Bob Carter: Deal with climate reality as it unfolds | JunkScience.com

Policymakers have quietly given up trying to cut ­carbon dioxide emissions

Models get the core assumptions wrong – the ‘hot spot’ is missing | JunkScience.com

This is part of a series that Tony Cox and I are doing that references the most important points and papers, as a definitive resource about the evidence. The missing hotspot is not just another flaw in the theory, it proves the models are wrong: not just “unverified”, not just “uncertain”, but failed. Apologies to those who feel I harp on about this! This is a condensed review, squishing years of a scientific battleground down to it’s bare bones… — Jo Nova

The Reference Frame: Science on anti-GOP bias of the NAS

Science Insider has printed a courageous article about the left-wing bias of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences yesterday:

A Partisan Look at U.S. Science Policy

UN Stalemate Risks Unraveling Durban Climate Deal | JunkScience.com

A row over planning how to bind all emitters under a global climate pact from 2020 at U.N. climate talks in Germany is blocking negotiations to deepen nearer term emission cuts and raise cash to help poor countries cope with a warming planet, the EU said Tuesday.

Mark Latham: Folly of climate alarmism | JunkScience.com

Some lessons in manipulation of the public from Australian Labor’s former leader.

The New Nostradamus of the North: The global warming scaremongering continues

One sometimes wonders what goes on in the heads of alarmist scaremongers, like the ones employed by an outfit haughtily calling itself "the Natural Resources Defense Council". Do they really think that they can scare people by bogus "wake-up calls" about global warming killing tens of thousands of Americans when even by their own account "the estimates do not take into account how more people are likely to buy air conditioners or take other measures to avoid exposure to heat as temperatures rise"?  Besides, the kind of temperature increases mentioned in the "report" are of course pure speculation, based on unreliable climate models.

THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: New paper finds water vapor feedback is strongly negative

The IPCC manufactures climate alarm by assuming CO2 controls water vapor to produce a runaway positive feedback system. Physicist Clive Best has posted his new paper showing that water vapor feedback is instead strongly negative, based on both the Faint Sun Paradox and a comparison of 5600 weather stations in the global CRUTEM4 temperature and humidity database. Peer-reviewed publications by Paltridge and others also find water vapor feedback is strongly negative. Without positive water vapor feedback, the IPCC's case for catastrophic man-made climate change collapses.