano is no only the publisher of Climate Depot but also the producer of the upcoming film ‘Climate Hustle’ (www.ClimateHustle.com).

Do you hear that giant sucking sound? Oh, no! Its another Green Project!

Popular Mechanics has an article about a company named Carbon Engineering that is sucking CO2 out of the air. By doing so Carbon Engineering is contributing to the death of plant life globally. Strong statement? Well read on.

Tim Radford, from the Climate News Network, in 2013 reported:

Australian scientists have solved one piece of the climate puzzle. They have confirmed the long-debated fertilization effect.

Plants build their tissues by using photosynthesis to take carbon from the air around them. So more carbon dioxide should mean more vigorous plant growth – though until now this has been very difficult to prove.

Randall Donohue of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Organization in Canberra, Australia, and his colleagues developed a mathematical model to predict the extent of this carbon dioxide fertilization effect. Between 1982 and 2010, carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere increased by 14 percent. So, their model suggested, foliage worldwide should have increased by between 5 and 10 percent.

[ … ]

The team averaged the greenness of each location over three year periods, and then grouped the greenness data from different locations according to known records of rainfall. They also looked at variations in foliage over a 20 year period. In the end, they teased out the carbon dioxide fertilization effect from all other influences and calculated that this could account for an 11 percent increase in global foliage since 1982.

So if you take CO2 out of the atmosphere you will reduce foliage and plant growth. Well that doesn’t seem to bother John Wenz from Popular Mechanics.

Popular Mechanics’ John Wenz writes:

Carbon Engineering has an ambitious plan to take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and turn it into fuel. The company is aiming the facility at areas where reforestation isn’t an option, such as deserts.

Air flows in through the series of fans you see in the picture, which feed into a carbon dioxide rich solution, helping pluck carbon compounds from the air. That solution is then purified, at which point Carbon Engineering extracts  the carbon dioxide for reuse or disposal in underground facilities. The solution is re-purified in the process, enabling it to be reused.

The technology is based on the same way that trees capture CO2 and release oxygen. It’s another take on the idea of an artificial tree, one of the potential geoengineering solutions that has been around for years, proposing to fight climate change by hacking the planet.

Words that Wenz uses are problematic at best. Wenz’s “ambitious plan” is really a waste of money that will harm foliage. The company Carbon Engineering is funded in part by the Climate Change and Emissions Management Corporation (CCEMC). Geoengineering is a Bill Gates initiative to cool the planet, the problem is the planet is already cooling.

So to save the planet it is necessary to defoliate it. Too bad for the environmentalists, who won’t have any more trees to hug as the CO2 gets sucked out of the atmosphere by Carbon Engineering.

Killing plants to produce fuel is as immoral as using food (corn Ethanol) to produce fuel. Both harm mankind.

Climate Refugee News: New Zealand’s Highest Court Rejects First ‘Climate Refugee’ Asylum Appeal

For our many new readers, you may not know that international Leftists and NO borders advocates are pushing the meme that there are millions of so-called ‘climate refugees’ that must be taken into first world countries as refugees because the climate is changing where they now live.

You are probably laughing at how ridiculous this sounds, but believe me the issue is getting legs especially now that the Vatican is weighing in.

Sensibly, New Zealand’s Supreme Court has ruled that, in an important test case, the man claiming that he would suffer harm if returned to the island nation of Kiribati must be deported.  He is not a refugee.

Remember the other day, I mentioned that in order for someone to be a legitimate refugee they must prove they would be PERSECUTED if returned to their country of origin and that Obama and his minions in the US State Department are working day and night to eviscerate refugee protection programs by deeming the ‘children’ from Central America as refugees when they are no such thing.

Economic migrants, people trying to escape crime or changes in the weather are NOT refugees.

Thankfully, in this case, the New Zealand court is demanding adherence to the long-standing definition of the word “refugee.”

From Sky News:

A Pacific Islander who applied to the New Zealand government to give him status as the world’s first climate refugee has had his appeal turned down.

Ioane Teitiota, 38, argued he should not be sent back to the island nation of Kiribati because it was under threat due to rising seas.

That, he argued, made it unsafe for him and his family.

However, while NZ’s Supreme Court agreed that the tiny nation of about 100,000 people was suffering environmental degradation, it said Mr Teitiota’s application did not meet the legal definition of a refugee because he was not facing persecution.

“While Kiribati undoubtedly faces challenges, Mr Teitiota does not, if returned, face ‘serious harm’,” the Supreme Court said in a ruling released on Monday.

Unfortunately, the court left the door open for a better test case.

In other ‘climate refugee’ news….

  • Ireland’s President says we need to save climate refugeeshere.  This made me laugh because I envisioned some Irishman claiming he was a climate refugee in someplace like Tahiti because it was just too darned cold and rainy in Ireland!
  • In a new report, the Leftists in Norway say there were 20 million climate refugees around the world in 2014, here.
  • And, finally, a good piece at the Washington Post of all places debunking this as another Leftist scare tactic, here.  Love it!

For more of this ridiculousness, see our ‘Climate refugees’ category going back several years, here.

Global Warming Expedition Stopped Because of Too Much Ice

The Conservative Post reports:

A research expedition to study the effects of global warming aboard the Canadian Coast Guard icebreaker Amundsen is on hold as the icebreaker is needed to do it’s primary job — break up ice.

According to a Coast Guard officer, the icy conditions are the “worst he’s seen in 20 years“:

A carefully planned, 115-day scientific expedition on board the floating research vessel, the CCGS Amundsen, has been derailed as the icebreaker was called to help resupply ships navigate heavy ice in Hudson Bay.

“Obviously it has a large impact on us,” says Martin Fortier, executive director of ArcticNet, which coordinates research on the vessel. “It’s a frustrating situation.”

Read more.

Antarctic Ice Melting Due to ‘Geothermal heating’ from Earth’s core not Global Warming

Geothermal heating from within the Earth’s core – as opposed to the possibly warming air or sea – has been measured beneath the West Antarctic Ice Sheet for the first time ever. And, we are told, it is “surprisingly high.”

Exactly what the new geothermal heating figures mean for the forecasts remains to be seen, but it is clear that the amount of geothermal heating is a good bit more than scientists had thought. Some of them are still hoping that it’s a fluke result.

It’s all a very confusing picture, then, and to make it worse nobody until now has had any idea how much heat might be reaching the possibly-troubled West Antarctic sheet not from the somewhat warmer seas and atmosphere, but from the rock beneath it. — Lewis Page, The Register, 13 July 2015

antarctic-volcano[1]

RELATED ARTICLES:

Top Scientific Adviser to Pope Francis is Atheist, GAIA Believer, Wants One World Government [+video]

Scientists Discover ‘Surprisingly High’ Geothermal Heating Beneath West Antarctic Ice Sheet – The Register, 13 July 2015

Antarctic Ice Threatened By Undersea Volcano – The Sunday Times, 11 May 2014