Global warming: Some errors are more important than others--especially when money is involved

Why would the IPCC baldly state a proposition that is contradicted by the entire scientific record? The answer is financial.

Petition to: stop describing members of the public who question the veracity of Anthropogenic Global Warming as climate change deniers. | Number10.gov.uk

Hot Air » Blog Archive » GOP to mine for votes in coal states

In 2008, Republicans didn’t get hold of Barack Obama’s comments to the San Francisco Chronicle about bankrupting the coal industry until far too late to do any damage. This time, armed with those comments, the cap-and-trade bill that would have fulfilled Obama’s promise, and the EPA hostility towards the coal industry, the GOP plans to make much more effective use of the danger to the coal industry in states that rely on it for economic survival. With even leading Democrats questioning Obama’s credibility on the issue, Republicans expect to mine gold with it

BBC News - Harrabin's Notes: Climate 'Armistice'

In his regular column, BBC environment analyst Roger Harrabin asks whether bloggers sceptical of man made global warming can be reconciled with the UN's climate body.

U.N. Climate panel pummeled for misinformation, high and low | GlobalWarming.org

But this latest wooden shoe to the butt again illustrates that this allegedly thoroughly documented reports by the allegedly top experts in world has a nasty tendency to simply include anything that will make its case seem stronger. Taken in light of the recent “Climategate” revelations that scientists who came to the “wrong” conclusions had their materially systematically excluded from the report and other IPCC documents, it shows just how shaky this house of cards is.

New Strategy for Solar - William Tucker - Planet Gore on National Review Online

They may not generate much electricity but they sure will look good on the cover of those annual reports!

Die Klimazwiebel: Ravetz in the Guardian

In the comments section we see the following statement:

'Could you tell me why you deleted this sentence from my article:

On the better blogs (as the one where I first posted, www.wattsupwiththat.com), the monitors ensure that the debate is courteous.'

I wonder why this sentence had so much significance for the Guardian moderators ;-)