And these people also want to have their leader as Minister of Finance.
And these people also want to have their leader as Minister of Finance.
Looks like they lost a loon in Jobs and got another to replace him.
Apple chief executive Tim Cook has shocked some in the United States with an impassioned attack on the single-minded pursuit of profit – and a direct appeal to climate-change deniers not to buy shares in his firm.
Eyewitnesses said Cook, who succeeded Steve Jobs as boss of the technology giant in 2011, was visibly angry as he took on a group of right-wing investors during a question-and-answer session at a shareholders’ meeting. ¬† Read more »
The latest theory for the “pause” in global warming is…wait for it…coincidence. I kid you not…now there are 10 supposed reason for the “pause”…here they are:
There is a new paper by Gavin Schmidt et al that comes in as #10 in the growing list of explanations for ‚Äėthe pause‚Äô. Now that we have a top ten list, let‚Äôs review:
- New study claims hi caused ‚Äúthe pause‚ÄĚ in global temperature ‚Äď but AGW will return!
- THE OCEANS ATE OUR GLOBAL WARMING!¬†Trenberth and Fasullo, 2013. But the heat will come back when you least expect it.
- Chinese coal caused the ‚Äėpause‚Äô, published in¬†the¬†proceedings of the National Academy of Science. The¬†study blamed Chinese coal use¬†for the lack of global warming. Global warming proponents essentially claimed that coal use is saving us from dangerous global warming. Kaufmann et al 2011.
- The¬†Montreal Protocol caused the ‚Äėpause‚Äė,¬†which reduced CFC‚Äôs ‚Äď but warming will return soon. Estrada 2013.
- Cowtan and Way‚Äôs (2013) underrepresented Arctic stations get adjustment to fiddle the numbers so that ‚Äėpause‚Äô never existed, but¬†not so fast. It seems all¬†isn‚Äôt quite as it seems. Dr. Judith Curry¬†doesn‚Äôt think much of it either. ¬†¬† Read more »
Dr. Patrick Moore, the co-founder of Greenpeace, went before the U.S. Senate to tell his story as it relates to global warming/climate change.
This is his submission. It is well worth your time to read.
Statement¬†of Patrick Moore, Ph.D.¬†Before¬†the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Subcommittee on Oversight
Chairman Whitehouse, Ranking Member Inhofe, and members of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify at today‚Äôs hearing.
In 1971, as a PhD student in ecology I joined an activist group in a church basement in Vancouver Canada and sailed on a small boat across the Pacific to protest US Hydrogen bomb testing in Alaska. We became Greenpeace.
After 15 years in the top committee I had to leave as Greenpeace took a sharp turn to the political left, and began to adopt policies that I could not accept from my scientific perspective. Climate change was not an issue when I abandoned Greenpeace, but it certainly is now.
There is no¬†scientific proof¬†that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth‚Äôs atmosphere over the past 100 years. If there were such a proof it would be written down for all to see. No actual proof, as it is understood in science, exists.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states: ‚ÄúIt is¬†extremely likely¬†that human influence has been the¬†dominant cause¬†of the observed warming¬†since the mid-20th¬†century.‚ÄĚ (My emphasis)
‚ÄúExtremely likely‚ÄĚ is not a scientific term but rather a judgment, as in a court of law. The IPCC defines ‚Äúextremely likely‚ÄĚ as a ‚Äú95-100% probability‚ÄĚ. But upon further examination it is clear that these numbers are not the result of any mathematical calculation or statistical analysis. They have been ‚Äúinvented‚ÄĚ as a construct within the IPCC report to express ‚Äúexpert judgment‚ÄĚ, as determined by the IPCC contributors. ¬†¬† Read more »
That‚Äôs it then the science is settled…oh wait no its not now smelly trees are saving the world.
Really. No bullshit.
¬†New research suggests a strong link between the powerful smell of pine trees and climate change.
Scientists say they’ve found a mechanism by which these scented vapours turn into aerosols above boreal forests.
These particles promote cooling by reflecting sunlight back into space and helping clouds to form.
The¬†research, published in the journal Nature, fills in a major gap in our understanding, researchers say.
One of the biggest holes in scientific knowledge about climate change relates to the scale of the impact of atmospheric aerosols on temperatures.
These particles form clouds that block sunlight as well as reflecting rays back into space.¬† Read more »
Reason number 71 why there has been no global warming for 17 years…volcanoes…so says the NZ Herald this morning.
The ironic thing is that the only coverage our media have ever given to the pause is when some well paid eco-loon comes up with an explanation on why their models don’t work.
Looking for global warming is turning into where’s Wally.
The impact of volcanic eruptions on global warming could provide a new explanation for the so-called “pause” used by sceptics to deny climate change is happening, scientists have said.
According to a study in the US, models for predicting the rate at which temperatures around the world would rise from 1998 onwards did not take into consideration the measurable impact volcanoes can have.
Rather than contributing to global warming, eruptions release particles into the air that reflect sunlight – causing temperatures to drop.
Experts from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California said this phenomenon was not taken into account when predictions were made – offering an explanation for why the world seemed to stop heating up.¬† Read more »
Anyone who stands up the the “settled science” crowd and global warming adherents are these days more than likely labelled “deniers”. For daring to question, demanding to see evidence, and the code of the models with which these charlatans are bashing us in their march towards state control and taxes we are called “deniers”.
Roy Spencer has decided to fight back.
Yeah, somebody pushed my button.
When politicians and scientists started calling people like me ‚Äúdeniers‚ÄĚ, they crossed the line. They are still doing it.
They indirectly equate (1) the skeptics‚Äô view that global warming is not necessarily all manmade nor a serious problem, with (2) the denial that the Nazi‚Äôs extermination of millions of Jews ever happened.
Too many of us for too long have ignored the repulsive, extremist nature of the comparison. It‚Äôs time to push back.
I‚Äôm now going to start calling these people ‚Äúglobal warming Nazis‚ÄĚ.
The pseudo-scientific ramblings by their leaders have falsely warned of mass starvation, ecological collapse, agricultural collapse, overpopulation‚Ä¶all so that the masses would support their radical policies. Policies that would not voluntarily be supported by a majority of freedom-loving people.
They are just as guilty as the person who cries ‚Äúfire!‚ÄĚ in a crowded theater when no fire exists. Except they threaten the lives of millions of people in the process.
Like the Nazis, they advocate the supreme authority of the state (fascism), which in turn supports their scientific research to support their cause (in the 1930s, it was superiority of the white race).¬† Read more »
Someone somewhere funds this crap.
A new study broadens a notion held by the earliest criminologists: Periods of higher temperatures – on an hour-by-hour or week-to-week basis – are likely to produce more crime.
The study by Matthew Ranson of Abt Associates, a research and consulting firm in Cambridge, Massachusetts, suggests global warming will trigger more US crimes including murders and rapes over the next century, with social costs estimated to run as high as US$115 billion.
Between 2010 and 2099, climate change can be expected to cause an additional 22,000 murders, 180,000 cases of rape, 1.2 million aggravated assaults, 2.3 million simple assaults, 260,000 robberies, 1.3 million burglaries, 2.2 million cases of larceny and 580,000 cases of vehicle theft, the study published this week in the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management says.¬† Read more »
I¬†repeat: I‚Äôm not a global warming believer. I‚Äôm not a global warming denier.¬†I‚Äôve long believed¬†that it cannot be good for humanity to be spewing tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. I also believe that those scientists who pretend to know exactly what this will cause in 20, 30 or 50 years are white-coated propagandists.
‚ÄúThe debate is settled,‚ÄĚ asserted propagandist in chief Barack Obama in his¬†latest State of the Union address. ‚ÄúClimate change is a fact.‚ÄĚ Really? There is nothing more anti-scientific than the very idea that science is settled, static, impervious to challenge. Take a non-climate example. It was long assumed that mammograms help reduce breast cancer deaths. This fact was so settled that Obamacare requires every insurance plan to offer mammograms (for free, no less)¬†or be subject to termination.
Now we learn from¬†a massive randomized study¬†‚ÄĒ 90,000 women followed for 25 years ‚ÄĒ that mammograms may have no effect on breast cancer deaths. Indeed, one out of five of those diagnosed by mammogram receives¬†unnecessary radiation, chemo or surgery.
So much for settledness. And climate is less well understood than breast cancer. If climate science is settled, why do its predictions keep changing? And how is it that the great¬†physicist Freeman Dyson, who did some climate research in the late 1970s, thinks today‚Äôs climate-change Cassandras are hopelessly mistaken?
The science is never settled…as we learn more we discover more.
They deal with the fluid dynamics of the atmosphere and oceans, argues Dyson, ignoring the effect of biology, i.e., vegetation and topsoil. Further, their predictions rest on models they fall in love with: ‚ÄúYou sit in front of a computer screen for 10 years and you start to think of your model as being real.‚ÄĚ Not surprisingly, these models have been ‚Äúconsistently and spectacularly wrong‚ÄĚ in their predictions, write atmospheric scientists¬†Richard McNider and John Christy¬†‚ÄĒ and always, amazingly, in the same direction. ¬† Read more »