A strange new silence about the current arctic sea ice extent number

I think it's a little odd that this graph of arctic sea ice extent suddenly stopped being updated after Nov 8, 2007. Note that for other years on the graph, we received updates after November 8.

Coincidentally, that looks to be about the date where the 2007 numbers seemed to catch up to the 2006 numbers, after trailing 2006 (to great media fanfare) by maybe 1.5 million square kilometers earlier in the fall.

On the bottom of a graph on another site, the November 2007 sea ice extent is listed as 10.1 million square kilometers. Does that indicate that as of November, the 2007 arctic sea ice extent exceeded the number from 2006?

That sea ice extent number seemed to be very important during the summer melt season, and the number was provided frequently here up to October 17.

I've spent some time looking, and I can't find an updated number for December anywhere. I wonder why that is.

Some details about "consensus" funding vs climate skeptic funding

Here.

Excerpt:

Newsweek reporter Eve Conant was given the documentation showing that proponents of man-made global warming have been funded to the tune of $50 BILLION in the last decade or so, but the Magazine chose instead to focus on how skeptics have reportedly received a paltry $19 MILLION from ExxonMobil over the last two decades.

Paleoclimate scientist Bob Carter, who has testified before the Senate Environment & Public Works committee, explained how much money has been spent researching and promoting climate fears and so-called solutions.

“In one of the more expensive ironies of history, the expenditure of more than $US50 billion on research into global warming since 1990 has failed to demonstrate any human-caused climate trend, let alone a dangerous one," Carter wrote on June 18, 2007.

"250 years of natural global warming"

Here.

Icecap site traffic booming

Here.

Note also the graph showing that funding for climate alarmists dwarfs funding for climate skeptics.

Despite the media's best efforts, the public is still not buying the ManBearPig scare

Here.

Excerpt:

Many commentators have called on the media to lead the public toward action [on global warming]. Some outlets, like Time Magazine, (and The Times editorial page and columnists like Tom Friedman) have taken on an advocacy role.

But polls persistently put the issue at the bottom of lists of voter concerns. Can the media make a difference?

Many sociologists I’ve interviewed say no one should count on articles or television (or even an Oscar-winning movie) to somehow magically galvanize meaningful action to pursue non-polluting energy options. It’s nearly impossible to impose a sense of urgency on people, as Time tried to do last year with its “Be Worried. Be Very Worried” cover on climate.

Some 2007 global warming highlights

Excerpt from this Newsweek article:

In March, when a planned trek by two explorers to the North Pole, intended to dramatize global warming, was aborted because of temperatures 100 degrees below zero, an organizer of the consciousness-raising venture explained that the cancellation confirmed predictions of global warming because "one of the things we see with global warming is unpredictability." Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize that should have gone to nine-time Grammy winner Sheryl Crow, who proposed saving the planet by limiting—to one—"how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting." At the U.N. global-warming conference in Bali there was Carbon Footprint Envy—the airport did not have space to park all the private jets.

Tilting at windmills in Virginia

Here.

Excerpt:

Now, you might think that a bipartison panel would include those "for" and those "against" - in this case global warming theory. But you'd be mistaken. This panel begins with the premise that global warming is fact, that humans can do something about it, and its only charge is to figure out how to achieve a 30% reduction in emissions of greenhouse gases. The debate, apparently, will be in the "how," not the "should." Or even "if." The "bi-" part of the partisanship remains unclear.

Excerpted quote from Patrick J. Michaels:

"If every nation of the world that has obligations under the Kyoto Protocol on climate change adopted and met the Virginia target, the amount of warming that would be prevented would be approximately six-hundredths of a degree Celsius per half century.

Snippet from the linked article:

Michaels, who contends that there is no statistically significant warming trend in the Virginia record dating back to 1895, is on leave from a research position at the University of Virginia.

Dave Lindorff sees a "silver lining" in the looming climate "catastrophe"

Excerpt from this piece:

Look at a map of the US.

The area that will by completely inundated by the rising ocean—and not in a century but in the lifetime of my two cats—are the American southeast, including the most populated area of Texas, almost all of Florida, most of Louisiana, and half of Alabama and Mississippi, as well as goodly portions of eastern Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina....So what we see is that huge swaths of conservative America are set to face a biblical deluge in a few more presidential cycles.

About Gore and those 75 free hours of airtime

From Investor's Business Daily here:

Here an idea: How about NBC hosting 75 hours of debate between some of Inhofe's 400 scientists and any one of Gore's choosing, including himself? Afraid of some inconvenient truths, Al?

Some background is here:

In what will surely be one of the largest ever, if not the largest, in-kind contributions to a presidential campaign if Al Gore decides to run, NBC Universal announced late last week that its networks will devote an incredible 75 hours of time on Saturday, July 7 to showing Gore's “Live Earth: The Concerts for a Climate in Crisis.”

The show MUST go on

Here:



Via Tim Blair

Dal lake partially frozen as cold wave sweeps through North

Excerpt from this link:

New Delhi, Dec 18: The world famous Dal Lake in Kashmir remained partially frozen as the cold wave maintained its icy grip on Northwest India with the death toll in the season reaching 46 today.

When I read stories like this, I can't avoid thinking that even if the earth does warm half a degree in the next 50 years, it won't necessarily be The End of the World As We Know It.

"However virtuous, virtual science is no substitute for the real thing"

Here.

Excerpts:

When I was a member of Greenpeace in the 1980s I received a request for money supported by the claim that about 30,000 species each year were becoming extinct. Until then I'd been an unsceptical environmentalist, but this sounded like an awful lot, so I called Greenpeace to ask how they knew. I made several queries but they didn't seem very interested. Finally they told me they didn't know where the figure came from, and I resigned from the organisation.
...
Kellow describes one paper published in the journal Nature in January 2004 that "warned of the loss of thousands of species with a relatively small warming over the next century...Kellow notes that a similar warming over the previous century had not left anything like the trail of species devastation being proposed in the paper, yet this observational data was considered irrelevant compared with the virtual world of the models.

"Beyond Bali: Fight Global Warming by Dumping Kyoto"

Here.

Excerpt:

Kyoto is both a technical and a political failure. (If fully implemented, Kyoto will reduce global temperature by only 0.03 degrees Celsius.) Activists demanded that the U.S. sign Kyoto, but it won't. Why? Because it is a terrible deal. The U.S. would have had to bear up to two-thirds, or more, of the cost of Kyoto, likely more than all other nations combined.

"My global warming question"

Here:

what are the most persuasive reasons for believing that the rise in temperature is due to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide?

Why the lack of warming since April '98 should make alarmists really nervous

Here.

From the referenced paper (published in 2000):

“Given the acceleration of the trends predicted by many models, we believe that an additional 10 years may be adequate, and 20 years will very likely be sufficient, for the combined satellite and radiosonde network to convincingly confirm or refute the predictions of increasing vapor in the free troposphere and its effects on global warming.”

"You live by the 'consensus'..."

Check out this comment in response to an Andrew Dessler post.

Attenborough on the alleged "truth" about global warming

Around the net, I notice that some people are still impressed by this video of Sir David Attenborough, where he confuses climate models with reality:





Here's a screen shot, where the red line is supposed to be real observations, the yellow line is modeled climate with human influence, and the green line is the modeled temperature without human influence.

Even though Attenborough has a title and an accent, and even though they play scary music in the background, I'm not buying any of this.

I say no one really knows what that green line should look like; I say that the yellow line follows the red line only because it's fudged; and I say the red line is distorted upward in recent years by local heat biases, and when it's measured by satellite, it shows a flatline or even a decrease over the last decade.

Comments on an Andrew Revkin post

Regarding this post:

1. The description of the post says:

A Republican senator finds hundreds of scientists and studies questioning the consensus over dangerous global warming. Does it matter?

Why yes, it most certainly does matter, since it's constantly suggested that an "overwhelming majority" of scientists believe in dangerous global warming.

I doubt that something like this would ever appear in a Revkin blog post:

A former Democratic vice-president says hundreds of scientists and studies agree with his catastrophic view of climate change. Does it matter?

2. In the post, Revkin says he sees Inhofe's report as "portrait of one corner of the absolutely normal, and combative, arena in which scientific ideas emerge and either thrive or fade."

Would Revkin ever refer to Gore's side as occupying "one corner" of this debate?

3. Here's the money quote from Revkin:

...there is still a lot of uncertainty about the extent and pace of warming from a particular rise in concentrations of greenhouse gases, and about how fast and far seas will rise as a result.

Of course--the crux of this entire debate is the "extent and pace" of the warming.

If ManBearPig is going to kill us all in upcoming decades, that's one thing; if ManBearPig is going to kill none of us, ever, that's quite another.

"Good news! Earth not flat"

Excerpt from this article:

Looks like man-made global warming theory is melting away faster than you can say Al Gore. A lot of reputations are now going to disappear along with it: all those who were part of the famous ‘consensus’ (not). Those people should never be taken seriously again.

It’s over, guys. Reason, truth and real science are fighting back.

One story, two very different headlines

(Click to enlarge)



(Thanks to a commenter for pointing this out).

Gore, through a spokeswoman, invokes the 'Exxon' defense

Excerpts from this article:

More than 400 scientists challenge claims by former Vice President Al Gore and the United Nations about the threat of man-made global warming, a new Senate minority report says.
...
After a quick review of the report, Gore spokeswoman Kalee Kreider said 25 or 30 of the scientists may have received funding from Exxon Mobil Corp.

Update: From a related blog post, entitled "Gore's Conspiracy Theory":

Of all people, why does he get to be the honest broker?

Why greens love “climate change” more than “global warming”

Here:

...“climate change” is useful because everything from cold weather to warm can be used as “proof”.

"Why I Don't Care About Global Warming"

Here.

Criticizing the UN

Here.

Excerpt:

...the most disturbing and the most dangerous initiatives presented of late are the initiatives surrounding the junk science of manmade global warming.
...
To declare that the scientific debate on mans role in the global warming and cooling cycle is over, a consensus reached, is to promote a blatant lie.

Good questions from Wizbang and Rational Review

Here and here.

A Solar Grand Plan

Here.

Excerpt:

Some 30,000 square miles of photovoltaic arrays would have to be erected. Although this area may sound enormous, installations already in place indicate that the land required for each gigawatt-hour of solar energy produced in the Southwest is less than that needed for a coal-powered plant when factoring in land for coal mining.

I'd like to see more details to back up that second sentence. I'd also like to see a convincing argument that this solar plan makes more sense than going nuclear.

Another short interview with Bob Carter

Here (WAV).

This is from the PapaJoe Chevalier Show, a nationally syndicated radio talk show originating in Las Vegas, Nevada.

More on “List of Over 400 Prominent Scientists Question Significance of Man-made Global Warming”

You can read the whole thing here.

Excerpt from Richard Lindzen:

Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse.

More people not buying the media's global warming hype

In this poll of likely GOP caucus voters in Iowa, note how global warming completely fails to register.

Dinner with a few believers

Here.

Excerpt:

...every one of them drives a big SUV and lives in a big home where they generate CO2 at the same prodigious clip as all of their peers.

They BELIEVE this stuff, and they regurgitate the talking points, but not a single one of them was interested in changing their own lifestyle…

How do you believe that you are destroying the earth, but you just keep on doing it even while you lecture other people about it?

Grow More Food in Cities (and indoors), UN Agency Tells Asia

Here.

"It may be checkmate for corn-based ethanol"

Here.

'Science' continues to desperately flog global warming

Here.

Excerpt:

In 2007, the debate about the reality of global warming ended, at least in the political and public realms in the United States.

January '07 Pew survey on global warming

Here.

Alleged "greatest crisis ever" ranks sixth on AP's top 10 stories of 2007

Here.

A primer on Al Gore and ManBearPig

Here.

Related videos here and here.

About that eco-tourist ship that unexpectedly rammed an iceberg and sunk

See the picture in Andy Revkin's blog entry here.

Excerpt:

They had seen “An Inconvenient Truth” during the cruise and heard lectures on the potential impact of global warming in Antarctica.

Evidently, there's now speculation that this incident may be related to global warming.

That may be, but it seems to me that if the globe was so "warm", the water forming that iceberg may have been present only in less-threatening liquid form.

Man-Made Global Warming: 10 Questions

See the article (and the comments) here.

The Algorism of Global Doom

Here.

Excerpt:

Global Dooming has a very simple explanation. There's nothing new about it. It is just the human desire to create a millenarian narrative that fits our political biases, whipped on by the Politically Correct elites of this world, fed by a huge infusion of money into climate modeling and other dubious science, plus unprecedented media hype, and finally, the intimidation of thousands of rational skeptics.

This "madness of crowds" happens all the time. Charles MacKay wrote about it in 1841, in his book Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds. Economics bubbles and busts are just one kind. But we can see a lush diversity of other superstitions and mass delusions.
It is a shame that it is now corrupting normal science. In healthy science the burden of proof is always on the proposer of any hypothesis. But now the burden of proof on the skeptics in the case of human-caused global warming. But you can't prove a negative. As soon as the skeptics disprove one false claim, the Global Fraudsters are allowed to jump to another one, as long as they predict the same conclusion.

In real science the deck is never stacked against the skeptics. Rational skeptics are welcomed when people know what they are talking about. They can only help to sharpen the issues.

Ok, now I'm convinced

I've just found out that Liam "Gandhi" Neeson has decided to make the ultimate sacrifice--actually riding a bike to a global warming event:

Granted, he was actually dared to do so by the campaign’s founder — Weeds actor Matthew Modine — but with the promise of a free dinner and the opportunity to make a point, the decision came easy to the actor.

"The Growing Consensus of the Lack of Consensus for Global Warming"

Here.

From this link:

Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called "consensus" on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.
...
Even some in the establishment media now appear to be taking notice of the growing number of skeptical scientists. In October, the Washington Post Staff Writer Juliet Eilperin conceded the obvious, writing that climate skeptics "appear to be expanding rather than shrinking."

Note that only 215 people signed a weakly-worded "consensus" petition mentioned here.

Obviously, you can't determine scientific truth by comparing these numbers. However, when UN Chief Ki-moon claims the world's scientists have spoken "clearly and in one voice" on this issue, he's not telling the truth.

If you're going to get panicky over CO2 emissions, don't forget China and India

Excerpt from here:

Sir, In the Kyoto treaty and during the Bali discussions, critics have avoided the big gorillas in the room — China and India.

In 2004 (from which date the most comprehensive numbers presently available), the world output of industrial CO2 emissions was 27.2 million tons, of which the US produced 6 million tons and China and India produced 6.4 million tons.

"President Signs Anti-Energy Bill"

Here.

Excerpt:

...it is unclear how carmakers will be able to even meet the new standard of 35 miles per gallon. “According to the Environmental Protection Agency, only two 2008 models out of a total of 1,153 currently on the market comply with the new regulations,” said CEI Senior Fellow Marlo Lewis. "This simple, easily checked fact blows away proponents' claim that the new standard is practical and realistic.”

A climate alarmist on "the insanity that is America’s ethanol policy"

Here.

Germany Cries Foul Over EU Plans to Cut Car Emissions

Here.

Excerpt:

Germany has attacked European Commission proposals to cut car C02 emissions limits, saying they unfairly hit the country's auto industry. The measures are intended to curb global warming.

I wonder if this is the same Germany that heroically committed to "steep CO2 cuts" in Bali earlier this month.

We just did zero-in-20. How to achieve 40-in-10?

Here.

UN issues warning, but averts eyes from its own role

Here.

Excerpt:

The hypothetical dangers of global warming, hyped so vigorously by the UN, are creating conditions that actually damage the world's billions of poor people for whom an adequate diet is a matter of affordability.

Flameout: Corn-Based Ethanol

From PIMCO here:

For PIMCO, these conclusions about ethanol play a role in economic forecasting, because foreign oil’s dominance of U.S. energy consumption – and ultimately its price – has broad implications for U.S. and global commodity prices, growth and inflation. While some suggest ethanol could be a potential solution to this mounting problem, we don’t believe it will have any meaningful impact on oil supply and demand over our medium to long-term economic forecasting horizon.

Sun, Water and Temperature

Here.

Excerpt:

...Very little radiation penetrates the water in polar regions, even during the "six month" summer, in spite of what some of the IPCC climatologists say.

Heating of polar waters occurs more from currents such as the Gulf Stream transferring warmer water from equatorial regions.

When solar output stabilizes or decreases, SST's do not change immediately. SST's may remain elevated for a few years after solar output has decreased.

The process of slow heating and cooling of the seas prevents the sun from having a direct linear impact on earth temperatures.

The Global Warming Suicide Cult

Here.

Remarkable statistics on cold-related deaths

Here.

Excerpt:

Deaths linked to extreme cold account for 0.8 percent of the nation’s annual death rate and outnumber those attributed to leukemia, murder and chronic liver disease combined, the study reports. Cold-related deaths also reduce the average life expectancy of Americans by at least a decade, it says.

From Australia: sunshine duration accounts for 93% of all warming since 1951

Here.

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom issues executive order creating nationally unique city carbon offset program

From this page:

Scientific evidence indicates that the risks of global warming are so dire that aggressive and immediate action is needed to reduce carbon emissions globally.

The Cascade Climate Declaration

Check out the completely hysterical document here.

I was actually quite saddened when I read this, because it looks like the young writer(s) of this document may be sincerely panicked over ridiculously weak evidence that "human activity is rapidly driving" an alleged climate crisis.

"Has global warming stopped?"

An article by David Whitehouse is here.

About the author:

David Whitehouse was BBC Science Correspondent 1988–1998, Science Editor BBC News Online 1998–2006 and the 2004 European Internet Journalist of the Year. He has a doctorate in astrophysics and is the author of The Sun: A Biography (John Wiley, 2005).]

Norway's emissions soar

Here.

Excerpt:

Just as Norwegian delegates to the UN's conference on climate change started heading home from Bali, came news that Norway's own carbon emissions rose 80 percent from 1990 to 2004.

Excerpt from this article:

Nobel Peace Prize winner Al Gore praised Norway on Sunday for being "among the leaders" in the fight to stop climate change.

Quote from alarmist Bill McKibben

From Vermont public radio here:

...More big box stores on the far outskirts of town? These are global warming machines. That's what they produce, more than anything else.

Actually, I think some of those stores also distribute fairly important stuff like food, clothing, building materials, etc.

It's probably asking too much, but I wonder if Bill would mind showing us his math here--for starters, I'd like to see his calculation of how much global temperature would be reduced by 2050 if we banned all big box stores today.

Keeping things in perspective

Check out this paragraph about UN chief Ban Ki-moon:

Another issue that has boosted Ban's credibility is climate change, which he views as a severe challenge for human beings. Some have said Ban is "a man on a climate-changing mission." Ban has frequently said his first priority is persuading the world to reach an agreement on this urgent issue. At the same time, he emphasized that "the United Nations is the natural forum for building consensus and negotiating future global action," intending to ensure a leading role for the organization in the battle against climate change.

Way to stick to that "policy neutral" stance, Mr Pachauri

Excerpt from IPCC chair Rajendra Pachauri here:

We have been so drunk with this desire to produce and consume more and more whatever the cost to the environment that we're on a totally unsustainable path. I am not going to rest easy until I have articulated in every possible forum the need to bring about major structural changes in economic growth and development.

Also from that above link:

...the formal mandate of the IPCC is to be "policy neutral."

Update: Pachauri was evidently just named "Newsmaker of the Year" by Nature.

Global Warming Changed Earth's Orbit?

Here.

Excerpt:

"The first dawn after winter up there is supposed to be mid-February, but the sun appeared to rise two weeks earlier. When I asked the locals about it, they said there have been huge changes here in the last few years.

"Incandescent stupidity: Washington outlaws 100-watt lightbulbs"

Here.

A good question

Asked here:

I was wondering in light of the new mileage regulations, how that would affect cars that use ethanol, since ethanol gets a lower MPG than gasoline?

I've yet to see this answered.

Note that according to this site, a gallon of ethanol has only 2/3 of the energy of a gallon of gasoline.

Parker: luxury limos to be replaced before 2015

Here.

Climate skepticism among North American energy industry executives

Check out the survey results here.

Excerpt:

In total, about 36 percent of all survey respondents believe global warming is real and is caused by man. Approximately 35 percent of respondents have a significant degree of confidence in the underlying climate change science compared to 42 percent who had low confidence in the science.

“These were surprising results. They suggest less support than we had expected for the science that underlies current and proposed climate change policy,” Rudden said. “The results also illuminate the substantial differences in views between the United States and other nations participating in the Kyoto Protocols.”

"Cold weather" blamed for deadly train accident in Pakistan

Here.

Excerpts:

At least 56 people have been killed and more than 120 injured as a crowded passenger train came off its rails in southern Pakistan...Officials think the crash was caused by part of the track that had cracked in the cold weather.

Fred Thompson on global warming

Here:

THOMPSON: Well, that's one of the questions we don't know, the last one that you just asked. There's no question in my mind that the world is warming. There's no question that humans are making some contribution to that. But there's a lot of answers that we don't have yet, Alan, that we need to get. We need to know whether or not this is a part of a phase or whether or not it's permanent, as best we can tell.

We've had cooling periods in our country -- or in our world before. We don't know the extent to which this is man made. We don't know the effects of it. The estimates of the results of all of this are all over the map. And I object to those people who say the books are closed, no more questions can be asked, we've got to now adopt the solutions that we're putting forth. We're not there yet.

"If global warming is going to kill us, then why is it so freaking cold?"

Check out the whole piece by David Deming here.

Hat tip: All American Blogger

Doubts about carbon capture

Here.

Excerpt:

There are plenty of experts who still doubt that capturing carbon dioxide and putting it in cold storage will ever work at a meaningful scale. Vaclav Smil at the University of Manitoba has calculated that capturing, compressing and storing just 10 percent of current CO2 emissions — here and now — would require as much pipeline and plant infrastructure as are now used worldwide to extract oil from the ground. And oil is a pricey commodity while carbon dioxide is a waste gas.

A related post from Climate Skeptic is here.

"Time Names Al Gore Runner-up to Person of the Year"

Here.

Note the fawning Time piece on Al Gore by "Bono" here.

I wonder if that's the same "Bono" that sang "Where The Streets Have No Name".

If it is, I guess we can all just assume that he's done proper due diligence on all of the various drivers of climate change.

"Al Gore: enviro-tyrant"

Here.

GAME OVER: JAPAN SCRAPS CARBON TAX, EMISSIONS TRADING SYSTEM

Here.

I wonder if this is the same Japan where Kyoto is located?

Excerpt:

Japan's government omitted a proposed carbon tax from its latest list of measures to curb pollution and will instead intensify appeals for voluntary reductions from homes, utilities and factories. Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda's Cabinet today reviewed alternative strategies to meet the nation's Kyoto Protocol target on carbon emissions, Hiroshi Kamagata, a counsellor in the Cabinet Secretariat, told reporters in Tokyo. Media handouts omitted earlier proposals for a carbon tax on fossil fuel use and the creation of an emissions trading system.

Hat tip: Greenie Watch

MORE EVIDENCE THAT GERMANY IS REALLY, REALLY SERIOUS ABOUT CO2 EMISSIONS

Here.

Excerpt:

Passenger numbers at Frankfurt airport, Germany's main civil aviation hub, could increase 60 percent by 2020 thanks to a new runway, the chief executive of airport operator Fraport was quoted as saying.

Hat tip: Greenie Watch

The problems with carbon trading

Here.

"Global Warming Really About Global Government"

Here.

“climate change is too important to be left to scientists”

A whole lot of global warming commentary is here.

Antarctic Temperatures: 1958-2002

Here.

Excerpt:

Clearly, the entire continent of Antarctica, together with much of the Southern Ocean that surrounds it, has been completely oblivious to the supposedly "unprecedented" radiative impetus for warming produced by anthropogenic emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases over the last three decades of the 20th century ... and even a bit beyond.

Request to the IPCC

...from Syun Akasofu of the International Arctic Research Center here.

Excerpt:

I am concerned about the inevitable backlash against science and scientists, when the public learns the correct information about climate change.

"Real winter"

Here.

Another tidbit about Ottawa:

The total cumulative snowfall so far this year is 148 centimeters, including almost 90 centimeters in December. At this time last year, only 18 centimeters had fallen.

Why not just ban cars on alternate days?

Check out a long list of harebrained ideas here.

"NASA recants: Arctic melt no proof of global warming"

Here.

"Alarmism sells"

Start with this post and its comments, then read the follow-up post here.

"Snowiest December day ever" in Ottawa

Here.

Climate alarmism hits a brick wall

Here.

Excerpt:

The success of the major Anglosphere nations at last week's United Nations climate conference in Bali marks the beginning of the end of the age of climate hysteria.

Mistakes made by Trenberth (and many others) when claiming veracity for climate models

Here.

From the comment section:

It turns out that the reliability of GCM projected future temperatures is zero. And not just for 100-year projections, but for 1-year projections.

IPCC forecasts are "opinions of scientists transformed by mathematics and obscured by complex writing"

See the web site here (this paper in particular).

Disney World gets it right

When I spent several days at the Walt Disney World theme parks this fall, I was curious to find out how they treated the subject of global warming.

Quite a few of the attractions and presentations dealt pretty extensively with man's impact to the environment, but I heard "global warming" mentioned only in one sentence (by Bill Nye at Ellen's Energy Adventure).

I found Disney's sanity to be very refreshing, considering how we're constantly bombarded with climate alarmism elsewhere.

Vuitton's new "Dissonance" line

Here.

What Economists Think About Stern

Here.

For Kyoto's champions, the meetings never end

Here.

Excerpt:

You may remember that COP-11 was held in Montreal in December, 2005, during the first two weeks of Canada's last general election. It, too, was hailed as historic. Stephane Dion, then the Liberal environment minister, was praised as the saviour of the Kyoto process for having hammered out some last-minute deal that kept negotiations alive through COP-12. But just what bargaining catastrophe Mr. Dion is supposed to have averted can no longer be recalled -- just as the "historic" achievements of Bali will quickly be lost in the mists -- because the substance of the agreement was completely meaningless.

Achievement means little to the UN's climate crusaders. It's the appearance of activity that counts. Keep moving, keep meeting, keep the shrimp toast and single malts coming, and the need actually to accomplish some tangible environmental outcome becomes inconsequential.

Organic material discharged from retreating Greenland glacier

Here.

Bali greenhouse update

Here.

About that "sugary drink tax"

Here.

EU plans to cut airline emissions

Here.

Carbon hypocrisy–what does it reveal?

Here.

Excerpt:

In An Inconvenient Truth, Gore admonishes readers to “reduce the number of miles you drive by biking, walking, carpooling, or taking mass transit wherever possible,” and to “reduce air travel.” Does he practice what he preaches? Nope.

Cornell's 2007/2008 Ivory-bill search team

Here.

Excerpt:

David [Luneau] captured the now-famous video footage of what many experts believe to be an Ivory-billed Woodpecker in 2004.

I'd like to see a list of the names of these "experts".

Chris Horner on the Bali farce

Video here.

"A planned, socialist solution to the global warming crisis is what is necessary"

From the Party for Socialism and Liberation here:

Marxism can help us make sense of the Bali conference...The imperialists’ endless maneuvering to protect the interests of the super-rich, and against the interests of the world’s workers and poor, illustrates the irrational character of the capitalist system.

A planned, socialist solution to the global warming crisis is what is necessary.

Ecochondria and ski conditions

Check out the gloomy outlook on ski conditions in this Dec. 16 article, then check out the actual ski conditions in this Dec. 17 report.

Excerpt from that second link:

Most resorts in Switzerland, France and Austria have over a metre of snow on their upper slopes with a few resorts having over two metres.

That allegedly "suffocating" blanket of carbon dioxide is still up there, am I correct? If it's driving climate, why does its effect seem to be AWOL worldwide for years, decades, and centuries at a time?

"cut CO2 by 100 percent"!!

Here.

"In the last four years, the sea surface temperature average between 60N and 60S has cooled"

Here.

Panic the big threat to planet

Here.

Excerpt:

Concern about unsettling climatic events is natural, but we are not the problem. Better to abandon ill-founded panic, to keep building a strong economy and thus the adaptive capacity to deal with whatever catastrophes unaided nature may have in store for us.

IMF and FAO Blame Biofuels for Food Inflation

Here.

Ponder the Maunder Update

An introduction to a remarkable teenager named Kristen Byrnes is here.

More on Byrnes is here and here.

A New Divergence Problem

Take a look at the graph here and let me know if you see overwhelming evidence of human influence.

"A Solemn and Prolonged Farce”

Here.

Excerpt:

On the science front, get ready for the rash of year-end headlines about 2007’s being yet again among the hottest years on record. What these headlines will conceal is that 2007 was roughly the same temperature as 2006, 2005, 2004, and so forth, back to 2000. After rising steadily and noticeably between 1980 and 1998, global temperatures have flattened out for the last decade, even though the climate models say they should be continuing to increase. Curious. The headlines could just as accurately read, “Scientists Confirm Global Warming Standstill.” A few more years of flat temperatures will cause a crisis among the climate campaigners and confound the scientists. This might, however, be one crisis that the greens can’t turn into a panic.

Interview with Professor Bob Carter

Here (10 minutes; WAV format).

A bit of information about the interview is here:

December 15, 2007: Interview with NRSP Science Advisory Committee member Professor Bob Carter on The Roy Green Show on the Corus Radio Network across Canada.

Carter thinks its nonsensical to attempt to "stop" climate change via controlling carbon dioxide; he also thinks cooling is a bigger threat than warming in upcoming decades.

McCARTNEY'S PLEA TO SAVE THE PLANET

Here.

Lomborg on Kyoto

Excerpt from this article:

Excerpt:

...Kyoto is at the same time impossibly ambitious and yet environmentally inconsequential. It attempts to change century-old patterns in 15 years, ending up costing a fortune and delivering almost nothing.

Hillary Clinton and greenhouse gases

1. Words here:

...[her] plan would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050 to avoid the worst effects of global warming...Hillary would increase fuel efficiency standards to 55 miles per gallon by 2030...

2. Action here:

Clinton will return to Iowa Sunday to embark on a five-day, 17-town helicopter tour of the state.

Fun and Games at the United Nations

Here.

CTV omits global warming/environment from top stories list

Here.

Excerpt:

...[CTV News president Robert] Hurst, however, said CTV editors were “skeptical of the importance of global warming” as an issue on the top ten list.

"A CLIMATE SCEPTIC IN BALI", by Dr Vincent Gray

Here.

Response to "How the World Ends" Video

Here.

Excerpt:

...He argues that one buys car insurance without actually knowing if he is going to crash his car, or how much such a crash might cost. If I had to summarize my response to Mr. Craven, I would retort "Yes, but you wouldn't pay $35,000 for car insurance if you only had a $30,000 car?" Costs matter a lot, as does the magnitude of risk. They can't just be shuffled off to the side.

Advice for women (from an old guy who doesn't own a Ferrari)

Excerpt from this post:

...Britain's top government scientist says the best thing women can do to ease global warming is "stop admiring young men in Ferraris."

A related post is here.

Times's reporter on biased climate coverage

Here.

Excerpt:

...Revkin’s blog is indistinguishable from Green weblogs.

He talks only to green sources, only cites studies that conform with GW orthodoxy, and hangs on The Goracle’s every word.

Notes on Tom Friedman's carbon footprint

Here.

Massive health risks if it's one degree warmer outside?

Let's say you live in a town in the northern U.S. or Canada.

Let's say you know of people who've actually left the safe, frigid north for the hellfires of Orlando or San Diego.

Have you ever noticed that these people never return, having succumbed to some combination of floods, fires, malaria, dengue fever, yellow fever, schistosomiasis, leishmaniasis, salmonella, diarrhea, scabies, Lyme disease, etc etc etc?

Well, the good people at the Washington Post have noticed, and they've helpfully provided this graphic of the horrible risks.

If an emission falls and there's no bureaucrat to mandate it...

Here.

Is ‘Journalistic Ethics’ an Oxymoron?

Read about the controversy generated by this rather innocuous letter here.

Saying “No” When Everyone Else Is Saying “Yes”

Here.

Excerpt:

Having followed the IPCC since its inception and the environmental movement in general for decades, I can tell you that what we are hearing is a shrill message of desperation coming from those who fear that people around the world may yet reject the global warming lie.

The Energy Bill with a Body Count

Here.

Excerpt:

In 2001, a National Academy of Sciences panel concluded that CAFE contributes to between 1,300 to 2,600 traffic deaths per year, by restricting the production of larger and heavier cars. A subsequent study by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration went even further, finding that the effect of downsizing on safety was “substantially larger” than previously thought.

Snowstorm parody

Here.

"Severe cold wave" in India

Here.

This article refers to the cold there as "spine chilling" and "nerve chilling".

Dutch diplomat in charge of the Bali talks "bursts into tears"

Here.

"Record Snow in Toronto"

Here.

A related story is here:

"It's a big one, a dangerous one," Environment Canada climatologist Dave Phillips told CTV, adding that more heavy snow was expected.

"Just because you have this one storm doesn't mean we're into the winter from hell, but my gosh, it's certainly started that way."

"When Diplomats Boo: How Global Climate Talks Reached a New Nadir"

Here.

Excerpt from Roger Pielke:

The growth in China's emissions from 2006-2010 is equivalent to adding the 2004 emissions of Japan, Germany, United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia to China's 2006 total (source). The emissions growth in China at these rates is like adding another Germany every year, or a UK and Australia together, to global emissions. The graph below illustrates the point.

"Bali was a science-free, fact-free zone, question-free zone"

You should read the whole thing by Christopher Monckton here (Word).

This piece once again uses logic and a large number of specific facts to debunk climate alarmism. In comparison, note the sparse "weak-coffee" page that Gore provides.

Aside from the science, Monckton also shares some other observations.

Excerpts:

...Gore himself does not believe his ridiculous estimate that the melting of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets will raise sea level by 20 feet imminently: he has just bought a $4 million condo in the St. Regis Hotel, San Francisco, a few feet from the Bay...

...Therein lies a danger that Gore has not yet seen. For he failed, yet again, to declare his financial interest before whipping up worldwide alarm with his trademark errors and exaggerations in Bali. He is a director of Lehman Brothers, a global finance house that wants to control the worldwide managed market in carbon-emissions trading. He founded his own “green” corporation, Generation Investment Management. He is a paid member of the Board of a renewable-energy company. In the UK, if he made a speech containing so many deliberate and unidirectional errors as he did in Bali, and if he failed to declare his financial interest, he would be committing a criminal offence.

"Gore's warming plan will blister U.S."

Here.

About that stupid "Northwest Passage" claim

It's really hard to scare people using temperature data like this:




Faced with this reality, climate alarmists very often resort to "scary" anecdotes.

One of the most common of these anecdotes is the one about the fabled Northwest Passage, which allegedly opened up for "the first time in history" in 2007.

The problem with that claim is that it is completely false.

For example, the Northwest Passage was successfully navigated in 1906, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1944, 1957, 1969, 1977, 1984, 1988, and 2000.

See this blog post for details and links.

Answers.com also contains a lot of information to debunk this claim.

Green Police State

Here.

Excerpt [quote from Mayer Hillman]:

"When the chips are down I think democracy is a less important goal than is the protection of the planet from the death of life, the end of life on it. [Carbon rationing] has got to be imposed on people whether they like it or not. "

You should also read this linked article, entitled "Let's ditch this 'nostalgia for mud'".

Excerpt:

So let’s dispel the fairy tale of the idyllic life of subsistence farming once and for all. For those Westerners who can’t, Andrew has a simple tip: ‘Let’s swap lives’.

Note that Al Gore chooses not to live in a mud hut, and he chooses not to travel everywhere on foot.

Global sea ice area anomaly goes *positive*

Excerpt from this post:

By the way, the global sea ice area anomaly is slightly positive right now (graph, more): it means that the total area is higher than the average for mid December. I am afraid that you won't read about it in the media.

Posts about a proposed global carbon tax

Here and here.

Post-Bali Manic Depression

Here.

Excerpt from a linked article:

And there is a case for saying that Europe played a poor hand here, demanding something it was never going to get.

"Divergence: the Young Dendros Rebel"

Here.

Excerpt:

Today I’m going to post on the session on the Divergence Problem, initiated and chaired by Rob Wilson, and which, for the most part, consisted of young dendros probing critically at the issue of the failure of ring widths to record recent warmth. This issue was touched on by both the NAS Panel and IPCC AR4, both of which arm-waved through the problem, relying on a rather lame explanation by Cook (who does a lot of solid work, but this wasn’t one of them).

A tale of two San Francisco weather stations

Here.

If your time is limited, just scroll down and compare the two temperature graphs near the bottom.

David Crane believes

Check out this remarkable Fortune article about NRG Energy's CEO David Crane, who has bought into climate alarmism.

Like nearly 100% of climate alarmists, he clearly hasn't seriously weighed the scientific evidence for himself; rather, he chooses to believe that an alleged "vast majority of scientists" have correctly concluded that CO2 emissions are dangerous.

Excerpts:

A lawyer, not an engineer, Crane admits he's as baffled as the next guy by how modern power plants actually, you know, make power...Crane doesn't waste time anymore worrying about whether the science is right; that's where he parts with the climate skeptics.

Jerry Brown is back again

Here.

Excerpt:

Bucking even the current scientific consensus on the issue Brown initiated "public nuisance" litigation seeking millions of dollars in compensation for global warming-induced floods and other natural disasters he believes were caused by emissions from automakers and coal plant manufacturers. Brown seeks through the power of his office to lay blame for specific climate induced disruptions at the feet of those whom he sees as directly responsible. The courts apparently have a different view and Brown’s lawsuits against both industries were recently dismissed.

A suggestion that climate alarmists may need to go "beyond nonviolence"

Excerpt from a blog post entitled "Whatever It Takes: Beyond Nonviolence" here :

We are in critical battle for this planet, and we need to think seriously about doing whatever it takes to stop the actions which are destroying the land and seas...

The summer/winter effect

Here.