Showing posts with label ipcc. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ipcc. Show all posts

Friday, November 23, 2018

November, 2018, 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 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 on 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 post 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 proclaim.

1) A recent research paper that was published in the scientific journal, Nature, proclaimed that the oceans were warming much faster than expected due to global warming and/or climate change. If true, this would have serious ramifications around the world, especially with countries with long coastlines along the oceans. The mainstream media went nuts with the news, proclaiming catastrophe in in its headlines covering the research, especially since the well respected magazine Nature had published the peer reviewed article.

One problem though, the research was wrong due to a math error:
  • The study claimed that ocean temperatures had risen 60% faster than previously believed.
  • But mathematician and well known climate change skeptic Nicholas Lewis found some math errors that proved this was not the case: “The findings of the . . . paper were peer reviewed and published in the world’s premier scientific journal and were given wide coverage in the English-speaking media. Despite this, a quick review of the first page of the paper was sufficient to raise doubts as to the accuracy of its results.”
  • Research author Ralph Keeling, a climate scientist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography who co-authored the paper, said he and his partner, Laure Resplandy of Princeton, agreed that their math error was indeed true: “When we were confronted with his insight it became immediately clear there was an issue there. We’re grateful to have it be pointed out quickly so that we could correct it quickly.”
  • Keely went on say in total honesty: “We really muffed the error margins.”
Error corrected, good thing. But three troubling thoughts come to mind:
  • It does not appear that the mainstream media corrected their original stories once the error was found and admitted to. Which, if given what we have discussed over the past week or so, lack of journalism honesty and ethics, means that the mainstream media has contributed to muddying the waters when it comes to the science of climate to suit their preconceived and biased intentions and aims.
  • Second, we will these two scientists the benefit of doubt on the error in their calculations. However, given the proven history of global warming advocates and scientists intentionally faking data and results to align with their preconceived notions, this type of relatively simple screw up does the raise the specter of bad and corrupt science for political and personal fame and glory.
  • And finally, and related to the previous point, this was a peer reviewed article. Why did none of those peers find the error? Were they just sloppy also or did they want the wrong findings to stand and fit their biased and skewed view of climate? 
Shady dealings potentially all around.

2) Although global warming basically stopped increasing two decades ago, there was global warming prior to the last two decades. And while global warming advocates always claim that ANY global warming is really bad, we have often discussed the reality that global warming may actually make it better for humanity, not worse.

Consider a February 13, 2018 article from the Constitution website that discussed this topic from both perspectives:
  • Former EPA head, Scott Pruitt, earlier this year posed the hypothesis that global warming might actually be good for humanity.
  • Penn State global warming advocate Michael Mann accused Pruitt of being in “stages of denial” and American Meteorology Society’s Paul Higgins also checked in to berate Pruitt. 
  • But Mann and Higgins represent only one side of the argument.
  • Consider Robert Murphy, an economist with the free market Institute for Energy Research who has done a lot of research regarding climate-economic models: “It’s always problematic to try to add benefits and harms together since people are different, but in terms of standard economic modeling, Administrator Pruitt’s comments are not as unreasonable as some of his critics are claiming. There are plenty of obvious benefits to certain regions from warmer temperatures, such as better harvests and fewer elderly deaths in the winter.” 
  • Murphy has concluded that, “It shows that the actual economic research on the human impacts of climate change are not as catastrophic as the alarmists would have you believe.”
  • Another study by environmental economist Richard Tol forecasted that impacts of global warming would be a net benefit to humanity, at least in the shorter term horizon.
  • Even longer term impacts, if global warming would start rising again, would not be all that bad: “ After 1.5 degrees [increase in warming], Tol found warming has “a limited impact on the economy and human welfare in the twenty-first century,” but the costs would be “substantially greater in poorer, hotter, and lower-lying countries.””
  • Specifically, Tol has stated: “There are of course positive aspects to climate change. The eastern US has just been through a brutal winter. Climate change will bring lower heating costs in winter, and cut cold-related death and disease. Plants grow faster and tolerate drought better if there is more carbon dioxide in the air.”
  • Historical satellite data likely shows that the Earth has greened up over the past several decades, possibly because of higher levels of carbon dioxide in the air from fossil fuel burning.
  • Since carbon dioxide is an essential plant food, more carbon dioxide may suggest more plant food which may mean more plant growth.
  • In fact, scientist Craig Idso of the CO2 Coalition has documented a load of studies and research that show the improved growth rates with higher levels of CO2 in the air: “And beyond this very real benefit to human health from increasing temperatures, the extra CO2 has helped to increase crop yields so as to improve food security.”
  • Of course, the United Nations’ effort on climate change, the IPCC, disagrees with all of these positive research findings on higher levels of carbon dioxide in the air.
  • But the IPCC also ignores the reality that crop yields have increased so much during the global warming hysteria that, “The world produces so much food now the World Peace Foundation declared the “elimination of calamitous famines.” Population has grown, but the death toll from famines has shrunk considerably in the last 50 years.”
So who is right, the global warming skeptics or the doubters? Tough to say but in my opinion there is far more science showing that global warming, which stopped two decades ago, has been more beneficial to humanity than hurtful. And given the reality that the forecasts of doom of global warming advocates over the past forty years or so have always been wrong, I believe the reality as pointed out by Dr. Tol: “The climate change we have witnessed over the last half century has been a net positive for humans.” 

And that is why I am a global warming skeptic 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





Sunday, October 21, 2018

October, 2018, Part 1, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and a Believer In Science: The Idiocy and Nonsense of the United Nations and the IPCC

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 on 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 post 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 United Nations via its IPCC organization has been one of the biggest supporters of the manmade global warming theory. Despite their predictions always being grossly wrong about what mankind is doing to the Earth’s environment, they continually put forth publications and “research” that show what dire consequences await us unless we immediately swear off carbon based fuels.

The IPCC recently put forth their latest gloom and doom predictions, which, not surprisingly, forecast the end of the world unless we all give up our freedom and wealth to an elitist organization who wants to believe they know what is best. Fortunately, the League Of Power website took a look at their latest schlock and logically and easily tore it to pieces:

  • The bottom line finding of this report was that we will be in for a catastrophe if the average Earth temperature rises between 1.5 and 2.0 degrees Celsius.
  • They claim their current global warming forecast models, models that have never, ever been close to accurate, predict we will hit the 1.5 degree mark by 2040.
  • Since Trump pulled us out of the idiotic Paris Climate Agreement, the models even predict that the Earth could hit that magically 2.0 degree mark before 2040.
  • According to the article: “The apparent dangers of unchecked climate change read like a progressive checklist. They warn of worsening storms, rising sea levels, massive famine, droughts, floods, wildfires and more.”
  • The writers of the report/research apparently have not checked reality where storms have been more infrequent and not as horrible, sea levels have risen very little, the amount and degree of droughts and wildfires is trending downwards, and the world’s farmers have never produced more food than they are doing now.
  • The research does not predict the probability of the 1.5 or 2.0 degree marks being met, just that they are bad.
  • But the report nicely glosses over the fact that from the beginning, years and years ago, the IPCC first predicted that 1.5 degree increase and it would be very bad. 
  • However, since then the average temperature has already gone up 1.0 degree, two thirds of the dreaded 1.5 degree increase, and yet, nothing really bad, relative to history, has happened. So are we to believe that a 1.0 degree increase is nothing but a 1.5 degree increase is the end of the world?
  • Again, looking at the IPCC global warming and model history, in 2014 they predicted that the Earth would see its average temperature increase 1.5 degrees by 2022, a mere four years from now.
  • But now, four years later in 2018, the IPCC predicts we will hit the magical 1.5 degree mark in 2040, a whole eighteen years later than they originally predicted just recently. Are their climate predictive models that bad that they were off by at least 18 years? Kind of destroys their modeling credibility.
  • Of course, the UN and the IPCC blame Trump and the U.S. for pulling out of the Paris agreement and making our climate future so much bleaker.
  • But what the report does not mention is that of all of the countries that signed the agreement, a mere nine of them have actually met their targets years after the agreement was signed and Trump and the U.S. had nothing to do with all of those countries not making their Paris targets.
  • The report also fails to point out that even though we are not in the agreement anymore, the U.S. has continued to reduce its carbon emissions since the agreement was signed, reducing our emissions by more than those nine countries have combined.
  • So we catch flak even though we have done a great job as a country reducing our carbon footprint while China, India, and the European Union continue to see their carbon emissions grow faster than just about any other country in the world.
It is such a bitch when reality gets in the way of myths such as man made global warming. The average temperature of the Earth has been basically flat for twenty years. In fact, some can make the case that the temps are actually starting to trend downwards. Any global warming forecast model has always been grossly wrong, whether it was from Al Gore or the United Nations. Countries that signed the Paris agreement for the most part are not abiding by the Paris agreement so it makes no difference if the U.S. was still a member of the agreement or not. India and China continue to build thousands of coal burning plants in their countries, increasing their carbon footprint, something that was actually allowed by the Paris agreement. 

The Paris agreement was a scam to get American wealth transferred to the poorer countries of the world and allow those poorer countries of the world, via the United Nations, to hobble our economy and our freedom. The global warming scam, rebranded climate change when global warming was proven to be a myth, is still a myth and a political power play with us as the target.

2) Given the first discussion point above, how the United Nations has never been right about man made global warming and has come up with all kinds of stupid ideas to address this non-issue, this next topic, from the Freedom Outpost website, in an article written by Tim Brown, fits right in with that discussion:

  • A recent UN report recommends that the world put a tax on carbon usage to the tune of $27,000 a ton to save the world from global warming and reduce carbon dioxide emissions, a myth we shattered in the previous discussion point.
  • This tax would raise the price of ordinary gas to about $240 a gallon.
  • While they do not want this tax to take effect until the year 2100, they do want to impose a carbon tax of $5,500 a ton by 2030 which would raise the price of a gallon of gas to only $49 a gallon.
  • Apparently, the UN provides no alternatives to what we would do to transport food, products, and ourselves to our jobs, they would just attempt to sideline our current transportation needs, crash our economy, all to feed a myth.
Nonsense and idiocy, $49 a gallon with no plan for an alternative. Mr. Brown sums up the reality of the situation when it comes to the United Nations, both when it comes to the global warming myth and everything else the UN touches: “I've said it before, and I'll say it again: We need to get out of the United Nations. Every informed Democrat, Republican, Independent, Libertarian and anyone in between knows what I'm saying is true. So, why don't we do it? We are doing nothing more than feeding a beast that is set on eating us alive, much like our own federal beast is doing. Let's not wait till 2100 or even 2030. Let's push to do what Nikki Haley has done. Let's choose to leave the UN for good!”

That will do it for today. More United Nations idiocy and myth shattering when it comes to the man made global warming and climate change myths. More to follow.

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





Friday, July 21, 2017

July, 2017, Part 3, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science: NOAA Says No To More Storms, More Failed Predictions, and Solar Panels Are Bad,

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) Al Gore, Barack Obama, and other global warming advocates like to claim that man made global warming and climate change are causing all kinds of havoc with the environment. But we have shown that actual government data shows that hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, and such are at historical rates or even at lower than historical rates.

And the latest government data from NOAA confirms that this reality still probably holds true:
  • Kimberly J. Smith, writing for the Conservative Tribune website on April 5, 2017, discussed the reality that NOAA has officially come out to state that it is premature to link human activity to stronger storms, specifically hurricanes.
  • The NOAA report and research concluded: “It is premature to conclude that human activities — and particularly greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming — have already had a detectable impact on Atlantic hurricane or global tropical cyclone activity,” the NOAA’s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory report said.
  • This finding supports the conclusions back in March, 2017 from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC - the primary United Nations climate change advoate organization) reported “no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century.”
Real data proving again that it is perfectly sane to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science. Especially when science and real data show that global warming should be doubted.

2) A June 29, 2017 article on the CSC Media Group's website by Michael Luckette gave a short but nice summary of some of the failed predictions that global warming advocates are produced over the years:
  • Al Gore predicted back in 2006 that within ten years there would be a “true planetary emergency: “Unless we act boldly and quickly to deal with the underlying causes of global warming, our world will undergo a string of terrible catastrophes,” 
  • Eleven years later that “true planetary emergency” is nowhere in sight.
  • In 2010, the Guardian newspaper of Britain reported that the United Nations was warning that humanity had as little as 8 years to avoid seeing a dangerous 2 degree Centigrade rise in the Earth’s temperature, a rise that never happened.
  • Three years ago and over 1,000 days ago France’s Foreign Minister, Laurent Fabius, warned everyone that: “we have 500 days to avoid climate chaos.”
At some point a sane person has to realize that when your theory on anything is ALWAYS wrong, maybe your theory is wrong, as illustrated in just the three examples listed above. 

But maybe that day of reckoning is finally dawning on global warming advocates, as illustrated in a research paper from a recent article in Nature Geoscience that admitted there have been: “differences in model and satellite tropospheric warming rates. In the early twenty-first century, satellite-derived tropospheric warming trends were generally smaller than trends estimated from a large multi-model ensemble.”

Maybe just maybe global warming advocates are having reality settle in and now we can have an adult conversation on global warming that looks at ALL of the science and ALL of the research and ALL of the data to try and figure out what is really going on, if anything.

3) One of the great options that is supposed to save humanity and the planet from global warming is solar energy. I am sure that all hard core global warming advocates are also big supporters of solar energy, their view likely being that solar is clean and non-polluting and not a contributor to CO2 levels in the atmosphere that cause global warming. Solar energy has a rep for being clean and safe, not like the use of those nasty fossil fuels.

But is solar energy really the savior of the environment and so pure and wonderful? Julie Kelly, writing for the National Review on June 28 2017, has a somewhat different view on solar energy:
  • A new research study by Environmental Progress (EP) warns that toxic waste from discarded solar panels now poses a global environmental threat. 
  • The Berkeley, California-based group, a geographic area certainly not famous for its conservative tenets, found that solar panels create 300 times more toxic waste per unit of energy than nuclear power plants. 
  • They also concluded that discarded solar panels, panels that contain high levels of dangerous elements such as lead, chromium, and cadmium, are piling up around the world, and that nothing is being done to limit their potential danger to the environment. 
  • Michael Shellenberger is the founder of EP: “We talk a lot about the dangers of nuclear waste, but that waste is carefully monitored, regulated, and disposed of. But we had no idea there would be so many panels — an enormous amount — that could cause this much ecological damage.”
  • EP researchers Jemin Desai and Mark Nelson found that scavengers in countries like India and China “burn the e-waste in order to salvage the valuable copper wires for resale. Since this process requires burning off plastic, the resulting smoke contains toxic fumes that are carcinogenic and teratogenic (birth defect-causing) when inhaled.” 
  • Japan is already scrambling for ways to reuse its mounting inventory of solar-panel waste, which is expected to exceed 10,000 tons by 2020 and grow by 700,000 to 800,000 tons per year by 2040.
  • There is a similar problem brewing in this country where we have more than 1.4 million solar energy installations, many of which are nearing the end of their life cycle.
So fixing one perceived environmental hazard might actually be creating another environmental hazard. 

Now, in the interest of balanced discussion, a spokesperson for the Solar Energy Industries Association, Dan Whitten, has come out to dispute EP’s research findings, claiming that solar panels are : “mainly made up of easy-to-recycle materials that can be successfully recovered and reused at the end of their useful life.” 

Mr. Whitten is not only fighting against these findings and pollution estimates about the end of solar panels, he also has to fight some estimates of the pollution caused by the creation of solar panels, as estimated from an Associated press investigation in 2013 that found:
  • From 2007 to 2011, solar panel manufacturing just in the state of California created more than 46.5 million pounds of sludge and contaminated water.
  • About 97% of this polluted sludge and water was stored in waste storage locations within the state but more than 1.4 million pounds were taken to 9 other states which required additional energy to be burned in the transportation of said sludge and water.
  • As the article concludes correctly, “There is nothing environmentally friendly about creating mountains of hazardous waste in an effort to reduce CO2 emissions.”
When analyzing a problem, you must look at the entire problem to fully understand not only the magnitude of the problem but the potential consequences of any solution you propose. Otherwise, you end up with the above situation, where the potential solution of one problem, man made global warming (assuming that is even a reality), creates another, equally bad or worst problem, massive environmental damage.

Three more examples proving that being a global warming doubter and a believer in sciences is a sane, rational person to be.

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








Friday, July 15, 2016

July, 2016, Part 1, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science: El Nino, A New Theory, and a List Of Global Warming Myths

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) Patrick J, Michaels, writing for the Cato Institute on July 1, 2016, reviewed the latest scientific data as it regards actual air temperatures as actually measured by satellites. His insights are important because a lot of global warming advocates were pointing to the recent hot weather as evidence that global warming was real. Global warming doubters were pointing to historical temperature trends which showed that higher temperatures should be expected since an El Nino weather pattern had formed in the Pacific and that historically, that raises temperatures in the U.S.

The satellites’ recordings include the following highlights:
  • Mr. Michaels sets up the science with the following El Nino summary: “For months we have been saying that, once they started dropping, the satellite temperatures—our only truly global measure—were going to go down with a vengeance, which is what usually happens after a strong El Niño event spikes a fever. El Niño is a dramatic slowdown (or even a reversal) in the trade winds that diverge surface water away from the South American coast, “upwelling” much colder subsurface waters. When that stops, global temperatures rocket upwards, but that also builds up more and more cold water to be unleashed when the trade winds resume.”
  • The satellite based temperature readings in the lower atmosphere are already showing a dramatic drop in the past four months as the El Nino starts to break up.
  • In fact, according to Roy Spencer of University of Alabama-Huntsville, who publishes the satellite data, the drop in temperatures the past in the last two months was the second-largest drop ever.
  • It missing being the biggest drop the record by only 0.01⁰C. 
  • The existing record was set, wait for it, after the slightly bigger 1997-8 El Niño. 
  • In the tropics, where El Niño is the strongest, the drop was the largest in the entire 37-year record of keeping track of temps by satellite.
  • Despite the current strong El Nino, the overall change in temps has been basically flat, subject to random error variation, over the past 20 years.
It is so much easier to be a global warming doubter when we have actual, government data to prove our point and so much harder to be a global warming advocate when data destroys pre-conceived notions of what they believe. We will keep an eye on this data over the next six months or so when we expect the fading of El Nino will further reduce overall air temperatures as measured by the satellites.

2) The website, www.ihavethetruth.com, probably does not have the reporting heft or reputation of say the New York Times and the Washington Post. So, it would be easy for global warming advocates to look at this tiny website and pooh pooh anything it says that would contradict what Al Gore told the advocates for global warming. In fact, they would probably ignore the following assertions by this website that was recently published on their site:
  • The global “truth” that people like Al Gore and Barack Obama like to spout is that 97% of climate scientists say the science is settled and that humanity is the prime suspect in driving up Earth’s temperatures. However, the article points out, correctly, given that we have already reported on this in previous posts, that this number was passed on a too small of a sample size of only 77 people, that was selectively and biasedly drawn from a much larger sample size who responded to a survey. You cannot base government policy and laws on such a small, skewed sample.
  • There are 35 “lies” in Al Gore’s global warming movie, “An Inconvenient Truth.”
  • Only 32% of the country is really worried about global warming which is about the same percentage of people that were worried about global cooling back in the 1980s.
  • If global warming is so bad and that it will eventually wipe out shore communities, why did Al Gore buy a California beach mansion a number of years ago?
  • Al Gore predicted back in 2008 that the entire North Pole could be melted by 2013 but it is still there and has been growing in ice size over the past few years.
The article goes through many more “facts” about global warming. What gives this obscure website credibility is that it sources every assertion it makes which allows the reader to easily go to the link that is the basis for the assertion, links that take you to far more famous websites and research sources. To check out the above, alleged global warming fallacies and others to judge for yourself, click on the following link:


I think you will be surprised how much information that Al Gore types are not telling you but are suppressing to keep their myths alive.

3) It is no secret that just about every global warming forecast over the past two decades has been a prediction disaster. These models have not come close to even remotely predicting what the Earth’s temperatures would be in the future. 

They are so bad that anyone who thinks that today’s global warming forecast models will do any better has just not been paying attention to the disaster that is climate forecasting. All of which raises a very valid question: if you have had grossly incorrect forecasts since day one, why should we believe your forecasts today will do any better job of predicting the future?

But there is a new scientific study and theory out that explains global warming and global cooling in one grand theory. To me, a non-climate scientist, the new theory seems logical and and helps explain why the Earth’s temperatures have been going up (global warming) and then followed by those temperatures going down (global cooling) over the history of the entire Earth. Rather than me trying to explain the theory, let me quote a description of it from a recent article that was on the Daily Caller website: “Now comes a new study which challenges the role that CO2 plays in our planet’s average temperature. The paper, “Modulation of ice ages via precession and dust-albedo feedbacks” by Ralph Ellis, asserts that carbon dioxide’s main mode of operation on planetary climate has to do with its interaction with terrestrial plant life: as CO2 levels decline after an extended ice-age, plants die off in areas such as the high steppes of Mongolia, causing a big upsurge in dust storms which coat the Northern Hemisphere’s ice fields, lowering their reflectiveness (albedo) resulting in the Earth coming out of an ice-age. After about 5,000 years, the planet, now with high CO2 concentrations, goes back into an ice-age as the Earth’s 23,000-year precession cycle swings the Northern Hemisphere away from the Sun.

Ellis’ paper provides an explanation for what the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) called, “one of the major unsolved questions in climate research” — that is, what caused the large CO2 variations in the past and how they were linked to climate. Of course, one would think that such a large unanswered question might be resolved before creating dozens of climate models that all assume a dominant role for CO2 as a direct agent in making the planet warmer or cooler depending on how much of it is present in the atmosphere.”

Here you have a comprehensive, logical, and testable theory about CO2 and how it affects both global warming AND global cooling. It is so much more viable and robust than just taking a few decades of temperature data and trying to extrapolate it out for several more decades. As a trained, degreed statistician, it is my view that the proposal by Mr. Ellis has likely far more statistical validity than the failed, simplistic historic global warming forecast models. And if he is right, than Al Gore et al are wrong and it becomes more realistic to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, the type of scientific thinking espoused by Mr. Ellis.

More discussion tomorrow on why it is perfectly rational and sane 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:


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







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




Sunday, January 31, 2016

January, 2016, Part 5, I am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science: The Science Is Not Settled, Just Ask These Scientists

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 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.
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:

Over the years we have identified the work and research of dozens of scientists and researchers who have proven it is sane and rational to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science. We found that the “science is not settled” and that observations, facts, realities, and other scientific research showed that there is doubt along many dimensions regarding global warming and its rebranded version, climate change.

A number of times we pointed out that some of the biggest advocates of global warming, e.g. Al Gore, Barack Obama, John Kerry, Bill Nye, and others, were not climate scientists or researchers. In many cases, they were not even scientists, they were often politicians with little or no science in their background.

In this context, we recently came across a Wikipedia page which researched and listed out dozens of scientists and researchers that were global warming doubters. For some of them, we have already discussed their work in this blog including Judith Curry of Georgia Tech. For most of them, I have no idea if their work and research is legitimate. But they include people from the following legitimate institutions:

  • New York University
  • MIT
  • Harvard
  • Greenpeace
  • Duke University
  • University of California, San Diego
Also included in the list are scientists from many other domestic and international universities. It includes scientists from many different fields including astrophysics, physics, chemistry, biology, botany, meteorology, climatology, geography, paleoclimatology, oceanography, and other fields. Thus, this list is balanced across many universities, scientific disciplines, and international borders.

Don’t their views merit a place at the table to discuss their global warming doubts? Would Al Gore call these professionals racists, homophobes, and other slurs like he has called global warming doubters in the past? Would Barack Obama dare call these scientists “flat earth believers” like he previously called global warming doubters? I doubt it. 

The entire Wikipedia article can be accessed at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

This article placed the following reasonable criteria down as on how someone ended up on this list:

  1. A scientist had to have at least peer-reviewed article published in any field.
  2. A scientist must have made a formal statement in any number of ways stating they had global warming doubts.
  3. Anyone on the list must have their own Wikipedia presence.
Thus, as you read the following list of global warming doubters, ask yourself if they have more credibility or less credibility than Al Gore when it comes to climate matters and science.

Scientists questioning the accuracy of IPCC climate projections: These scientists have said that it is not possible to project global climate accurately enough to justify the ranges predicted for temperature and sea-level rise over the next century. They may not conclude specifically that the current IPCC projections are either too high or too low, but that the projections are likely to be inaccurate due to inadequacies of current global climate modeling.


Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes: These scientists have said that the observed warming is more likely to be attributable to natural causes than to human activities.

Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown:
These scientists have said that no principal cause can be ascribed to the observed rising temperatures, whether man made or natural.



Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences: These scientists have said that projected rising temperatures will be of little impact or a net positive for society or the environment.


Dead scientists: This section includes deceased scientists who would otherwise be listed in the prior sections.


So maybe the science is not settled, as global advocates like to say. Maybe it is not 97% of all scientists who agree that man made global warming is real and substantial, as global warming advocates like to say. Maybe these dozens of scientists are not racists, homophobes, etc., as global warming advocates like to say. Maybe, we finally need a comprehensive, adult conversation with ALL scientists, not just Al Gore scientists.


More tomorrow as to why it is 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:

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