The Fraudsters Who Invent the "Science" of Climate Change » Publications » Family Security Matters

Rael Jean Isaac Interviews Donna Laframboise, author of The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World's Top Climate Expert, available from Amazon or, a digital edition, from IvyAvenue.com, 2011...

[Donna] I live in Canada. Twenty-thousand years ago my country was 98% covered with ice. That ice has been melting and retreating all on its own for twenty thousand years. The Egyptians, remember, only came into the picture 5,000 years ago. The Romans ruled 2,000 years ago. So if the ice at the Northern end of the globe has been shrinking for the past 20,000 years why do we suddenly imagine that what's going on at this very moment is our fault? And yet when's the last time you've seen a talking head on the television ask that question? I mean, the level of debate and public discourse on these issues is pathetic. It's beyond lame.   

How Hot Is Spitzbergen? | Real Science

Spitzbergen warmed 16 degrees from 1910 to 1939, as CO2 rose 10 ppm to 310 ppm.

We now know that CO2 is the cause of Arctic warming, and we also know that CO2 has increased by another 80 ppm since 1939. So it stands to reason that Spitzbergen has warmed 128 degrees (80 / 10  * 16) since 1939, or 144 degrees since 1910.

On the dangerous(?) naivete of uncritical acceptance of scientific consensus | Climate Etc.

JC comment:  Bertrand Russell’s statement to me defines rational skepticism.  Political motivation for establishing a scientific consensus associated with a policy prescription, such as occurred in the context of the UNFCCC/IPCC, seems to me to provide grounds for non-experts to question the consensus.

Put in this light, engaging in the climate blogosphere, challenging the consensus and demanding accountability is part of our individual attempts to draw our own intelligent conclusions and do so responsibly.