Global warming really is a religion – based almost exclusively on faith and feelings – where facts are created and manipulated on a daily basis to keep the flock in-check. I’ve always said man-made global warming is complete vanity, and our friend Walter Williams agrees.
Another good example of how government regulation – in this case climate change legislation – can have unintended consequences, specifically higher food prices. Read more
The self-proclaimed non-poet reads his poem on CNN.
If you fly more, you must be rich. Since you’re rich and fly more, you should be penalized by the government and pay higher taxes on your airline tickets. These types of taxes are designed to slow down or cripple the economic engine of the world, and Lord Turner, the chairman of some climate committee does not care.
The Global Warming Zealots continue to dismiss the East Anglia e-mails as an anomaly … in other words “fake but accurate” … but the flood gates have opened and the GW ship is taking on water faster than the sea levels are rising, which is not hard, may I say.
The science is proper and this is about a small fraction of research on the issue, said Holdren, a physicist who has studied climate change.
“The e-mails do nothing to undermine the very strong scientific consensus … that tells us the earth is warming, that warming is largely a result of human activity,” said another government scientist Jane Lubchenco. A marine biologist and climate researcher, she heads the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
The e-mails don’t negate or even deal with data from both NOAA and NASA, which keep independent climate records and show dramatic warming, Lubchenco told members of the House global warming committee.
But this is not going away anytime soon. Jim Hoft at Gateway posts: Last week, a group called “We Are Change Chicago”, confronted Al Gore on the e-mails at a book signing. Crazy stuff.
For those of you who need a primer, I saved this article from CBS a few days ago because it clearly outlines how these e-mails are so much more than an anomaly. They represent research, or lack there of, from a group that is at the very core of the IPCC reports and thus the Dems efforts to control our energy future.
The leaked documents (see our previous coverage) come from the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in eastern England. In global warming circles, the CRU wields outsize influence: it claims the world’s largest temperature data set, and its work and mathematical models were incorporated into the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2007 report. That report, in turn, is what the Environmental Protection Agency acknowledged it “relies on most heavily” when concluding that carbon dioxide emissions endanger public health and should be regulated.
Last week’s leaked e-mails range from innocuous to embarrassing and, critics believe, scandalous. They show that some of the field’s most prominent scientists were so wedded to theories of man-made global warming that they ridiculed dissenters who asked for copies of their data (“have to respond to more crap criticisms from the idiots”), cheered the deaths of skeptical journalists, and plotted how to keep researchers who reached different conclusions from publishing in peer-reviewed journals.
Save this one … it’s full of good stuff.
Apparently, the culture of “moral equivalency” reaches even into the Senate. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) thinks the real tragedy and crime of Climategate is not the content within the e-mails, rather the way they were accessed and released. She wants Congress to investigate the hacker.
Quit saying that Stuart! Ed Begley was pretty funny practially pouting when arguing about the non-existent “consensus” on climate change with Stuart Varney on Your World last week. But when real climate scientists look at the facts and note how substantial the political process weighs on the scientific process, you can hear a pin drop.
The Wall Street Journal has published a selection of e-mails from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom. If the tone of these e-mails do not prove the alarmists scientists are trying to destroy the skeptic scientists, I don’t know what will.
The Climate Research Unit (CRU) group of scientists based at the University of East Anglia had their mail server hacked and we’ve got quite a few links for you with the details. First off, if accessing and copying the information was illegal, those responsible should be charged. That said, how valuable is this information? Is the context missing? You decide.
One thing seems for certain when you browse through the links … the CRU scientists have absolutely no love for other scientists who may peer review and come up with a different opinion.
One site has built up a search engine for those of you familiar with the science and interested in wading through all of the documentation.
The Web site Bishop Hill has put together a valuable list of the most interesting information revealed in the e-mails. We found the Bishop Hill site through Sweetness & Light. Go read the full post, but here are the first four with out links to the details. Head over to Bishop Hill for the details and links to originals.
- Phil Jones writes to University of Hull to try to stop sceptic Sonia Boehmer Christiansen using her Hull affiliation. Graham F Haughton of Hull University says its easier to push greenery there now SB-C has retired.
- Michael Mann discusses how to destroy a journal that has published sceptic papers.
- Tim Osborn discusses how data are truncated to stop an apparent cooling trend showing up in the results.
- Phil Jones describes the death of sceptic, John Daly, as “cheering news”.
Update: John Hinderaker at Power Line has a great write-up on the CRU conspirators. It’s amazing how these crooks have a good portion
Actually, there has been an increase in the amount of CO2 emitted by human activity – including breathing – since 1850. That fact is not in dispute. But the increase in CO2 emissions does not mean the earth is dealing with higher levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.