[Still a believer: Through an extremely complicated and dubious chain of "logic", alarmist Peter Gleick envisions carbon dioxide causing violence]

It doesn’t have to be this way: we know the climate is changing, we know that water resources are widely shared, and we know general principles for careful and sustainable management of water. It is time to bring these pieces together on the international stage in order to reduce the risks of conflict and violence over water.

Moore: snow damage a serious threat to rural economy - politics.co.uk

Local MP Michael Moore is pressing Ministers in Edinburgh to provide farmers in the Borders with emergency financial support after receiving reports of widespread snow damage on farms and other rural businesses across the south of Scotland.

Structures such as sheds, polytunnels and glasshouses have been hit hard, with growing facilities collapsing under the weight of snow. In some cases, businesses had invested all of their funds in stock and equipment and have no means to finance the vast clean-up operation and purchase of replacements. Many of the structures that have been damaged will not be covered by insurance because they are deemed to be temporary buildings.

“Threat Perception” of Climate Change in Canada Drops « Unambiguously Ambidextrous

While the perception of danger from terrorism may have diminished, it’s significant to note that despite the past six years of relative hysteria about the threat of climate change, that it actually dropped 3% over the past six years.

The Reference Frame: IPCC types read Lindzen-Choi 2009

I do think that the paper by Lindzen and Choi has some bugs - and I hope they will be mostly corrected in the near future. But my prelimiinary calculations show that the sensitivity remains close to 1 degree Celsius - "the truth is somewhere in between" - when the things are corrected.

And that's a completely unremarkable CO2-induced temperature change especially because it's not far from the effect of one or two volcano eruptions - phenomena that many models are freely omitting. The very fact that it looks "sensible" for some people to build the whole models around CO2 while ignoring effects that are equally or more important - as Trenberth et al. have claimed themselves - shows a bias, a distorted focus of the science driven by the purpose.