I was once a Green who believed in man-made global warming

Since time immemorial people have been inventing or exaggerating scares to gain power. I used to think carbon dioxide posed a real threat, and I even used to be an active member of the Australian Greens. Then I discovered all the things we weren’t being told (like this and this), and how much money was involved and I was shocked.

There are many good people among the Greens who will be outraged when they realize how they have been used.

Read more

Club Of Rome Behind Eco-Fascist Purge To Criminalize Climate Skepticism

Ultra elitist organization that openly bragged of inventing global warming scare to manipulate population behind new onslaught of green fascism which would criminalize questioning man-made climate change.

Read more

NASA Data Worse Than Climate-Gate Data, Space Agency Admits

(FOXNEWS)   NASA was able to put a man on the moon, but the space agency can’t tell you what the temperature was when it did. By its own admission, NASA’s temperature records are in even worse shape than the besmirched Climate-gate data.

E-mail messages obtained by a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that NASA concluded that its own climate findings were inferior to those maintained by both the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) — the scandalized source of the leaked Climate-gate e-mails — and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Climatic Data Center.

The e-mails from 2007 reveal that when a USA Today reporter asked if NASA’s data “was more accurate” than other climate-change data sets, NASA’s Dr. Reto A. Ruedy replied with an unequivocal no. He said “the National Climatic Data Center’s procedure of only using the best stations is more accurate,” admitting that some of his own procedures led to less accurate readings.

“My recommendation to you is to continue using NCDC’s data for the U.S. means and [East Anglia] data for the global means,” Ruedy told the reporter.

“NASA’s temperature data is worse than the Climate-gate temperature data. According to NASA,” wrote Christopher Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute who uncovered the e-mails. Horner is skeptical of NCDC’s data as well, stating plainly: “Three out of the four temperature data sets stink.”

Global warming critics call this a crucial blow to advocates’ arguments that minor flaws in the “Climate-gate” data are unimportant, since all the major data sets arrive at the same conclusion — that the Earth is getting warmer. But there’s a good reason for that, the skeptics say: They all use the same data.

“There is far too much overlap among the surface temperature data sets to assert with a straight face that they independently verify each other’s results,” says James M. Taylor, senior fellow of environment policy at The Heartland Institute.

“The different groups have cooperated in a very friendly way to try to understand different conclusions when they arise,” said Dr. James Hansen, head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, in the same 2007 e-mail thread. Earlier this month, in an updated analysis of the surface temperature data, GISS restated that the separate analyses by the different agencies “are not independent, as they must use much of the same input observations.”

Neither NASA nor NOAA responded to requests for comment. But Dr. Jeff Masters, director of meteorology at Weather Underground, still believes the validity of data from NASA, NOAA and East Anglia would be in jeopardy only if the comparative analysis didn’t match. “I see no reason to question the integrity of the raw data,” he says. “Since the three organizations are all using mostly the same raw data, collected by the official weather agency of each individual country, the only issue here is whether the corrections done to the raw data were done correctly by CRU.”

Corrections are needed, Masters says, “since there are only a few thousand surface temperature recording sites with records going back 100+ years.” As such, climate agencies estimate temperatures in various ways for areas where there aren’t any thermometers, to account for the overall incomplete global picture.

“It would be nice if we had more global stations to enable the groups to do independent estimates using completely different raw data, but we don’t have that luxury,” Masters adds. “All three groups came up with very similar global temperature trends using mostly the same raw data but independent corrections. This should give us confidence that the three groups are probably doing reasonable corrections, given that the three final data sets match pretty well.”

But NASA is somewhat less confident, having quietly decided to tweak its corrections to the climate data earlier this month.

In an updated analysis of the surface temperature data released on March 19, NASA adjusted the raw temperature station data to account for inaccurate readings caused by heat-absorbing paved surfaces and buildings in a slightly different way. NASA determines which stations are urban with nighttime satellite photos, looking for stations near light sources as seen from space.

Of course, this doesn’t solve problems with NASA’s data, as the newest paper admits: “Much higher resolution would be needed to check for local problems with the placement of thermometers relative to possible building obstructions,” a problem repeatedly underscored by meteorologist Anthony Watts on his SurfaceStations.org Web site. Last month, Watts told FoxNews.com that “90 percent of them don’t meet [the government's] old, simple rule called the ’100-foot rule’ for keeping thermometers 100 feet or more from biasing influence. Ninety percent of them failed that, and we’ve got documentation.”

Still, “confidence” is not the same as scientific law, something the public obviously recognizes. According to aDecember survey, only 25 percent of Americans believed there was agreement within the scientific community on climate change. And unless things fundamentally change, it could remain that way, said Taylor.

“Until surface temperature data sets are truly independent of one another and are entrusted to scientists whose objectivity is beyond question, the satellite temperature record alone will not have any credibility,” he said.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/03/30/nasa-data-worse-than-climategate-data/

Germans Giving Up on Global Warming

Germans citizens are rapidly losing faith in global warming following the Climate-gate scandals, according to a new report in Der Spiegel.

Read more

GLOBAL WARMING FAIL: U.K. government says Cocaine users making global warming worse

Read more

IMF proposes global warming fund based on world economies

Read more

New Climate Agency Head Tried to Suppress Data, Critics Charge

Thomas Karl, the head of Obama’s new Climate Change office has been criticized for trying to suppress contradictory scientific data on climate change.

Read more

Obama rebukes climate skeptics

(RAW STORY)   US President Barack Obama on Friday rebuked climate change skeptics who argue that piles of snow dumped on the United States during a frigid winter cast doubt on global warming science.

“We just got five feet of snow in Washington,” said Obama, when asked about alternative energy projects during a town hall meeting in Nevada.

“Opponents of climate change, they say — ‘see look at that, there is all this snow on the ground — this doesn’t mean anything.’”

“I want to just be clear that the science of climate change doesn’t mean every place is getting warmer — it means the planet as a whole is getting warmer.”

Obama cited the lack of snow in Vancouver during the current winter Olympics and unusual snowstorms in places like Dallas in the southern United States as examples of violent weather patterns brought on by climate change.

The president has committed the United States wholeheartedly to the fight against climate change — unlike the previous Bush administration — and played a major role in the ill-fated UN climate conference in Denmark last year.

But there is growing doubt over the fate of legislation being pushed by Democrats in Congress aimed at establishing a cap-and-trade system to regulate carbon emissions.

Republicans have branded such legislation “job killing” and even some Democratic lawmakers have questioned the wisdom of passing such a bill that could impose more costs on industry during a deep economic crisis.

http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Obama_rebukes_climate_skeptics_02192010.html

Harvard Hometown Plans Coercive Taxes, Veganism to Stop Climate ‘Emergency’

Congestion pricing to reduce car travel. Elimination of curbside parking. A carbon tax “of some kind,” not to mention taxes on plastic and paper bags. Advocating vegetarianism and veganism, complete with “Meatless or Vegan Mondays.” Those are just some of the proposals put forth by the Cambridge Climate Congress, an entity created in May 2009 to respond to the “climate emergency” plaguing the Massachusetts city.

Read more

Bill Nye the Science Guy: Climate change deniers are ‘unpatriotic’

(RAW STORY)   Frozen water fell from the sky today, therefore thousands of scientists the world over are liars. Just go with it.  That’s the narrative coming from Fox News in their coverage of the heavy snow blanketing the eastern coast of the United States this winter.  Thankfully, there’s Bill Nye the Science Guy, ready to explain the complexities of climate science in terms easy enough for even a child to digest.

Nye, however, jacked his assessment of meteorology into the realm of partisanship, scoffing on MSNBC’s The Rachel Maddow Show on Wednesday night that climate change deniers are “unpatriotic” in parroting simple minded, anti-science propaganda.

“[We] remind you that global warming was the first term for this phenomenon that we now call can climate change,” he said. “So it‘s very reasonable that a snowstorm in Washington that‘s this severe is a result of climate change.”

“There‘s more energy in the atmosphere, and this is stirring things up,” Nye continued. “If you want to get serious about it, these guys claiming that the snow in Washington disproves climate change are almost unpatriotic. It’s really, they’re denying science.”

Nye, who once hosted a popular children’s show, explained that as an educator he’s noticed a sharp divide between older and younger people when it comes to accepting the science of climate change.

“This is anecdotal for me,” Nye said. “Older people just have a much harder time grasping the idea that you have many billions of people on the planet with a very, very thin atmosphere, you‘re able to affect its climate. It’s younger people are able to sort of embrace it, understand the evidence and move forward.”

Weather, he noted, is day-to-day. The average global climate on a year-to-year basis, however, is something else entirely.

NASA scientists announced toward the end of January that the last 10 years were the hottest decade in over 2,000 years, with 2009 being the second warmest on record.

“This thing of denying science, you know, science has done so much to make this country what it is: A technological leader,” Nye said. “It’s improved the quality of life for so many people, here and around the world. To deny what scientists or scientific evidence is showing, is inappropriate. And as I said earlier … It’s unpatriotic.”

His words did not sit easily with conservative blog Hot Air, which retaliated in a Thursday post.

“Maybe Nye is an expert on patriotism?” writer Ed Morrissey rhetorically asked. “Er, no.”

“Demanding unquestioning acceptance of recent scientific claims as gospel amounts to a forced belief system, and our Constitution actually has an explicit prohibition against religious tests for office,” he continued. “Is the Constitution unpatriotic as well? Maybe Nye should stick to classroom demonstrations of basic science and leave AGW and the measurement of patriotism to those more intellectually capable of discernment.”

http://rawstory.com/2010/02/bill-nye-climate-change-deniers-unpatriotic/

Next Page »