Climate Change

Obama contributes US$3b to UN climate change

natoI meant to bring this up yesterday.

Can you think of a  more devastating headline?

Keeping in mind that the USA is the country that has to shut down its own government infrastructure because it can’t afford to pay for it unless it agrees it is allowed to borrow even more.  Yet they have a cool 3 bil to give to the UN.

I’m putting $10 on Barry wanting a UN post after his stint as president. Read more »

How one global warming nutter spent $74M trying to influence the US elections and got zip for his efforts

The left wing love to demonise the Koch brothers and any one else who puts their own hands into their own pockets for something they believe in.

When their own billionaires do it that is some sort of heroic act, and when you consider that socialists generally only like to spend other peoples money you can understand why it is a small miracle when they spend their own.

Still the demonisation of right wing funders continues while tame millionaires and billionaires on the left are hailed as the new messiahs.

One such person is Tom Steyer who blew $74 million pouring money onto campaigns of those who supported action on climate change.

Though Harry Reid and his merry band of hypocritical Democrats spent the months leading up to the midterm elections ranting and raving about the evils of rich Republican donors like the Koch Brothers, the midterms single largest donor was liberal billionaire Tom Steyer who vowed to shovel money to candidates who would work to address supposed climate change.

Steyer spent $74 million on Tuesday’s elections and sifting through the Democratic carnage, it appears that Steyer has little to show for his vast expense.

Nearly $67 million was pushed to NextGen Climate Action, Steyer’s super PAC. Though Democrats have postured as if donor money was the single greatest threat to our election process, none seemed to take issue with Steyer’s role as financier of global warming alarmist candidates.

In Colorado, Steyer spent $7 million on Democrat Sen. Mark Udall who ended up losing to Republican Cory Gardner.

In Iowa, Steyer blew-through $4.6 million against Republican Joni Ernst and spent $781,327 bankrolling Democrat Rep. Bruce Braley. Ernst won the Iowa Senate seat, becoming the first female Senator from the State of Iowa.

However, beyond just simply candidates, Steyer spent copious amounts of money crusading to make climate change/global warming/global cooling/weather a high-profile issue in the midterm elections that, historically, have served as a referendum on the job performance of the president and the overall direction of the nation.

Read more »

Another positive from global warming

So warming the atmosphere heals the ozone layer holes.

I’m so confused.

Read more »

Fresh evidence that we survived the last Ice Age

ice-age

Say “hi” to grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand granddad.

Turns out he was a cool dude in more ways than one: Read more »

Dom Post editorial as thick as two planks

Editorial: The Government must act on poverty

Such is the screamy headline.  That’s then followed by

Unicef’s latest report on child poverty in rich countries in the years after 2007 includes a special criticism of New Zealand.

“Australia’s increase in spending on families had a more positive impact than the ambitious tax cuts implemented in New Zealand, where poverty and inequality stagnated.”

The last part, at least, is blunt but fair – whichever way you dice it, poverty levels in New Zealand are flat.

Perhaps, one might argue, that is still an achievement after years of recession. The National Government has not cut such social spending as the Working for Families tax credits, a help to many low-income families during the past 10 years. But Australia’s success begs the question: why are we not doing more? Prime Minister John Key says it’s all about the economy – Australia famously bucked the global slump after 2007.

“A strong economy is the No 1 way to lift youngsters out of poverty,” he says.

This is at least an incomplete view. It must be relevant that the Australian government launched what one group of academics calls a “massive policy response” to the financial crisis, putting “billions of dollars into the pockets of low and middle income families”.

Until journalist at large either understand, or stop deliberately lying about how “poverty” is measured, we will never make any progress.   The way it is statistically defined means that the larger the difference between the higher and lower earners in a society, the higher the child poverty.   Read more »

Christopher Booker destroys the Met Office

If only we had someone in the NZ media that could have a crack at NIWA like Christopher Booker has just done in the Telegraph to the Met Office over their wonky predictions over climate change.

Five years after we paid £33 million to buy the Met Office a new computer, we are now to pay £97 million to give them a “world-leading super-computer” – described by its chairman as “our integrated weather and climate model, known as the Met Office Unified Model”. That’s because it will not only “produce the most accurate short-term forecasts that are scientifically possible”, but can also predict how the Earth’s climate will change over the next 100 years.

I scarcely need remind readers of how the Met Office’s computer modelling has performed in the past 10 years. In 2004, it predicted that by 2014 the world would have warmed by 0.8C, and that four of the five years after 2009 would beat the 1998 record as the “hottest year ever”. In 2007, its computer predicted that this would be the “warmest year ever”, just before global temperatures temporarily plummeted by 0.7C, equal to their entire net rise in the 20th century. That summer in the UK, it told us, would be “drier than average”, just before some of the worst floods in living memory.

From 2008 to 2010 the models consistently predicted “warmer than average” winters and “hotter and drier summers”: three years when much of the northern hemisphere endured record winter cold and snow; while in the UK, as in that promised “barbecue summer” of 2009, we had summers wetter and cooler than usual. A particular triumph, in October 2010, was the prediction that our winter would be up to “2C warmer than average”, just before the coldest December since records began in 1659.   Read more »

Top meteorologist claims Climate change PROVED to be ‘nothing but a lie’

The wheels are systematically coming off the climate change trolley.

Now a top meteorologists claims that climate change is nothing but a lie.

THE debate about climate change is finished – because it has been categorically proved NOT to exist, one of the world’s leading meteorologists has claimed.

John Coleman, who co-founded the Weather Channel, shocked academics by insisting the theory of man-made climate change was no longer scientifically credible.

Instead, what ‘little evidence’ there is for rising global temperatures points to a ‘natural phenomenon’ within a developing eco-system.

In an open letter attacking the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, he wrote: “The ocean is not rising significantly.

“The polar ice is increasing, not melting away. Polar Bears are increasing in number.  Read more »

Wheels coming off the global warming trolley

For sometime now it has become increasingly obvious that none of the predictions of the climate change alarmists have come true.

The models are hopelessly flawed, the glaciers aren’t disappearing, neither is the sea ice at either pole.

Basically pretty much everything is being shown to be a lie.

Now the statistics are unravelling as Judith Curry points out in the Wall Street Journal. The numbers simply don’t add up.

According to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, preventing “dangerous human interference” with the climate is defined, rather arbitrarily, as limiting warming to no more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial temperatures. The Earth’s surface temperatures have already warmed about 0.8 degrees Celsius since 1850-1900. This leaves 1.2 degrees Celsius (about 2.2 degrees Fahrenheit) to go.

In its most optimistic projections, which assume a substantial decline in emissions, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projects that the “dangerous” level might never be reached. In its most extreme, pessimistic projections, which assume heavy use of coal and rapid population growth, the threshold could be exceeded as early as 2040. But these projections reflect the effects of rising emissions on temperatures simulated by climate models, which are being challenged by recent observations.

Human-caused warming depends not only on increases in greenhouse gases but also on how “sensitive” the climate is to these increases. Climate sensitivity is defined as the global surface warming that occurs when the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere doubles. If climate sensitivity is high, then we can expect substantial warming in the coming century as emissions continue to increase. If climate sensitivity is low, then future warming will be substantially lower, and it may be several generations before we reach what the U.N. considers a dangerous level, even with high emissions.

The IPCC’s latest report (published in 2013) concluded that the actual change in 70 years if carbon-dioxide concentrations double, called the transient climate response, is likely in the range of 1 to 2.5 degrees Celsius. Most climate models have transient climate response values exceeding 1.8 degrees Celsius. But the IPCC report notes the substantial discrepancy between recent observation-based estimates of climate sensitivity and estimates from climate models.

Read more »

About those receding Himalayan glaciers that will rob the sub-continent of water

Remember the fuss about the receding Himalayan glaciers that were going to disappear because of global warming…and the perilous tales peddled about the sub-continent running out of water as a result?

Yeah, well it turns out that those stories were yet more lies in the ongoing lie-fest over global warming.

Glaciers around the world are melting, retreating and even vanishing altogether. But in the mountainous Karakoram region of Asia — home to K2, the second highest peak on Earth — the glaciers aren’t melting. If anything, some are expanding.

Now, scientists have found an explanation for this mysterious glacial stability. While precipitation is increasing across the Himalayas, most of this moisture drops in the summer — except in Karakoram, where snow dominates the scene.

“It’s been a source of controversy that these glaciers haven’t been changing while other glaciers in the world have,” said study researcher Sarah Kapnick, a postdoctoral researcher in atmospheric and ocean sciences at Princeton University.

“This gives a reasoning for why you can have increased snowfall in a region and have increased glaciers or stable glaciers in a warming world,” Kapnick told Live Science.

The Karakoram is a picturesque chain of snowy peaks along the border of India, Pakistan and China. It’s part of the larger Himalaya mountain chain, which is losing its glaciers as the climate warms.

Yet observations in the Karakoram region reveal that the glaciers there are stable, and snowfall is increasing instead of decreasing.

“I really wanted to dive deeply into why that is,” Kapnick said.   Read more »

Most Antarctic sea ice since records began in 1979

How’s about that global warming huh?

The poles will be ice free sometime 4 years ago…turns out no.

The Antarctic is now breaking every record there is…and just last year we were told that the ice was dissipating…then of course we had the Ship of Fools…and now the ice extent is larger than ever before records since records began.

Sea ice surrounding Antarctica has reached a new record high.

Nasa says it now covers more of the southern oceans than it has since scientists began a long-term satellite record to map sea ice extent in the late 1970s.

They say that even though Antarctic sea ice has been increasing, ‘the planet as a whole is doing what was expected in terms of warming.’

The upward trend in the Antarctic, however, is only about a third of the magnitude of the rapid loss of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean.  Read more »