The Reality of Global Warming

“So, does the white man follow the White bear into the world history books and photos, all because of global coolarming?”

“In 1950, there were 5,000 polar bears in the wild. Today there are 25,000. What idiot buys into this whole man-caused global warming crap?”

“Global cooling isn't change?”

“In 1950 there were 5,000 wild polar bears. Today they number 25,000.”

“WAIT...and here from the left is Danny Glover with a typically PatRobertslum line. And YET no one has called him on it....

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2010/01/16/actor-danny-glover-blames-global-warming-earthquake-haiti


Actor Danny Glover says the earthquake in Haiti is a result of global warming. Glover told GRITtv that it could have happened to any of the Caribbean island nations, quote: �They are all in peril because of global warming.� Then, he lamented the failure of the climate summit in Copenhagen. As a result of that failure, he says, �this is what happens.�

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2010/01/16/actor-danny-glover-blames-global-warming-earthquake-haiti#ixzz0d4OwQ5wk”

“Danny Glover should stick to pretending to fight space aliens.”

“Don't forget Lethal Weapon...LOL”

“http://www.miamiherald.com/854/story/1433247.html Keep your eyes on the prize Dixie.”

“WHOOPS....

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6991177.ece

A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it.

Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world's glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.

In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC's 2007 report.

It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was itself based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi”

“LOL..and the house of cards begins its collapse....

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/87479ee2-0600-11df-8c97-00144feabdc0.html

The timetable to reach a global deal to tackle climate change lay in tatters on Wednesday after the United Nations waived the first deadline of the process laid out at last month�s fractious Copenhagen summit.

Nations agreed then to declare their emissions reduction targets by the end of this month. Developed countries would state their intended cuts by 2020: developing countries would outline how they would curb emissions growth.

But Yvo de Boer, the UN�s senior climate change official, admitted the deadline had in effect been shelved.”

“http://knucklesunited.com/2010/01/coyote-found-frozen-dead-in-his-tracks-literally/

Have you ever asked yourself how cold it would have to get to freeze an animal dead in it’s tracks? Well if so, the answer is -28 degrees. That’s how cold it was in Silt, Colorado when this coyote froze solid right in it’s tracks.

(more pics at link)

”

“What's that coming out from under that wolves tail, you should be expert on matters like that? LOL”

“http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/un-says-sorry-for-glacier-error/story-e6frg6xf-1225822334349

THE UN's top climate change body has issued an unprecedented apology over its flawed prediction that Himalayan glaciers were likely to disappear by 2035.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said yesterday the prediction in its landmark 2007 report was "poorly substantiated" and resulted from a lapse in standards. "In drafting the paragraph in question, the clear and well-established standards of evidence, required by the IPCC procedures, were not applied properly," the panel said.

The stunning admission is certain to embolden critics of the panel, which is already under fire over a separate scandal last year involving stolen emails that mentioned suppressing data to freeze out climate change sceptics.

The 2007 report, which won the panel the Nobel Peace Prize, said the probability of Himalayan glaciers "disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high".

It caused shock in Asia, where about two billion people depend on melted water from Himalayan glaciers for their supplies during the dry seasons.

It emerged last week that the prediction was based not on a consensus among climate change experts but on a media interview with a single Indian glaciologist in 1999.

....”

“http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245636/Glacier-scientists-says-knew-data-verified.html

The scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning UN report that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 last night admitted it was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.
Dr Murari Lal also said he was well aware the statement, in the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research.

....

”

“Isn't he the one that found drag marks that proved WMD were drug out of Iraqi into Neverland?”

“http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Scientists+using+selective+temperature+data+skeptics/2468634/story.html

Call it the mystery of the missing thermometers.

Two months after “climategate” cast doubt on some of the science behind global warming, new questions are being raised about the reliability of a key temperature database, used by the United Nations and climate change scientists as proof of recent planetary warming.

Two American researchers allege that U.S. government scientists have skewed global temperature trends by ignoring readings from thousands of local weather stations around the world, particularly those in colder altitudes and more northerly latitudes, such as Canada.

...”

“Record high temperatures here in the Northeast.
;-)”

“Liberal Poosie Zac!”

“U.S. government scientists have skewed global temperature trends

Surprise, surprise. This is the great thing about science. It will ALWAYS expose the fraudulent.”

“WAIT...it was a LOT warmer in my bathroom than my kitchen this morning....meaning THERE IS HORRIBLE HOUSEHOLD WARMING the world will end....”

“Under the heading, "I refuse to be swayed by the facts", I bring you;

Climate Chief Staying Put Despite Calls for His Head

The chief of the U.N.'s climate science panel says he isn't going anywhere, despite calls for his head amid allegations that he is a sloppy scientist who presided over a report that contained intentionally misleading statements.

U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) head Rajendra Pachauri looks on at a press conference in New Delhi, India. Five glaring errors were discovered in one paragraph of the world's most authoritative report on global warming, forcing the Nobel Prize-winning panel of climate scientists at the IPCC who wrote it to apologize and promise to be more careful.

The chief of the U.N.'s climate science panel says he isn't going anywhere, despite calls for his head amid allegations that he is a sloppy scientist who presided over a report that contained intentionally misleading statements.

"I know a lot of climate skeptics are after my blood, but I'm in no mood to oblige them," Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), told The Times of London.

Pachauri spoke following revelations that an oft-cited "fact" in his panel's 2008 climate change report -- that the Himalayas were on track to melt by 2035 -- was sloppily copied from a magazine interview with a single glaciologist in 1999.

Like water flowing downhill from a melting glacier, other errors have since emerged from the report, simply titled AR4.

The panel now faces fresh controversy for wrongly linking global warming to an increase in the number and severity of natural disasters, including hurricanes and floods, and for a separate section of the report that warned that the world had "suffered rapidly rising costs due to extreme weather-related events since the 1970s."

The IPCC based its claims on an unpublished report that had not been subjected to routine scientific scrutiny -- and ignored warnings from scientific advisers that the evidence supporting the link was weak, The Sunday Times of London reported. The newspaper has since found that the scientific paper on which the IPCC based that claim had neither been peer reviewed nor published at the time the U.N. panel issued its report.

In 2008, when the report was eventually published, it had a new caveat. It said: "We find insufficient evidence to claim a statistical relationship between global temperature increase and catastrophe losses."

But despite this change, the IPCC did not issue a clarification ahead of the Copenhagen climate summit last month.

Dr. Murari Lal, the scientist behind the bogus claim about melting Himalayan glaciers, suggested over the weekend that the panel intentionally ignored the facts.

The statement "related to several countries in this region and their water sources," Lal told the London paper The Mail. "We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy-makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action. It had importance for the region, so we thought we should put it in."

The Mail concluded that the comments were included "purely to put political pressure on world leaders."

Pachauri hasn't yet commented on these allegations, but he has admitted that the statement "was a collective failure by a number of people." And while he fretted that there may be other errors in the same report, Pachauri added that he was still considering whether to take action against those responsible.

"I need to consider what action to take, but that will take several weeks. It's best to think with a cool head, rather than shoot from the hip."

So far, the IPCC has issued only a comment offering regret for the poorly vetted statements. "The Chair, Vice-Chairs, and Co-chairs of the IPCC regret the poor application of well-established IPCC procedures," it said in a statement. But it fell short of issuing a full retraction or reprinting the report.

The IPCC "made a clear and obvious error when it stated that Himalayan glaciers would be gone by 2035," Patrick J. Michaels, a senior fellow in environmental policy at the libertarian Cato Institute, said in an interview.

"The absurdity was obvious to anyone who had studied the scientific literature. This was not an honest mistake. IPCC had been warned about it for a year by many scientists."

The dustup is the latest scandal in global warming science, coming after the disclosure of attempts to shade climate-science research findings at the U.K.'s East Anglia University and the failed talks in Copenhagen by environmental policymakers last month.”

“Does burning treated wood speed up the GW process?”

“It's all caused by farting cows;

Cow Farts: Global Warmers Or A Load Of Hot Air?

August 05 2005

Scientists and farmers around the world are debating a very serious subject at the moment. Cow farts. Yes, really, they're talking about farting cows. They're talking about cow burps as well, and sheep burps, and even sheep farts.

Shows a photo of several creamy-colored cows in a green field.


Why? Good question. Let's start with a look at the science behind wind.

Farts and burps are basically pockets of gas that get released from human and animal bodies.

Some gas is swallowed, like oxygen, when we eat or talk. Some of it is created inside our bodies as we digest food.

This gassy mixture isn't useful, so our bodies push it out and away as best they can... in burps and farts. Got it so far? Hope you're not giggling by the way, this is very serious science.

One of the gases found in farts and burps is called 'methane'. A certain amount of methane in the atmosphere is natural, and is a good thing. Along with other so-called 'greenhouse gases' methane collects in the sky and traps warm air around our planet.

Problems begin when the layer of greenhouse gases gets too thick and traps too much heat. This is called 'global warming'.”

“The REAL cost of global warming ...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/25/cbsnews_investigates/main6140406.shtml”

“Carbon credits are selling at eight cents. Down from around eight bucks. Gore should be in prison.”

“Temperatures are back below freezing. Global Warming is over.”

“FG = Father Goose?”

“Warmer and wet here in the high desert of California.
El Nino has brought us more rain in one week than the combined last four years- Just under four inches and more today.
Thank you Global Warming, LMAO”

“Hi. I'm gonna pull a Sarge. SEE, GLOBAL WARMING EXISTS!!!

http://www.thebackpacker.com/trailtalk/thread/42289,5.php”

“Only one in four American Meteorological Society broadcast meteorologists agrees with United Nations’ claims that humans are primarily responsible for recent global warming, a survey published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society reports.

The survey results contradict the oft-repeated assertion that a consensus of scientists believes humans are causing a global warming crisis.

http://www.heartland.org/publications/environment%20climate/article/26794/Meteorologists_Reject_UNs_Global_Warming_Claims.html”

“http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7004936.ece

Scientists in stolen email scandal hid climate data

The university at the centre of the climate change row over stolen e-mails broke the law by refusing to hand over its raw data for public scrutiny.

The University of East Anglia breached the Freedom of Information Act by refusing to comply with requests for data concerning claims by its scientists that man-made emissions were causing global warming.”

“Wow, I got a warming global today.”

“U.N.'s Global Warming Report Under Fresh Attack for Rainforest Claims

A United Nations report on climate change that has been lambasted for its faulty research is under new attack for yet another instance of what its critics say is sloppy science -- adding to a growing scandal that has undermined the credibility of scientists and policymakers who back the U.N.'s findings about global warming.

In the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), issued in 2007 by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), scientists wrote that 40 percent of the Amazon rainforest in South America was endangered by global warming.

But that assertion was discredited this week when it emerged that the findings were based on numbers from a study by the World Wildlife Federation that had nothing to do with the issue of global warming -- and that was written by a freelance journalist and green activist.”

“From the London Times, I bring you;


From The Times
January 28, 2010
Scientists in stolen e-mail scandal hid climate data
Ben Webster, Environment Editor, and Jonathan Leake

(University of East Anglia)

Professor Phil Jones, the unit's director, stood down while the inquiry took place

The university at the centre of the climate change row over stolen e-mails broke the law by refusing to hand over its raw data for public scrutiny.

The University of East Anglia breached the Freedom of Information Act by refusing to comply with requests for data concerning claims by its scientists that man-made emissions were causing global warming.

The Information Commissioner’s Office decided that UEA failed in its duties under the Act but said that it could not prosecute those involved because the complaint was made too late, The Times has learnt. The ICO is now seeking to change the law to allow prosecutions if a complaint is made more than six months after a breach.

The stolen e-mails , revealed on the eve of the Copenhagen summit, showed how the university’s Climatic Research Unit attempted to thwart requests for scientific data and other information, and suggest that senior figures at the university were involved in decisions to refuse the requests. It is not known who stole the e-mails.

Professor Phil Jones, the unit’s director, stood down while an inquiry took place. The ICO’s decision could make it difficult for him to resume his post.

Details of the breach emerged the day after John Beddington, the Chief Scientific Adviser, warned that there was an urgent need for more honesty about the uncertainty of some predictions. His intervention followed admissions from scientists that the rate of glacial melt in the Himalayas had been grossly exaggerated.

In one e-mail, Professor Jones asked a colleague to delete e-mails relating to the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

He also told a colleague that he had persuaded the university authorities to ignore information requests under the act from people linked to a website run by climate sceptics.

A spokesman for the ICO said: “The legislation prevents us from taking any action but from looking at the emails it’s clear to us a breach has occurred.” Breaches of the act are punishable by an unlimited fine.

The complaint to the ICO was made by David Holland, a retired engineer from Northampton. He had been seeking information to support his theory that the unit broke the IPCC’s rules to discredit sceptic scientists.

In a statement, Graham Smith, Deputy Commissioner at the ICO, said: “The e-mails which are now public reveal that Mr Holland’s requests under the Freedom of Information Act were not dealt with as they should have been under the legislation. Section 77 of the Act makes it an offence for public authorities to act so as to prevent intentionally the disclosure of requested information.”

He added: “The ICO is gathering evidence from this and other time-barred cases to support the case for a change in the law. We will be advising the university about the importance of effective records management and their legal obligations in respect of future requests for information.”

Mr Holland said: “There is an apparent Catch-22 here. The prosecution has to be initiated within six months but you have to exhaust the university’s complaints procedure before the commission will look at your complaint. That process can take longer than six months.”

The university said: “The way freedom of information requests have been handled is one of the main areas being explored by Sir Muir Russell’s independent review. The findings will be made public and we will act as appropriate on its recommendations.””

“That's the exact article I posted yesterday”

“So we have Liberals just giving a MEH to REAL EXACT evidence that manmade Global Warming is a HOAX..Heck the PrezBO even mentioned it and derided people who believe otherwise....”

“�That's the exact article I posted yesterday�
HighPlainsDrifter
2:13:54 PM
1/28/10


Ooooops, sorry.”

“Scientists broke the law by hiding climate change data: But legal loophole means they won't be prosecuted

By David Derbyshire
28th January 2010


Accused: Professor Phil Jones asked a colleague to delete emails relating to a report by the IPCC

Scientist at the heart of the 'Climategate' email scandal broke the law when they refused to give raw data to the public, the privacy watchdog has ruled.

The Information Commissioner's office said University of East Anglia researchers breached the Freedom of Information Act when handling requests from climate change sceptics.

But the scientists will escape prosecution because the offences took place more than six months ago.

The revelation comes after a string of embarrassing blunders and gaffes for climate scientists and will fuel concerns that key researchers are too secretive and too arrogant.

It will pile pressure on the director of the university's climate change unit, Professor Phil Jones, who has stood aside while an investigation is carried out, and make it harder for him to return.

The ruling followed a complaint from retired engineer David Holland-66, whose Freedom of Information-requests were ignored.

Last night Mr Holland welcomed the watchdog's decision but said it was disappointing the researchers would not be prosecuted.

'All we are trying to do is make the scientists follow their own professional rules by being open, transparent and honest,' he said. 'We are not trying to show that human beings don't affect the climate, but to show that the science is not settled.'”

“I did not read it. Don't hafta. Lie after lie after lie...”

“The chairman of the leading climate change watchdog was informed that claims about melting Himalayan glaciers were false before the Copenhagen summit, The Times has learnt.

Rajendra Pachauri was told that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment that the glaciers would disappear by 2035 was wrong, but he waited two months to correct it. He failed to act despite learning that the claim had been refuted by several leading glaciologists.

The IPCC’s report underpinned the proposals at Copenhagen for drastic cuts in global emissions.

Dr Pachauri, who played a leading role at the summit, corrected the error last week after coming under media pressure. He told The Times on January 22 that he had only known about the error for a few days. He said: “I became aware of this when it was reported in the media about ten days ago. Before that, it was really not made known. Nobody brought it to my attention. There were statements, but we never looked at this 2035 number.”

Asked whether he had deliberately kept silent about the error to avoid embarrassment at Copenhagen, he said: “That’s ridiculous. It never came to my attention before the Copenhagen summit. It wasn’t in the public sphere.”

However, a prominent science journalist said that he had asked Dr Pachauri about the 2035 error last November. Pallava Bagla, who writes for Science journal, said he had asked Dr Pachauri about the error. He said that Dr Pachauri had replied: “I don’t have anything to add on glaciers.”

The Himalayan glaciers are so thick and at such high altitude that most glaciologists believe they would take several hundred years to melt at the present rate. Some are growing and many show little sign of change.

....

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7009081.ece”

“Lie after lie from both sides.
The truth will really only be known by a few people for the next 20 years, when hopefully the public will be ready to face the consequences of whatever the outcome. In the meanwhile the damage to other pollution awareness that has been cold cocked by Gores insane overestimate of this religious non-sense instead of concentration on the real threat that pollution of all sorts can cause.
last edited: 1/29/10 9:13:52 PM”

“Danmark has the WMD, he knows where they are.”

“...after lie after lie after...”

“http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7017907.ece

Africagate: top British scientist says UN panel is losing credibility

A LEADING British government scientist has warned the United Nations’ climate panel to tackle its blunders or lose all credibility.

Robert Watson, chief scientist at Defra, the environment ministry, who chaired the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) from 1997 to 2002, was speaking after more potential inaccuracies emerged in the IPCC’s 2007 benchmark report on global warming.

The most important is a claim that global warming could cut rain-fed north African crop production by up to 50% by 2020, a remarkably short time for such a dramatic change. The claim has been quoted in speeches by Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman, and by Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general.

This weekend Professor Chris Field, the new lead author of the IPCC’s climate impacts team, told The Sunday Times that he could find nothing in the report to support the claim. The revelation follows the IPCC’s retraction of a claim that the Himalayan glaciers might all melt by 2035, dubbed 'Glaciergate' by commentators.

The African claims could be even more embarrassing for the IPCC because they appear not only in its report on climate change impacts but, unlike the glaciers claim, are also repeated in its Synthesis Report.

This report is the IPCC’s most politically sensitive publication, distilling its most important science into a form accessible to politicians and policy makers. Its lead authors include Pachauri himself.”

“wow...SO HPD...when did we put the lines and the little names on there where we could see them from space???”