From Daily Tech report by Michael Asher - January 14, 2009
"The Japanese Society of Energy and Resources (JSER) has published a new study on the causes of Global Warming. Entitled, "Global warming: What is the scientific truth?”, the report highlights the differing views of five prominent Japanese scientists.
All but one of the scientists disagreed that global warming is the result of human activity."
I wonder if James Hansen, Al Gore and Penny Wong would call this a consensus?
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Galloping Glaciers of Greenland Have Reined Themselves In
Science Magazine 23 Jan 09
Fall Meeting of the American Geophysical Union:
Ice loss in Greenland has had some climatologists speculating that global warming might have brought on a scary new regime of wildly heightened ice loss and an ever-faster rise in sea level. But glaciologists reported at the American Geophysical Union meeting that Greenland ice's Armageddon has come to an end.
Fall Meeting of the American Geophysical Union:
Ice loss in Greenland has had some climatologists speculating that global warming might have brought on a scary new regime of wildly heightened ice loss and an ever-faster rise in sea level. But glaciologists reported at the American Geophysical Union meeting that Greenland ice's Armageddon has come to an end.
Anthropogenic Global Warming: The Greatest Fraud in History?
by James Lewis From Pajamas Media, January 30, 2009 on "An Honest Climate Debate."
Some Extracts:
"But what worries me most is that the credibility of science may never recover — and perhaps it shouldn’t. Credibility has to be earned, and once it’s squandered may never be recovered. By now far too many scientists have knowingly colluded in an historic fraud.... We are seeing political larceny here on a truly planetary scale. Why should scientists who’ve gambled their own reputations on this fakery ever be trusted again? They shouldn’t."
" Like most scientists I rarely judge what others do in their fields. And yet it’s been flamingly obvious for years now that the hypothesis of human-caused global warming violates all the basic rules and safeguards that protect the integrity of normal, healthy science. That’s why AGW (anthropogenic global warming) looks like a massive fraud, the biggest fraud ever in the history of science."
"If that’s true, anybody who cares about science should be outraged. Even if you don’t care about that ask yourself if you want your next medical exam to be honest. Or the next time you drive across a traffic bridge, do you want the engineering tests to be falsified? If scientific corruption becomes endemic, we risk losing one of the great jewels of our culture.
Some Extracts:
"But what worries me most is that the credibility of science may never recover — and perhaps it shouldn’t. Credibility has to be earned, and once it’s squandered may never be recovered. By now far too many scientists have knowingly colluded in an historic fraud.... We are seeing political larceny here on a truly planetary scale. Why should scientists who’ve gambled their own reputations on this fakery ever be trusted again? They shouldn’t."
" Like most scientists I rarely judge what others do in their fields. And yet it’s been flamingly obvious for years now that the hypothesis of human-caused global warming violates all the basic rules and safeguards that protect the integrity of normal, healthy science. That’s why AGW (anthropogenic global warming) looks like a massive fraud, the biggest fraud ever in the history of science."
"If that’s true, anybody who cares about science should be outraged. Even if you don’t care about that ask yourself if you want your next medical exam to be honest. Or the next time you drive across a traffic bridge, do you want the engineering tests to be falsified? If scientific corruption becomes endemic, we risk losing one of the great jewels of our culture.
Friday, January 30, 2009
New Report Says Climate Change Irreversible for Next 1,000 Years
From Voice of America:
The study published Tuesday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences says that even if carbon dioxide emissions are reduced the effects on global temperature could remain high for generations.
Could? Could or on the other hand, could not! As we know, the growth in CO2 follows the rise in temperature. Google- Vostok Ice Core Samples. I'm sick of supplying references and these clowns just post their lies. The Fools
The study led by researchers at the United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says that possible climate changes include global sea level rise and reduced rainfall in certain parts of the world.
Possible - not definite, only possible, or maybe, possibly NOT!
Scientists said those changes could decrease water supplies, increase the frequencies of fires, expand deserts and affect agriculture.
Could decrease water supplies, increase the frequencies of fires, expand deserts and affect agriculture. Or, then again, Maybe Not. Bloody alarmists will not actually make a definite statement, but by their inferences, doom and gloom. If it doesn't happen (and I guarantee that it won't) well, they will say we didn't say it WILL happen!
"In the past five years Greenland has been melting at rates that are higher than they consider in this paper, and it's been adding about 0.5 millimeters per year to sea level rise," he said.
Well, Sorry. Greenland's Glacier has been growing since 2005 - I can post the references, but these clowns should not be telling porkies.
The study published Tuesday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences says that even if carbon dioxide emissions are reduced the effects on global temperature could remain high for generations.
Could? Could or on the other hand, could not! As we know, the growth in CO2 follows the rise in temperature. Google- Vostok Ice Core Samples. I'm sick of supplying references and these clowns just post their lies. The Fools
The study led by researchers at the United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says that possible climate changes include global sea level rise and reduced rainfall in certain parts of the world.
Possible - not definite, only possible, or maybe, possibly NOT!
Scientists said those changes could decrease water supplies, increase the frequencies of fires, expand deserts and affect agriculture.
Could decrease water supplies, increase the frequencies of fires, expand deserts and affect agriculture. Or, then again, Maybe Not. Bloody alarmists will not actually make a definite statement, but by their inferences, doom and gloom. If it doesn't happen (and I guarantee that it won't) well, they will say we didn't say it WILL happen!
"In the past five years Greenland has been melting at rates that are higher than they consider in this paper, and it's been adding about 0.5 millimeters per year to sea level rise," he said.
Well, Sorry. Greenland's Glacier has been growing since 2005 - I can post the references, but these clowns should not be telling porkies.
O-Obama -Isn't this waste?
Stayed tuned we'll have a Pop-eye cartoon along in a minute - Roger Miller.
A quote from Roger's classic - Kansas City Star.
And speaking of Kansas City Star ( the Newspaper): From: Thomas McClanahan, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist:
"Another nugget from the stimulus bill passed by the House:
Backers of NASA sought $2 billion to help finance the costs of the next manned-space program. Instead...
NASA was allotted $600 million by the House - none of it for space-related activities. The biggest chunk of the money, $400 million, went to "put more scientists to work doing climate change research."
NASA backers are hoping the Senate will aim some money at NASA for what the agency exists to do: Explore space. "
More money wasted on the scam that is Anthropogenic Global Warming. O-O-O-Obama...What are you doing?
A quote from Roger's classic - Kansas City Star.
And speaking of Kansas City Star ( the Newspaper): From: Thomas McClanahan, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist:
"Another nugget from the stimulus bill passed by the House:
Backers of NASA sought $2 billion to help finance the costs of the next manned-space program. Instead...
NASA was allotted $600 million by the House - none of it for space-related activities. The biggest chunk of the money, $400 million, went to "put more scientists to work doing climate change research."
NASA backers are hoping the Senate will aim some money at NASA for what the agency exists to do: Explore space. "
More money wasted on the scam that is Anthropogenic Global Warming. O-O-O-Obama...What are you doing?
Is Penny Wong or Right (3)
On ABC (Australia) Rural, Penny Wrong...er Wong had this to say
"Meanwhile, Senator Wong says the heatwave gripping south-east Australia is part of what scientists predicted would happen.
Temperatures have soared into the mid-40s across Victoria and South Australia, and the hot weather is forecast to continue for the rest of the week."
In South Australia it is the hottest for 70 years! Back to the 1930's which NASA's GISS has said was the hottest decade in the last 100 years!
"Eleven of the hottest years in history have been in the last 12..."
Really, Penny, when Dr. R.K. Pachauri head of the IPCC made the same statement, he had to retract it!
And following on from my post Is "Penny Wong or Right (2)" where she said on 4BC radio "and... and... and I... to be honest with you.. think that most Australians do have a view that this (AGW) is real ..." a poll in the Australian newspaper as at today's date records: Are the heatwaves in Victoria and South Australia evidence of global warming?
Yes 8%
No 70%
Don’t know 23%
Wong...er Wrong again, Pen!
"Meanwhile, Senator Wong says the heatwave gripping south-east Australia is part of what scientists predicted would happen.
Temperatures have soared into the mid-40s across Victoria and South Australia, and the hot weather is forecast to continue for the rest of the week."
In South Australia it is the hottest for 70 years! Back to the 1930's which NASA's GISS has said was the hottest decade in the last 100 years!
"Eleven of the hottest years in history have been in the last 12..."
Really, Penny, when Dr. R.K. Pachauri head of the IPCC made the same statement, he had to retract it!
And following on from my post Is "Penny Wong or Right (2)" where she said on 4BC radio "and... and... and I... to be honest with you.. think that most Australians do have a view that this (AGW) is real ..." a poll in the Australian newspaper as at today's date records: Are the heatwaves in Victoria and South Australia evidence of global warming?
Yes 8%
No 70%
Don’t know 23%
Wong...er Wrong again, Pen!
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Is Penny Wong or Right (2)
Penny Wong on 4BC:
"The consensus science is that climate change is occurring."
Well, sorry, Penny, Science doesn't work on "Consensus." and if it did, look at petitionproject.org and the more than 31,000 scientists that do not believe in AGW. I'll take your consensus and raise you...
"What I say is, have a look at what the IPCC said – that is not a radical group…"
Pardon, that biased and disgraced POLITICAL body???
When asked about the 31000 of the petition project, she, as usual dodged the question and answered "and... and... and I... to be honest with you.. think that most Australians do have a view that this is real ..."
Have you seen recent polling, Penny... oh yes, of course you have. Don't tell porkies!
"Are you willing to take the risk in terms of the reef, in terms of all of the economic impact of climate change. We see this as an economic responsibility issue."
I say- Ms Wong, Are YOU willing to initiate a CRIPPLING carbon (Dioxide) tax (aka ETS- aka Penny's new HAT [hot air tax])
on an unproven theory which is slowly sliding into oblivion?
"The consensus science is that climate change is occurring."
Well, sorry, Penny, Science doesn't work on "Consensus." and if it did, look at petitionproject.org and the more than 31,000 scientists that do not believe in AGW. I'll take your consensus and raise you...
"What I say is, have a look at what the IPCC said – that is not a radical group…"
Pardon, that biased and disgraced POLITICAL body???
When asked about the 31000 of the petition project, she, as usual dodged the question and answered "and... and... and I... to be honest with you.. think that most Australians do have a view that this is real ..."
Have you seen recent polling, Penny... oh yes, of course you have. Don't tell porkies!
"Are you willing to take the risk in terms of the reef, in terms of all of the economic impact of climate change. We see this as an economic responsibility issue."
I say- Ms Wong, Are YOU willing to initiate a CRIPPLING carbon (Dioxide) tax (aka ETS- aka Penny's new HAT [hot air tax])
on an unproven theory which is slowly sliding into oblivion?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)