|
Warmal Globing |
|
The lighter side of global warming |
To The Contrary... |
|
Any examination of global warming deserves an airing of the work of those brave scientists who are not afraid to point out the naked emperor and tell it like it is. To those scientists, thanks… and watch your backs! |
|
The recent hullabaloo at the UN made me wonder, if everybody is in agreement, who are these guys? With their titles and degrees, seems that someone would have stopped and picked them up on the way to the convention.
Why would scientists lie? There is plenty of motivation out there—Scientists get promoted by bringing in grant money. They get grants by studying the popular questions. If they tend to come up with conclusions that go against the mission of the funding source, their grant applications get a chuckle, and are pushed to the bottom of the pile. I doubt that many scientists knowingly make things up (although there have been many examples of that happening over the years). There are many ways that science gets ‘fooled’. One is the ‘publishing effect’—positive results get published, and negative findings don’t. There is a similar process in the media— right now, stories about warming are ‘hot’. Stories about things being the same don’t sell. And stories against the religion of global warming bring outcries, calls for censorship… |
|
Back to science, any researcher bears responsibility to eliminate bias, separate correlation from causation, and to attempt to prove the null hypothesis. But in an environment full of believers, science gets careless. An example of carelessness would be my realizing that I was growing in the 1970s, but that I haven’t grown anymore since 1985. I look at the temperature charts, and conclude that global warming causes growth retardation. Get it?
Non-science people who are reporters and editors and TV personalities confuse correlation with causation all of the time. As a scientist, I am surprised by some of the conclusions. A friend recently pointed out that there is less snow now, compared to her childhood, and that supports the idea of global warming. Such a type of mistake is common, but I would think that reporters and writers would be smart enough (or ‘wise enough’) to realize the error of their logic.
Why would Al Gore et al. lie? The public radio crowd actually believes that there are different kinds of people out there—the good ones and the bad ones. Liberals see evil all around. Oils? Evil. Halliburton? Evil. Cheney and Bush? Evil. In the liberal mind, there are things that are simply above reproach. NPR? No greed there— heck, they likely don’t care about money and give everything to the poor. Oral sex in the Oval Office? What is wrong with that? Sometimes it is hard to keep track— like right now, corn and ethanol is good, but Archer Daniels Midland is evil. When one opens their eyes, they can see that the left has far more motivation to lie about global warming than any conservative does. The left has entire foundations that would go poof if it weren’t for ecological disaster. And as far as Exxon goes, they will make more money from corn than they ever did with oil. Just wait and see.
Consensus? No way. The problem is that those climatologists who still have careers ahead of them are aware of happens to the truth, and to those telling it, when the truth interferes with a liberal or media agenda (same thing, as I think about it). A well-written paper discusses the global warming ‘consensus’. |
|
Actually, consensus is a good place to start. The UN just announced that there is a ‘scientific consensus’ on warming—they assure the public, through the media, that every person with any credibility is on board. Heck, I just proved they are lying by showing that one article above—in that article alone there are several respected research climatologists with opposing views. Look for yourself, or do a Google search—they are not hard to find. But my question is, where do the UN and press get off telling us that everyone agrees? At this point a liberal will say that the scientists who don’t agree don’t count—they must be paid off by business. There is no evidence of that situation, but it must be so—otherwise Huffington and Streisand and Pelosi and Penn and all those pretty, neat, (uneducated) people would be wrong!! |
|
A column about ‘consensus’ from the WSJ by Richard Lindzen at MIT.
Ever hear of it? Just up the coast a bit from the New York Times. Is this guy invisible or something? |
|
Hurricanes and Global Warming. |
Someone say “consensus”?An experiment that hints we are wrong on climate change |
|
Hey—Looks like an interesting movie… Don’t get too excited—Broadcasters don’t have the guts to show the movie over here. But although you cannot see it, you can look in on a discussion about the movie, some questions about what Gore is smoking, etc, if you click here: |
|
Some day people will refer to someone “pulling a gore” for doing something analogous to losing a ‘sure-thing’ election, and then being the proponent of the wrong side of the biggest issue of the decade. I keep picturing Al up on stage at the Oscars, so proud of this neat little movie he made... Drives up with his Prius (from the jet hangar). During the applause, he’s thinking about Tennessee: “Damn, I think I may have left 4287 lights on in the basement…” |
|
The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine offers links to a number of interesting things, including the petition signed by over 17,000 scientists who take issue with the global warming alarmists over at the UN. There is also a video feed for an interesting lone-hour lecture on what we know about the relationship between carbon dioxide and climate. Click on the banner above. |
|
If only more people had the ability to think independently, like these sixth graders. (and Kudos to their teacher! |
|
Is the tide turning?
More and more articles are finding their way to the public, despite the continuing censorship of the media outlets who have lost their perspective years ago. A word to the New York Times et al. : Yes, you are going to have egg on your face. And yes, the Nobel Prize to Gore thing will look pretty silly in retrospect… but the sooner you come clean, the less painful it will be. Quit your suppression campaign, and report EVERYTHING— even the stuff you don’t want to be true. Maybe the drop in your circulation numbers will even slow down. The articles below are fascinating— keep reading... |
|
I haven’t written for awhile— not that there hasn’t been plenty of reason, but I’ve just been too darn busy!! The bad news is that the weather has been changing… but the REAL bad news for those who make money off global warming alarmism is that the Earth is cooling!
The worst of the news is that the country is run by politicians who have much to gain from frightening the public. You know Ben Stein, as in ‘Ben Stein’s Money’ or is role in ‘The Wonder Years’? The other day I heard him put it best— our president (sorry— no caps for that guy) is an incredibly genial, intelligent man. He is also (and I’m paraphrasing here) a very dangerous man, as he, more than any recent President, wants to control EVERYTHING.
The only people who talk about Global Warming now are the politicians; I have explained how science works, being a former scientist myself— if you want grant money, you don’t spit in the eye of the guy holding the money bag! But now, enough scientists have taken showers to wash away their shame and admitted the truth— that global warming was, and is, a myth. Sorry. To them I say, better late than never.
Kimberley Strassel writes a nice piece about the current state of affairs— in which the US is once again late to the party of the truth-tellers. It is as if those on the Left want planetary destruction— and the money they make off fearing people— so badly that now that they are in power, they will just do the things that they WISH they could have done, back when the world was ‘fooled’. The American Press won’t help you here, so READ SOMETHING FOREIGN! Travelling in France (ick) I read about China laughing at Obama’s plans for our economy… for some reason stories like that never make the NYT!!
The article by Strassel— and a couple highlights from that article:
Steve Fielding recently asked the Obama administration to reassure him on the science of man-made global warming. When the administration proved unhelpful, Mr. Fielding decided to vote against climate-change legislation. If you haven't heard of this politician, it's because he's a member of the Australian Senate. As the U.S. House of Representatives prepares to pass a climate-change bill, the Australian Parliament is preparing to kill its own country's carbon-emissions scheme. Why? A growing number of Australian politicians, scientists and citizens once again doubt the science of human-caused global warming. Among the many reasons President Barack Obama and the Democratic majority are so intent on quickly jamming a cap-and-trade system through Congress is because the global warming tide is again shifting. It turns out Al Gore and the United Nations (with an assist from the media), did a little too vociferous a job smearing anyone who disagreed with them as "deniers." The backlash has brought the scientific debate roaring back to life in Australia, Europe, Japan and even, if less reported, the U.S. In April, the Polish Academy of Sciences published a document challenging man-made global warming. In the Czech Republic, where President Vaclav Klaus remains a leading skeptic, today only 11% of the population believes humans play a role. In France, President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to tap Claude Allegre to lead the country's new ministry of industry and innovation. Twenty years ago Mr. Allegre was among the first to trill about man-made global warming, but the geochemist has since recanted. New Zealand last year elected a new government, which immediately suspended the country's weeks-old cap-and-trade program.
Cause for Optimism?
The number of skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. -- 13 times the number who authored the U.N.'s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Joanne Simpson, the world's first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak "frankly" of her nonbelief. Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a Japanese environmental physical chemist who contributed to a U.N. climate report, dubs man-made warming "the worst scientific scandal in history." Norway's Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics, decries it as the "new religion." A group of 54 noted physicists, led by Princeton's Will Happer, is demanding the American Physical Society revise its position that the science is settled. (Both Nature and Science magazines have refused to run the physicists' open letter.)The collapse of the "consensus" has been driven by reality. The inconvenient truth is that the earth's temperatures have flat-lined since 2001, despite growing concentrations of C02. Peer-reviewed research has debunked doomsday scenarios about the polar ice caps, hurricanes, malaria, extinctions, rising oceans…
At some point, Inconvenient Truth will become an inconvenient source of parody, akin to ‘Reefer Madness.’ Gore will go down in history as one more example of some idiot from the Left, congratulated by his own ‘ship of fools.’
Let’s just hope the ship of foold don’t do TOO much damage until then! |
