Global Warming Scam: 2010 is Not the Hottest Year

Probably not the “hottest year”

Mixing and dropping proxies (replacing with more recent “data” sets created by East Anglia Climategaters for example) also seems to be part of the “trick”, intentionally designed to “hide the decline.”

Perhaps I’m only reviewing what you just said, but:

It would seem to me that tree-rings and even ice-core samples would be subject to effects of other variables; although I profess no great expertise here. A dry year isn’t necessarily a hot or cold year for example. And by the way – too hot OR too cold stunts growth. Growth v. temp. is not linear. (That I do know.) Even if there is a way to differentiate, I would think it rather challenging to align the relative information you get into just the right absolute positions.

The info that’s come from review of East Anglia, et al.- warmers’ “corrected data” says they just made crap up along the way to support their case. Very selective people, even regarding the equations they built themselves that were able to give the results they wanted even without any data. Believe me – I have seen it before in politically driven “SCIENCE!!!” – emphasizing how they shout about it – one of the proxy indicators used by political corruption investigators like me to quickly identify suspect arguments. It’s an appeal to authority and particularly suspect when “deniers” and “skeptics” and any other potential opponent is labeled and demonized before any debate starts; accompanied of course, by a refusal to engage in debate.

It’s been said that anyone who limited themselves to information from the NY Times would have eventually heard of the Climategate scandal without ever having any idea what it was about, other than it was something the evil half-witted religious right-wing racist deniers were exited about. Revkin has not been merely one of its lead propagandists. He’s an insider playing a key role in the conspiracy. He is to providing general descriptions of the next round of argument / propaganda to the faithful what RealClimate.org is to providing its junk science. Top of the class “environmental journalist.” Aside from climate articles for NY Times, he has his own NY Times climate blogg.

Now that the Cap-n-Trade vote in the Senate has concluded, there’s little short-term use for the fake alarmist report. However, Revkin at the NY Times is already calling for a coup and the end of democracy following the thumbs down from the Senate. His suggestion: Obama should take immediate emergency dictatorial control of everything and expand the powers of the bureaucracy under his control – i.e. more of what he did via the fake CO2 pollution finding that the EPA used to implement laws not passed by Congress.

Jay;

It’s well within our experience to see warmers jumping off cliffs without looking down first; just because someone put up a sign that says “Jump Here”.

So, all we have to do to recognize that you’re right is to ignore everything else (much of which I take it you either aren’t aware of or don’t want to mention) and focus attention on a comment that supports your position. Well, du-uh!

You guys also want to win the scientific argument by running it like a political process – an election based on how many scientists vote your way – so long as you get to decide who’s allowed to vote and have absolute control of interpreting what the votes mean. (Al Gore’s fantasy.)

Warmers lost the debate – many times over. Give it up!

Vincent:

I can’t really make much sense of your comment. Left to guess; it looks like you’re a salesman for some kind of “alternative energy” company that has nothing real to offer and is desperately trying to hook potential investors by lying about climate change. It’s easy to see why desperation has set in. Part of the sales pitch is to claim that consumers will face higher total energy costs without unnecessary and arbitrarily high taxes on energy. Someone stupid enough to believe that probably doesn’t have money to invest. The situation is so desperate that you either need a corrupt government scheme to funnel public cash your way, or perhaps give up on the get-rich-quick scheme. Have you tried fixing horse races?

Hi Bob,

I’m a scientist, and the problem is that there isn’t any credible supporting evidence that human activity has a significant (in the common sense) impact on climate. It’s not a matter of “admitting” or “denying” some evidence that’s out there for all to see if their eyes would just open. It’s just clear misrepresentation to characterize the claims being made in support of global warming hysteria as “”"”"science”"”"”.

It is a question of “admitting” or “denying” what is established fact. The idea that human activity is steering nature really left us, for the most part, as science developed – taking mankind away from superstitious beliefs; like that our behavior made the gods angry and they punished us with, for example, really bad weather. There is no scientific evidence that would cause a reasonable person in the modern age to change their minds. Such ideas are just superstitious belief. It’s established fact – that’s not what happens. Modern educated intelligent people know that.

As a scientist, I have no problem stating that the IPCC is not a scientific body. It is a political organization that puts out propaganda as naturally as Green Peace or any other organization that maintains itself in that way. But even if you accept the adjusted adjusted IPCC results, there is no cause for alarm, and no need for expensive (and very destructive) political action.

You can thank extreme distortion and exaggeration on the part of environmental journalists, a few dishonest scientists, and a bunch of corrupt politicians for giving you the impression that there is any reason to think otherwise.

(Al Gore should be hanged.)

Baby Girl Survives 3 Days With Bullet Inside Her

A baby girl survived three days with a bullet in her chest as she lay alone beside the dead bodies of her parents and toddler brother in Argentina, the Daily Mail reported.

Francisco Lotero, 56, and Miriam Coletti, 23, shot their 7-month-old daughter and son, 2, before killing themselves. The pair allegedly agreed to a suicide pact over fears about global warming, according to the Daily Mail.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/03/01/baby-girl-survives-days-bullet -inside/

Many think that all of this global warming stuff is nothing but an attempt to redistribute the wealth and work for a one world government.

The American government has suspended its funding of the University of East Anglia’s climate research unit (CRU), citing the scientific doubts raised by last November’s leak of hundreds of stolen emails.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/18/doe-funding-for-cru-placed-on-hold/

Stephen Hawking believes warming is for real, Sarah Palin doesn’t. I’ll go with Hawking.

You’re all doomed – It doesn’t matter whether you believe it or not – you’re doomed because you don’t get along and if its TRUE you aren’t working together to resolve the most dire problem in the history of civilization. Its like a pack of people in a burning theater “The theater is on fire.” – “No its not. Shut up and watch the damn movie.” “No – its on fire. I see the flames. I smell the smoke.” “No. That’s a kid smoking in the back row. Shut up. You’re ruining my flick.” “No. I sent a guy to the front of the theater. He checked. Its really on fire.” “Look; if you don’t shut up you ain’t getting any when we get home.” “Oh. Ok. Its not on fire.”

Instead, how about facts and a reality check: we – a voracious species – are chewing up resources like mold in an agar dish – and we are about to run out of sufficient resources to keep civilization going. There are already more home in the U.S. alone then our forests can support just for the maintenance, and Asia where half the world lives is embarking on a similar path, vacuuming resources worldwide and driving up commodity prices through the roof. I have a friend who sails to the N. Pole every year. Climate change is real…and whether sunspot or human driven (or both) the droughts, famine and war as we fight for a shrinking resource base is absolutely perfect – it shows Mother Nature won’t tolerate this silly-ass species any longer and when she kicks us down a few notches by wiping out 80% – 99% of our neighbors in under 2 decades (at most), that will be sweet justice indeed. Got sustainable water that doesn’t rely on urban infrastructure? Grow your own food? Can you live without power? No? You’re doomed.

Dear Roger, You might check the Japan database, as this has not been influenced so much by political concerns (cf. NIWA in NZ!), also, UHI DIFFERENTIAL through time in Japan is lower due to lower impact of ‘urban sprawl’ in 20th Cent. vis a vis the more extreme American situation (initial high density pop., with much more restrictive building codes than USA-in historical terms makes Japan a more ‘pristine’ instrumental record). Thus the instrumental record in Japan, unlike USA (cf. GISS), points to the 1930′s as being the warmest decade of the 20th Century. This conforms also with Soviet records of Arctic Ice extent pre-WW2 (it would appear, below 2007 levels), as well as the Depression Era Dustbowl experience in the Midwest US (higher temps. coupled with intenisve land-use practice here leads to a well-known and very REAL env. problem).

Two questions remain. First, how much longer will some people at NOAA-GISS get away with this farce? Second, when will that part of the env. movement devoted to AGW ideology wake-up and do the very many real things they can do about REAL env. problems! Everyone has a real positive interest in good science, and not everyone in ‘est.’ Academia or the Federal bureaus is going along with falsification, but most simply lack needed guts to go against a party line. It is more about lack of institutional integrety-a quite common problem today, and scientists, unfortunately, are simply ordinary people.

How come we now have to go to the Chinese for the truth about global warming?

Roger, If I understand your argument clearly, what it comes down to is that you are saying that the data are falsified. To wit: “But aside from the normally expected counter-analysis to warmist claims from those who are actually scientifically competent, there is a particular phrase in the new promo that immediately catches my attention – on record.” You go on to attack not only the credibility of East Anglia but of NASA. It’s all a vast conspiracy theory, is basically what your argument comes down to.

I’m curious — can you direct me to a database in which you have trust? I’d like the opportunity to compare and contrast data credibility. Can you give a link to what you’d consider to be reliable climate data?

Thanks! – Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA

jeremy

For a second there, I thought you may have intended to comment on my article.

You can easily find articles on all three fake inquiries for East Anglia, including several videos of the social gathering at Westminster (not really sure what building they were in) where they asked Jones if he’s a good scientist acting in normal ways and wrote up his answer as their report. Trying to give them credibility by calling them “independent reviews” is almost laughable. Almost, but not quite. It’s just too stupid for my sense of humor and I rarely laugh at dishonesty anyway. It’s just not funny, especially when intended to aid other criminal behavior. Their actions are intended to cause serious harm to a great many people, and they know it.

Well, there’s lots more to cover, but I can’t do it in one article, and I don’t tutor individuals to bring them up to speed in the comments section. I’d advise you to keep digging and eventually you’ll discover what’s going on, but you might need some help with this first:

Deprogramming Yourself After Global Warming Scam
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2009/12/16/deprogramming-yourself-after-global-warming-scam/