The dilemma of a warmist | ScottishSceptic

If natural variation is so small that it cannot have been responsible for the 20th century, then it is too small to have stopped the “warming”. If natural variation is big enough to cause sufficient cooling to cancel out the warming, then it is clearly big enough (when working in the opposite way i.e. to warm) to explain all the apparent warming in the 20th century.

How to win a “scientific” argument if the science doesn’t support you. | ScottishSceptic

In essence, the precautionary principle is a rewriting of the rules of science. Without the precautionary principle, one has to say: “the evidence shows”. With the precautionary principle you can say: “the evidence could lead us to believe”. Bang goes all the burdensome necessity of proving what you say with evidence to call it science, in comes the precautionary principle which has no limit to the unscrupulous. You can take any bit of information, add a few “scientific facts” show how it “could lead to some kind of tragedy” and then claim: “science tells us that we must …”.

[An incredibly smart person weighs in] | FavStocks

Why everyone interested in the climate/warming issue isn’t bookmarking, tracking, and linking items from TOM NELSON is beyond me. It’s the single best source of news about this fretful warming sweating wheezing poisoned planet. Dozens of items a day. Here’s a few headlines from overnight

Green Jobs Are Real: German and American Solar Industry Both Employ More People Than U.S. Steel Production | ThinkProgress

These figures are comparing solar manufacturing, sales and installation to steel production alone. If one were to factor in products made from steel, the industry would be up around 160,000 workers.

2008: Solar Power Could Provide 10 Percent of U.S. Electricity by 2025

Solar energy currently provides less than 0.1 percent of the electricity generated in the United States,