Love My Country, Loathe My Government: el nino

Showing posts with label el nino. Show all posts

Monday, January 15, 2018

January, 2018, Part 3, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and a Believer In Science: How Science Continues To Dispel The Global Warming Myth

Every month we have enough material to return to a continuing theme in this blog, namely that “I am a global warming doubter AND a believer in science.” This became of interest because of people like Al Gore who fanatically and verbosely claimed that you had to be an idiot to not believe in manmade global warming. It has been my life belief that anyone that is that loud and that obnoxious is hiding something, that rather than argue facts and reality it is better to beat down and insult anyone who disagrees.

As we have dove into the whole issue of manmade global warming, or its new rebranded title of climate change, we found that Al Gore and people like him were guilty of a number of things:

Ignoring science and realities that did not support their opinions and positions.
Rather than have an adult conversation about climate, these types of advocates like Gore sank to the level of insulting those who dared look at ALL science by calling them a variety of names including racists, homophobes, terrorists, flat earth believers, and other slanderous names.
Continuing to insist that politicians step up their intrusions into our lives with higher taxes, more regulations, and more control of our freedoms and standards of living based on a shaky theory at best.

To see the past posts and the multitude of evidence that we have compiled that showed it is perfectly okay to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, enter the phrase "global warming doubter” in the search box above or go through the monthly historical posts listed on the right side of this page.

Thus, let’s see the latest facts and science that prove you can be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, regardless of what Al Gore proclaims.

1) The most important reason why we should not take people like Al Gore and his ilk seriously is that they have always been wrong. Over the past two decades global warming advocates have forecasted major, extensive climate disasters. Al Gore even predicted that there would be an excellent chance that within five years the North Pole ice cap would be totally melted. Those five years expired about four years ago and the ice cap is still there and still very cold, as witnessed by the recent arctic weather.

Other forecasts predicted that coastal city streets would be flooded by the melting ice caps (they are not), that the number and severity of hurricanes would increase significantly (they have not), etc. But none of that happened and there is a good reason for that: the warming trend unexpectedly stopped about twenty years, a reality that every global warming scientist and forecast model totally and embarrassingly never saw coming:

According to an article on the Conservative Tribune website on September 17, 2017 by John Falkenberg, real scientists compared actual, real Earth temperatures over the past 15 years and compared the realities to the predicted temperatures form the major global warming forecast models.
What they found is that the Earth’s temperature basically stopped rising after the year 2000, contrary to everything Al Gore told us would happen, severely crippling his and other global warming advocates’ credibility.
The study results were published in the publication nature Geoscience.
The study results came about as researchers analyzed satellite data over the years.
Michael Grubb, a professor of international energy and climate change at University College London, an original global warming advocate and scientist, and one of the authors of the study, even admitted that his initial belief in man made global warming was wrong: “When the facts change, I change my mind, as (John Maynard) Keynes said.”
Myles Allen, professor of geosystem science at the University of Oxford, and another author of the study: “We haven’t seen that rapid acceleration in warming after 2000 that we see in the models. We haven’t seen that in the observations.”
A previous article in Nature Geoscience in May, 2017 came to the same conclusion: “In the early twenty-first century, satellite-derived tropospheric warming trends were generally smaller than trends estimated from a large multi-model ensemble.”

Real scientists looking at realdata to prove that manmade global warming forecasts were REALLY bad, REALLY wrong, and REALLY useless. And still, non-scientists like Al Gore continue to try to contort, manipulate, and deny that they were wrong and that it is highly likely that manmade global warming is a myth.

2) Let’s continue looking at real climate data via a recent article in the Wall Street Journal on January 13, 2018 by Benny Peiser and Matt Ridley:

Although the U.S. got hit with some really bad weather in 2017, e.g. Hurricane Irma, leading global warming advocates hysterically like to claim that this is what happens when manmade global warming occurs, from a total Earth perspective, 2017 was a very calm climate and weather year.
On average, the Earth experiences 325 catastrophic natural disasters annually but through November of 2017 only about 250 occured, about 25% below normal, something that global warming advocates would not expect or predict.
These real numbers come from research done by the Centre For Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters at the University of Leuven in Belgium.
Not only were there about 25% fewer natural disasters last year but one third fewer people died on average as a result of them.
Although a lot of record high temperatures were set around the world the past three years, much of that was due to a huge El Nino warm weather cycle that had established itself in the Pacific Ocean.
As the El Nino dissipated so did the high temperatures and with the weather cycle gone, temperatures have returned to pre El Nino levels.
Now, although global warming advocates could make a case that man made global warming caused the higher than average intensity of the El Nino, they never predicted that situation, further damaging their credibility that they understand climate and according to historical records, there have similar intense El Ninos throughout history, long before Al Gore claims that manmade global warming started. You cannot say "I told you so" after the fact.
Back in 1990, the global warming advocates predicted that the Earth’s average temperature would rise 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit but it has risen only a fraction of that forecast and since 2000 has risen very little if at all.
When Hurricane Harvey hit the Texas coast in 2017, it ended a 12 year period with no major hurricane hitting the U.S., a drought of major hurricanes that was not supposed to happen according to manmade global warming forecasts and hysteria.
In fact, global hurricane/cyclone activity as measured by the Accumulated Cyclone Energy index, which combines intensity and number of hurricanes, is running at about 20% below its long term average.
In 2017, that index was at less than half of its long term average for the Southern hemisphere.
Although California suffered through some terrible wildfires in 2017, long term, the trend of wildfires is down, contrary to global warming advocates’ predictions.
According to expert Jon Kelley at UCLA, the number of wildfires has been trending down for forty years.
In 2016, the Britain's Royal Society showed research that the global area burned by wildfires has also trended downwards over the past few decades.
From a drought perspective, data compiled by the scientific journal, Science, found that the the proportion of the world suffering from lower than average rainfall is down slightly since the 1980s, something that should not have happened according to global warming advocates since manmade global warming should have parched a lot more of the Earth.
A 2017 study published by Glenn. Hodges of the U.S. Geological Society found that the number of major floods in Europe and the U.S. has not increased in 80 years while worldwide flooding instances have decreased over time.
While global warming advocates have forecasted that Asia's monsoon seasons would get dryer and dryer over time, inreality, according to a study by MIT scientists Qinjian Jin and Chien Wang, monsoons have actually gotten stronger over the past 15 years and since the 2012 monsoon season, monsoon has increased significantly.
Since the most recent El Nino ended, the U.S. National Snow and Ice Center reports that the North and South poles have recovered almost all of their shrunken ice volume, increasing to 21.2 million square kilometers, up from 19. 65 square kilometers in just a few years.
The Center does report that while the South Pole has been adding ice coverage over the years, the North Pole has been losing ice coverage but that the North Pole ice erosion has been so small that it has had no effect on sea levels.
And finally, according to NASA, global sea levels have hardly changed at all since 2015, not a situation predicted by global warming models.
The rise since 1998 has been 3.2 millimeters per year but the rate has not accelerated over time despite predictions by global warming advocates and as we just said, the rise has stopped since 2015.
And even if the 3.2 rate should start again, that would result in only a one foot rise over the next 100 years, more than enough cushion to fix shore lines if needed.

A great article featuring real data from real research from real scientists and scientific institutions. So who do you believe: these scientific results or former politician Al Gore? More realities that reinforce my stance that I am a global warming doubter and a believer in science.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:

http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w

Wednesday, December 21, 2016

December, 2016, Part 2, I Am A Global Warmer Doubter and a Believer In Science:

As we have dove into the whole issue of manmade global warming, or its new rebranded title of climate change, we found that Al Gore and people like him were guilty of a number of things:

Ignoring science and realities that did not support their opinions and positions.
Rather than have an adult conversation about climate, these types of advocates like Gore sank to the level of insulting those who dared look at ALL science by calling them a variety of names including racists, homophobes, terrorists, flat earth believers, and other slanderous names.
Continuing to insist that politicians step up their intrusions into our lives with higher taxes, more regulations, and more control of our freedoms and standards of living based on a shaky theory at best.

Thus, let’s see the latest facts and science that prove you can be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, regardless of what Al Gore proclaims:

1) Although global temperatures have been more or less table over the past twenty years or so, i.e. global warming stopped two decades ago, many global warming advocates refuse to admit that all of their climate forecast models were wrong. Those models predicted a continuing upward trend in global temps over the past twenty years, no model anticipated a flat trend over that time.

But when 2016 turned out to be a very hot year globally, the advocates were back out in force with their global warming theories even though their track record of predicting such conditions has been dismal, so dismal that they failed to predict that 2016 would be so hot after twenty years of stable temps.

But they usually fail to take into account that there was a very intense El Nino weather pattern in the Pacific Ocean over the past couple of years and history shows us that El Ninos usually result in hotter than average temperatures in the U.S., which is exactly what happened over the past year or so. It likely had nothing to do with global warming, it was a weather situation that scientists have studied for a very long time and know that hot U.S. weather usually comes in tandem with an El Nino.

But rather than take that known scientific piece of information into consideration, global warming advocates knee jerk reacted to one year of higher than normal temperatures, ignoring twenty years of flat temperature trends. More importantly, Damon Morgan, writing for the Conservative Daily Post on November 29, 2016, discussed the fact that recent NASA data is showing that global temps have already cooled, on average, on one Celsius degree as the El Nino weather pattern has dissipated and an El Nina weather pattern takes its place. This is a pretty radical drop in just the past year, something that you would not expect if global warming was putting continual upward pressure on the world’s temperatures.

Now, one could make the case, if the data showed it, that manmade global warming/climate change, made this El Nino one of the strongest ones on record. Valid point, if the data could show that. But so far, I have not seen any global warming advocate make that case scientifically, they usually just react to the data and science that supports their views. NASA data disputes that view.

2) Earlier this month we reviewed research from the University of Michigan Energy Institute that showed that Washington’s forcing Americans to use gasoline diluted with corn and other biofuel ethanol was adding three times as much carbon to the atmosphere as it was saving, the exact opposite of what it was supposed to do. That link can be accessed at:

XXXXX

Up until recently, I had no idea how that situation had come about. But I came across an article by a gentleman named William O’Keefe, on the Value Walk website, which laid it all out and it is not pretty. Mr. O’Keefe is the Chief Operating Officer of the George C. Marshall Institute and he was once the Treasurer/Secretary of the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the COO of the American Petroleum Institute so he obviously knows the industry.

According to his article, the whole biofuel/ethanol boondoggle came about as follows:

In order to get enough Congressional votes back in 1990 to pass some amendments to the Clean Air Act, Congressman Henry Waxman cut a deal with the corn industry.
In exchange for their support of the amendments he wanted to get enacted, he promised that the Washington political class would force American drivers to use gasoline in their cars that had been diluted with ethanol biofuels, mostly ethanol from corn.
Obviously the corn industry was thrilled to get this forced onto American drivers since it opened up a new market for their products even if it was a market that made no sense.
Thus, the real reason for ethanol and the resultant industry had little to do with global warming, it was purely a tit for tat deal between politicians and a whole industry.
Meanwhile, the oil and auto industries had been working and researching hard to find a way to meet clean air emissions requirements that Washington was likely to impose on them and then take their findings and research and give it to the Federal government to use.
According to O’Keefe: “The two industries briefed Congress on the research and made one primary request: set emission standards to achieve Clean Air Act objectives but give the two industries the freedom to determine how best to achieve them.”
But rather use what may have been a better alternative that was uncovered by their research, their effort was rejected out of hand because Washington politicians had already cut a deal with the corn lobby, a deal that turned out to be a bad deal for the taxpayers, gas consumers, food consumers, and the environment.
The Manhattan Institute published some research in 2015 that concluded just in 2013 the ethanol scam cost consumers $10.6 in one year and about $200 billion since the Congressional ethanol mandate.

As always, when Washington tries to resolve a problem they make it worse, costing the taxpayer billions of dollars in the process but making sure they take care of their favorite campaign donors and crony business associates.

3) Leon Puissegur, writing for the Freedom Outpost website on December 9, 2016, reviewed some scientific research and findings that Al Gore probably has not read:

Mr. Puissegur starts off with the abstract of a paper done by a scientist named Nasif Nahle: “Scientific studies have shown that atmospheric Carbon Dioxide in past eras reached concentrations that were 20 times higher than the current concentration. Recent investigations have shown that the current change of climate is part of a larger cycle known as climatic lowstand phase which precedes a sequential warming period known as transgression phase. The purpose of this evaluation is to demonstrate that the Earth is actually cooling, in the context of the total geological timescale, and that the current change is equivalent to a serial climate phase known as lowstand.”
He then goes on to describe the extensive research done by Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert, a geologist and data computation expert.
Ewert went through all of NASA’s temperature data series that were taken from 1153 weather stations from around the world, starting with data gathered in 1881.
His analysis of all of the raw data shows that the earth has actually been cooling since 1940 even though NASA’s “adjusted” data shows warming over that same time period.
Which brings up a problem: do you believe the actual, real data or believe detail that has been “massaged” by government officials? Remember the old saying: “If you torture the data long enough it will tell you anything you want.”
Specifically, he found that between 2010 and 2012 the data since 1881 were changed in order to show a substantial warming in the earth’s temps, particularly after 1950, a warming that does not appear in the raw data.
Ewert’s analysis of the raw data showed that the surface temperature of the world from 1940 has fallen dropped by 1.10 degrees C and since 2000 it has dropped by .4223 degrees C.
Regionally, the drop was all over the world with the exception of Australia which went up .6339 degrees C since 2000.
The article accuses scientists at NASA’s GISS agency, James Hansen and Gavin Schmidt, of making the adjustments in order to show a warming trend where there was not one in the raw data.
Their adjustments included the following: reducing the annual mean in the early phase, reducing the high values in the first warming phase, increasing individual values during the second warming phase, suppression of the second cooling phase starting in 1995, shortening the early decades of the datasets, and with the long-term datasets, even the first century was shortened.
I do not know what all those adjustments are but it seems to indicate that Ewert did an extensive analysis of the adjustments that were made.
U.S. meteorologists,Joseph D’Aleo and Anthony, are also cited in the article because they “examined 6,000 NASA weather stations and found a host of irregularities, both with the way they were cited and how the raw data had been adjusted to reflect such influences as the Urban Heat Island effect.”

Real scientists doing real research and analysis and showing us that Al Gore types are not considering all of the available data and numbers. That is all we have been asking for in this series, an adult conversation that considers all of the data and research, not just the data and research that feeds political objectives and the need for some scientists to continue to fund what may well be a myth.

4) During this past summer many global warming advocates claimed global warming was true because it was a really hot summer (most likely caused by the current El Nino effect.) If that kind of reasoning is valid, using very, very short term weather to justify long term climate changes, than it is fair game to use the recent embarrassment that happened to handful of global warming advocates in Colorado.

According to the Eagle Rising website, a group called the “Keep It In The Ground,” held a rally outside a U.S. Department of Interior Office in Colorado in an attempt to convince people and the government to keep carbon fuel sources “in the ground” to combat global warming. They carried signs such as “End Fracking,” “Keep It [carbon fuel sources] In The Ground,” and “Stop The Fracking Leases.”

During the day of their protests to combat global warming and the burning of carbon that might create it, the temperatures were ,mostly only in the 20s and there was an offical low that day of -10 degrees F. Karma can be a bitch, can’t it? If warm weather in summer is evidence of long term global warming and climate change, then a cold day in Colorado is evidence of an impending ice age. This is how ridiculous the argument in support of global warming can become.

More tomorrow where we show that it is still perfectly okay to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

Tuesday, November 1, 2016

October, 2016, Part 2, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and a Believer In Science -

Every month we have enough material to return to a continuing theme in this blog, namely that “I am a global warming doubter AND a believer in science.” This became of interest because of people like Al Gore who fanatically and verbosely claimed that you had to be an idiot to not believe in manmade global warming. It has been my life belief that anyone that is that loud and that obnoxious is hiding something, that rather than argue facts and reality it is better to beat down and insult anyone who disagrees.

As we have dove into the whole issue of manmade global warming, or its new rebranded title of climate change, we found that Al Gore and people like him were guilty of a number of things:

Ignoring science and realities that did not support their opinions and positions.
Rather than have an adult conversation about climate, these types of advocates like Gore sank to the level of insulting those who dared look at ALL science by calling them a variety of names including racists, homophobes, terrorists, flat earth believers, and other slanderous names.
Continuing to insist that politicians step up their intrusions into our lives with higher taxes, more regulations, and more control of our freedoms and standards of living based on a shaky theory at best.

To see the past posts and the multitude of evidence that we have compiled that showed it is perfectly okay to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, enter the phrase "global warming doubter” in the search box above or go through the monthly historical posts listed on the right side of this page.

Thus, let’s see the latest facts and science that prove you can be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, regardless of what Al Gore proclaims:

1) Let’s talk some science today that Al Gore and other global warming advocates so often seem to ignore. But first, a little history relative to the EPA:

In 2009, the EPA released its so-called “endangerment finding.”
This assertion is the EPA’s legal attempt to issue government regulations to reduce the country’s use of carbon based fuels and fight global warming.
The EPA claimed at that time that there was a “tropical hotspot” in the tropical troposphere which is the mystical fingerprint that proves manmade global warming.
This justified the Obama administration’s attempt to put into effect stringent U.S. power plant restrictions without the consent of Congress, restrictions that are being challenged in court by many states.

But what if there really was no “tropical hotspot,” would that invalidate everything Obama and his EPA want to do? Let’s consider some scientific work of real scientists. Consuder some research by James Wallace, climatologist John Christy and meteorologist Joseph D’Aleo:

Their research analyzed satellite temperature observations, weather balloons, weather stations and ocean buoys.
Their research concluded that the “tropical hotspot,” relied upon by the EPA to declare carbon dioxide a pollutant “simply does not exist in the real world.”
Part of their research included the valid approach of taking El Ninos into account from a climate perspective which showed that the global warming simply did not exist when the random El Ninos were taken into account, “there is no ‘record setting’ warming to be concerned about.”
Additionally, “These analysis results would appear to leave very, very little doubt but that EPA’s claim of a Tropical Hot Spot (THS), caused by rising atmospheric CO2 levels, simply does not exist in the real world."
"Also critically important, even on an all-other-things-equal basis, this analysis failed to find that the steadily rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations have had a statistically significant impact on any of the 13 critically important temperature time series analyzed,” they wrote.
Adjusting for El Ninos and La Ninas from tropospheric temperatures creates “temperature time series each having a flat trend.”
The research found that oceanic warming events, not humanity’s use of carbon fuels, are responsible for virtually all the warming since 1977 when El Ninos became more frequent and stronger: “It is an accepted fact that El Ninos bring global warmth and La Ninas cooling,” D’Aleo said. “It is thus not at all surprising that the period from 1947 to 1977 brought cooling, 1977 to 1997 warming and we had a flat trend from 1997 to current.”
The researchers seem very confident in their findings: “Needless to say, if regardless of data source, the results are the same, the analysis findings should be considered highly credible.”

Some additional scientific findings:

John Christy is the co-operator of the satellite temperature dataset at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and his partner, climatologist Roy Spencer, have previously presented evidence and data that proved global warming forecast models severely over predicted global warming in the tropical troposphere.
Ross McKitrick, an environmental economist at the University of Guelph in Canada, independently ran his own analysis and data and also found that climate change models overestimated warming in the tropical troposphere.
McKitrick provided evidence of a phase shift in 1977 from dominant El Ninas to El Ninos — just like D’Aleo, Christy and Williams found: “Over the 55-years from 1958 to 2012, climate models not only significantly over-predict observed warming in the tropical troposphere, but they represent it in a fundamentally different way than is observed,” McKitrick wrote in a 2014 study.

Makes one wonder why these scientific findings from real scientists are never part of the Al Gore/Barack Obama/John Kerry and other global warming advocates’ discussions?

2) An interesting article from Kerry Jackson was put up on the Investors’ Business Daily website on October 17, 2016. Yesterday, we showed how the frequency of hurricanes has been declining since 1982 despite over 30 years of humanity using a lot of carbon based fuels, the exact opposite of what global warming advocates said would happen. In fact, over a decade ago Al Gore claimed that "the science is extremely clear now" global warming was "magnifying" the "destructive power" of the "average hurricane" and mankind's impact on the environment "makes the duration, as well as the intensity of the hurricane, stronger."

But, also as we discussed yesterday, as a Florida resident since 2005, my adopted state had not seen a hurricane since then until Hurricane Hermine earlier this summer, a hurricane that was not devastating by any stretch of the imagination. But when, heaven forbid, a second hurricane hit the country, Matthew, Al Gore decided to ignore the previous eleven years of no hurricanes: "Mother Nature is giving us a very clear and powerful message."

Hillary also seemed to forget the eleven years without a hurricane at the same time: "Hurricane Matthew was likely more destructive because of climate change." As always, neither provided any science or real data to support their assertions.

But if the data does not support your position, let’s change the measurement system. Science editor Andrew Freedman wrote in Mashable that "it's time to face the fact that the way we measure hurricanes and communicate their likely impacts is seriously flawed. We need a new hurricane intensity metric, that more accurately reflects a storm's potential to cause death and destruction well inland."

When global warming stopped for almost twenty years, global warming advocates changed their market strategy to get rid of the disproven global warming myth and go to the more generic and more nebulous “climate change” myth. Now that the hurricane data and realities do not support the Al Gores of the world, they want to change the measurement process. When losing, just change the rules. Pathetic.

As we have always said, as global warming doubters and believers in science, all we want is an adult, mature, and respectful discussion that uses ALL of the relevant data, science, and research. I do not think that is too much to ask but apparently it is for the likes of Gore, Obama, and Clinton who obviously do not want such a discussion to occur. More myth busting next month.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

Sunday, May 29, 2016

May, 2016, Part 2, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science: Bill Nye Wants You In Jail and Al Gore Was Wrong Despite An Oscar Award

Every month we have enough material to return to a continuing theme in this blog, namely that “I am a global warming doubter AND a believer in science.” This became of interest because of people like Al Gore who fanatically and verbosely claimed that you had to be an idiot to not believe in man made global warming. It has been my life belief that anyone that is that loud and that obnoxious is hiding something, that rather than argue facts and reality it is better to beat down and insult anyone who disagrees.

As we have dove into the whole issue of man made global warming, or its new rebranded title of climate change, we found that Al Gore and people like him were guilty of a number of things:

Ignoring science and realities that did not support their opinions and positions.
Rather than have an adult conversation about climate, these types of advocates like Gore sank to the level of insulting those who dared look at ALL science by calling them a variety of names including racists, homophobes, terrorists, flat earth believers, and other slanderous names.
Continuing to insist that politicians step up their intrusions into our lives with higher taxes, more regulations, and more control of our freedoms and standards of living based on a shaky theory at best.

To see the past posts and the multitude of evidence that we have compiled that showed it is perfectly okay to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, enter the phrase "global warming doubter” in the search box above or go through the monthly historical posts listed on the right side of this page.

Thus, let’s see the latest facts and science that prove you can be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, regardless of what Al Gore proclaims:

1) Bill Nye is the science guy. One would think that someone known as the science guy would want to look at all sides of a scientific argument or problem. That is what scientists do, look at all available data, research, and information and put together testable theories in the search for truth.

But apparently Mr. Nye is not a traditional scientist in this sense. Even though we have provided hundreds of examples in various forms that proves that global warming science is not settled, Nye thinks that those realities, scientists, and facts should be ignored.

Why did I reach that conclusion? In a recent interview by the Youtube channel, cfact, Nye implied that putting global warming doubters jail might be a viable option since he and non-scientists like Al Gore and Barack Obama know what is best for humanity. If it means trampling on the rights of Americans to have a different opinion, then so be it.

Throwing people in jail for having a difference of opinion, a difference that is justified in so many ways by so many scientists and research? Is that what the political class in this country has done to us, abusing the Constitution and the scientific method in one fell swoop? And suggested by someone, Bill Nye, who has a degree in mechanical engineering, a discipline quite far away from knowing anything special about climate.

You can see Nye’s implying that jail is a good option for global warming doubters at:

http://conservativevideos.com/bill-nye-the-science-guy-thinks-climate-deniers-should-be-punished-in-this-horrific-way/

2) Michael Bastasch, writing for the Daily Caller on May 3, 2016, went back in time to review the forecasts that were made in Al Gore’s Oscar winning movie, “An Inconvenient Truth.” At the time of its release, the movie and it’s scary forecasts of climate disasters due to global warming were all the rage. What Mr. Bastasch found ten years later is that Gore’s “inconvenient truths” turned out to be anything but truth:

Claim #1 - Mount Kilimanjaro in Africa will be snow free within ten years.

Reality: There is still considerable snow on Mount Kilimanjaro and that snow is there 12 months a year. In a 2014 study, ecologists found that while the snow pack on the mountain may have shrunk a tiny bit over the past ten years, they concluded that the snow would be on that mountain top for many, many years to come:

“There are ongoing several studies, but preliminary findings show that the ice is nowhere near melting,” Imani Kikoti, an ecologist at Mount Kilimanjaro National Park, told eturbonews.com. “Much as we agree that the snow has declined over centuries, but we are comfortable that its total melt will not happen in the near future.” “Over the centuries,” long before man started using a lot of carbon based fuels.

Claim #2: Gore claimed that the Earth’s temperature rise from man made carbon usage was “uninterrupted and intensifying.”

Reality: Beginning prior to the movie, global temperatures had already flatlined and continued to flatline for the next ten years. Until the recent El Nino, there has been no statistically significant warming of the Earth for more than 21 years. So much for uninterrupted and intensifying.

Claim #3: Storms and weather would become more frequent and intense as humanity continues to use carbon based fuels: “And of course when the oceans get warmer, that causes stronger storms. That same year that we had that string of big hurricanes, we also set an all-time record for tornadoes.”

Reality: But storms did NOT get more frequent and intense over the next ten years. As a Florida resident for the past ten years, we in this state have not had a major storm hit us since we moved here in 2005. While Hurricane Katrina was terrible and devastating, nothing close to it has happened since then even though humanity has used a lot of carbon based fuel since that storm.

The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an entity that has been the global advocate for global warming, eventually had to fess up relative to this claim, concluding in 2013 that there “is limited evidence of changes in extremes associated with other climate variables since the mid-20th century….[there has been] no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century” and “[n]o robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin.”

This is a major confession since Al Gore shared the Oscar for “An Inconvenient Truth” with the IPCC.

Clain #4: The Arctic would be ice free within the next 50 to 75 years. This is the best kind of forecast to make since just about everyone alive today will not live long enough to see if Gore was right. He used the scare tactic that the polar bears would go extinct since they would have no ice to live on any more at the North Pole.

Reality: But rather than play it safe, Gore blew it when in 2008 he predicted that the North Pole would be ice free by 2013 which, of course, never happened. We have discussed the reality many times in this blog that Arctic ice pack is still quite robust and no where close to being extinct and melted. “I doubt the Arctic will be free of all ice in any summer, although the total area may well be greatly reduced in the future if it continues to warm there,” said Chip Knappenberger, a climate scientist at the libertarian Cato Institute. “Such a situation should not be overly worrisome, as there is ample evidence that it has occurred in the past and clearly, polar bears, and everything else up there managed to survive.”

As an FYI, recall that we have shown a number of studies that proved that the polar bear population is large and growing despite Al Gore’s predictions of gloom and doom.

Claim #5: If Greenland’s ice sheet melts because of man made global warming, it will dump a load of cold water into the Atlantic Ocean and cause a new ice age, i.e. global warming will cause an ice age because the cold water changes the Gulf Stream: “At the end of the last ice age, as the last glacier was receding from North America, the ice melted and a giant pool of fresh water formed. An ice dam on the eastern border formed and one day it broke.”

Reality: Australian scientists totally killed the theory that the Gulf Stream, or AMOC, was weakening because of global warming or any other reason: “Claims of strengthening or reducing of the AMOC are therefore pure speculation,” the scientists wrote in a research paper published in March, 2016.

So much for the “science being settled,” as Al Gore had loudly and and often proclaimed. For a film that was so bold in it’s predictions, it certainly was so wrong in being accurate in it’s predictions.

That will do it for today but we still have a lot of science and realities to discuss on why it is rational and sane to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science. Those discussions to happen in the coming days, assuming Bill Nye had not thrown us in jail by then.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:

Term Limits Now: http://www.howmuchworsecoulditget.com
http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w

Thursday, March 10, 2016

March, 2016, Part 2, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science

Every month we have enough material to return to a continuing theme in this blog, namely that “I am a global warming doubter AND a believer in science.” This became of interest because of people like Al Gore who fanatically and verbosely claimed that you had to be an idiot to not believe in manmade global warming. It has been my life belief that anyone that is that loud and that obnoxious is hiding something, that rather than argue facts and reality it is better to beat down and insult anyone who disagreesAs we have dove into the whole issue of manmade global warming, or its new rebranded title of climate change, we found that Al Gore and people like him were guilty of a number of things:

Ignoring science and realities that did not support their opinions and positions.
Rather than have an adult conversation about climate, these types of advocates like Gore sank to the level of insulting those who dared look at ALL science by calling them a variety of names including racists, homophobes, terrorists, flat earth believers, and other slanderous names.
Continuing to insist that politicians step up their intrusions into our lives with higher taxes, more regulations, and more control on our freedoms and standards of living based on a shaky theory at best.

Between 1920 and World War II,global temperatures rose three quarters of a degree Fahrenheit even though there was far less carbon spewing economic activity going on.

Temps then cooled down, despite more carbon burning going on, and then temps warmed up again from the mid-1970s to the late 1990s by about the same amount as what happened in the early 1900s.

Most scientists, if not politicians, have concluded that temps reached their current level in the late 1990s and have stayed constant since then.

Some global warming advocates claim that temps started climbing again, based on one year’s worth of 2015 data, when temps jumped up.

But this jump in temps could have happened because the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) stopped using satellite-senses sea surface temperatures, a measurement process that had been going on since the mid-1970s, and replaced this generally accepted measurement process with taking temperatures from the “cooling-water-intake tubes of ocean going vessels.”

Really? Cooling water intake tubes of ocean going vessels? Mr. Michaels claims that scientific literature is in agreement that this new process results in large measurement errors since a ship’s structure conducts heat, is affected by the sun’s rays, and the intake tubes of different ships measure temps at different ocean levels.

Thus, one year’s worth of data from a new measurement process is hardly conclusive when it comes to global warming proof.

But there is another factor in the higher 2015 temps since in 2015 a massive El Nino weather set up in the Pacific Ocean.

Historically, El Nino periods always raise temps worldwide because of how it affects Pacific Ocean currents.

For example, as a result of the 1998 El Nino, global average surface temperature jumped up slightly less than a quarter of a degree while in 2015 the global average temps jumped up a bit more than a quarter of a degree, thus no big deal.

In 1999, the year after that 1998 El Nino, global temps dropped almost three tenths of a degree, wiping out the jump in temps in 1998, a reaction that is likely to happen once the 2015 El Nino dissipates.

The article goes on to show how another temperature measurement process also debunks some global warming theories:“Instead of relying on debatable surface-temperature information, consider instead readings in the free atmosphere (technically, the lower troposphere) taken by two independent sensors: satellite sounders and weather balloons. As has been shown repeatedly by University of Alabama climate scientist John Christy, since late 1978 (when the satellite record begins), the rate of warming in the satellite-sensed data is barely a third of what it was supposed to have been, according to the large family of global climate models now in existence. Balloon data, averaged over the four extant data sets, shows the same.”One last global warming doubter set of data: Analyses from the biggest reinsurer insurance company, Munich Re, and University of Colorado professor Roger Pielke, Jr. proved that weather-related losses have not grown at all over the past 25 years. In fact, if anything, weather-related losses have trended downward in a non-statistically significant speed. 2015 recorded the second lowest weather related loss of Global World Productivity the entire time it was measured.A lot of real data from real scientists again showing how rational it is to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science.2) One last piece of science and reality in the global warming debate for today and this month. Yesterday, we discussed the reality that if Obama’s so-called Clean Power Plan goes into effect it will have a minimal impact on the environment, according to his own EPA analysis and forecast, but will have a devastating impact on the U.S. economy and jobs. This conclusion was recently reinforced by an article on the U.S. Chamber Of Commerce website in an article written by Sean Hackbarth, “Setting Things Straight: EPA’s Carbon Regulations Will Not Save People Money.” Details of his article include the following:

EPA head Gina McCarthy claims the EPA’s Clean Power Plan will save the country and Americans billions of dollars a year.
Which on the surface, from a basic economics perspective, is a ridiculous claim to make since the plan will likely shut down many coal powered power plants and immediately reduce the amount of electricity available throughout the country.
Economic theory tells us that if you reduce the supply of anything but allow demand to grow, prices HAVE to go up, no possibility of anything else happening.
Which is exactly what is going to happen according to research and analysis done by NERA Economic Consulting.
NERA Economic Consulting found that 40 states could see an average retail electricty price increase of 10% or more.
Their state by state analysis found that two states, North Dakota and Utah, could see an obscene increase in electricity rates of over 40%.
The following chart highlights the economic devastation across the most heavily impacted states:

So, if electricity is going to go up by double digit figures for just about every American, Ms. McCarthy, where is America going to save billions of dollars? Simple economic theory and NERA analysis shows that either you are not being truthful with America or you simply do not understand reality. Double digit increases in electricity prices for a global warming theory that grows weaker and weaker every day.

That will do it for this month’s discussion on how to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science. Today we learned about how weather patterns have short term effects on temperatures and that short term effects on temperatures do not mean the end of the world is near or that global warming is real. And we learned that somehow Obama's Clean Air Plan was going to save us billions of dollars while simultaneously raising the cost of our electricity by over 40% in some states. Insanity.

Love My Country, Loathe My Government

Monday, January 15, 2018

January, 2018, Part 3, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and a Believer In Science: How Science Continues To Dispel The Global Warming Myth

Wednesday, December 21, 2016

December, 2016, Part 2, I Am A Global Warmer Doubter and a Believer In Science:

Tuesday, November 1, 2016

October, 2016, Part 2, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and a Believer In Science -

Sunday, May 29, 2016

May, 2016, Part 2, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science: Bill Nye Wants You In Jail and Al Gore Was Wrong Despite An Oscar Award

Thursday, March 10, 2016

March, 2016, Part 2, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science

Blog Archive

About Me