"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts."  - Richard Feinman, quantum physicist

"Truth never lost ground by enquiry." -
WILLIAM PENN, Some Fruits of Solitude

“Men only care for science so far as they get a living by it, and that they worship even error when it affords them a subsistence.” — Goethe, from Conversations of Goethe with Eckermann and Soret

Global warming provides a marvelous excuse for worldwide, supra-national socialism.

"One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy.  We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy." - Ottmar Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015


Whistleblowers at the U.S. government’s official keeper of the global warming stats, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), claim their agency doctored temperature data to hide the fact that global temperatures plateaued almost 20 years ago.

As propounded by alarmists, global warming would require these distinct conditions:  

1.  Conclusive evidence of a long-term increase in global warming,

2.  Conclusive evidence that increasing concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide is causing global temperatures, not the reverse,

3.  Conclusive evidence that the anthropogenic component of carbon dioxide increases is indeed critical to CO2 increases,

4. Conclusive evidence that the global effects of an increase in a few degrees will be as devastating as has been and continues to be claimed,

5.  Conclusive evidence that the anthropogenic component can be sufficiently reduced to effect a material reduction in future warming and consequent devastation, given that most countries are so poor that the residents continue to improve their conditions, and burn more fuel.  They couldn't care less about Al Gore's and Barack Obama's panic attacks over a hypothetical fraction of a degree.  They have cold winters and hot summers.  What is a fraction of a degree to them,

6. Conclusive evidence that earth’s inhabitants can and will reduce the global human carbon footprint to 80% of 1990 carbon dioxide emissions, as demanded by various agencies and leaders, without suffering catastrophic consequences far worse than the effects of a degree or two or three increase in average global temperatures,

7.  Conclusive evidence of their own integrity and honesty and lack of bias everywhere, including doing research, presenting data objectively, and avoiding even the appearance of bias.


The birth of The Global Warming Fraud can be traced to a conference organized by anthropologist Margaret Mead, in 1975.  You can read the paper documenting the conference which began the ongoing fraud  here. 

It was at Margaret Thatcher’s personal instigation that the UK Met Office set up its Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research, which—in one of her final acts as Prime Minister—she opened in 1990. The Hadley Centre, in turn, helped to produce the primary data set which was used by the newly founded IPCC to “assess observed global warming”. Under the leadership of committed Warmist Sir John Houghton, Hadley was also responsible for selecting the lead authors for the IPCC’s scientific working group (Working Group I)—authors who, it need hardly be said, would reliably push the IPCC’s reports in the “correct” alarmist direction.

Was she stupid? Crazy? Ill-advised? What?

One of the more cynical theories is that Mrs. Thatcher’s early adoption of the “climate change” issue was rooted in Realpolitik. After the challenge to her power posed by the 1984 Miners’ strike, she wanted to ensure that never again could Britain be held hostage by the National Union of Mineworkers. By posing it as a global environmental issue quite beyond the realm of party politics, she could cunningly reduce Britain’s reliance on coal without provoking further confrontation with the miners.
What’s more, she could use CO2 reduction—just as Swedish Prime Minister Olaf Palme did in the mid-70s—as an excuse to justify a push for otherwise unpopular nuclear energy. Two years after the Chernobyl disaster, a nuclear-plant-building programme would hardly have been a great vote-winner, but the Conservative government needed nuclear processing facilities in order to upgrade its nuclear deterrent with the Trident missile system.


According to the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, the United States “has made the world’s largest scientific investment in the areas of climate change and global change research” with a total of nearly $20 billion over the past 13 years. - CNSNews.com, Jan 3, 2012

Carbon Dioxide Graphs in Perspective

Here is a typical graph (The Keeling Curve) designed to scare and mislead you by skewing facts.

Fig. 1
(Click on any image to enlarge it)

This appears to be a dramatic increase in carbon dioxide, and you are supposed to think it is all our fault. Further, you are expected to destroy your own life and with it, the world's economy by cutting back carbon emissions 80% by 2050, even as the world's population will grow some 40%. *

Water vapor is also a greenhouse gas. Water makes up roughly 15,000 ppm, or 1.5% by weight. Water has a much smaller molecular weight than carbon dioxide.  In other words, ton for ton, there are more water molecules to absorb energy than CO2.

Now we get the perspective by adding atmospheric water vapor.

According to David J. C. MacKay, geologist and chief adviser to the British Department of Energy and Climate, the burning of fossil fuels sends seven gigatons (3.27 percent) of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year, while the biosphere accounts for 440 gigatons (55.28 percent) and oceans account for 330 gigatons (41.46 percent).

All those who wish to disrupt their personal lives in the fantasmic hopes of "doing something" to reduce an insignificant component of greenhouse gases, feel free to do so. But be advised. If everyone did what you are proposing so naively, the world would plunge into a permanent depression of unprecedented scale. Under the socialism and incompetence of Barack Obama, we have begun that collapse.


August 5, 2011

Regulatory Commissars: The EPA Costs Jobs
As the unemployment rate hovers above 9 percent and job creation remains abysmal thanks to this administration's policies, the Environmental Protection Agency has announced a proposal that will destroy millions more jobs by 2030. Of course, the EPA isn't admitting this consequence, but such would be the impact of the agency's plan to constrict ozone standards from the 75 ppb (parts per billion) set in 2008 to 60 ppb. According to a study by the Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI, the proposed new standard would not only kill 7.3 million jobs but also carry a price tag of more than $1 trillion per year between 2020 and 2030, not to mention that the idea is downright ridiculous. For perspective of just how much so, consider that not even Yellowstone National Park consistently meets a 60 ppb standard.
Icing the cake of idiocy, the anticipated health benefits of the proposed standard aren't at all significant. As HotAir.com reports, "EPA's assumed causal relationship between ozone and mortality has not been supported by EPA's science advisers, [and] the EPA's own data show that the benefits of the proposed ozone standard will not outweigh the costs." So in short, a negative cost-benefit ratio, seven million-plus jobs gone, and an annual cost of $1 trillion. Sounds like a typical Leftist-inspired EPA program.

To be fair, it's not just the EPA wreaking havoc on the economy. According to a memo distributed by Sen. John Barasso (R-WY), the administration added or finalized 608 regulatory rules in July alone at a total cost of $9.5 billion. That's what Obama has previously called a "massive, job-killing tax increase."

New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism

By James Taylor | Forbes – Wed, Jul 27, 2011

NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.
Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA's Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models.
"The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show," Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. "There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans."
In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted.
The new findings are extremely important and should dramatically alter the global warming debate.
Scientists on all sides of the global warming debate are in general agreement about how much heat is being directly trapped by human emissions of carbon dioxide (the answer is "not much"). However, the single most important issue in the global warming debate is whether carbon dioxide emissions will indirectly trap far more heat by causing large increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds. Alarmist computer models assume human carbon dioxide emissions indirectly cause substantial increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds (each of which are very effective at trapping heat), but real-world data have long shown that carbon dioxide emissions are not causing as much atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds as the alarmist computer models have predicted.
The new NASA Terra satellite data are consistent with long-term NOAA and NASA data indicating atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds are not increasing in the manner predicted by alarmist computer models. The Terra satellite data also support data collected by NASA's ERBS satellite showing far more long wave radiation (and thus, heat) escaped into space between 1985 and 1999 than alarmist computer models had predicted. Together, the NASA ERBS and Terra satellite data show that for 25 years and counting, carbon dioxide emissions have directly and indirectly trapped far less heat than alarmist computer models have predicted.
In short, the central premise of alarmist global warming theory is that carbon dioxide emissions should be directly and indirectly trapping a certain amount of heat in the earth's atmosphere and preventing it from escaping into space. Real-world measurements, however, show far less heat is being trapped in the earth's atmosphere than the alarmist computer models predict, and far more heat is escaping into space than the alarmist computer models predict.
When objective NASA satellite data, reported in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, show a "huge discrepancy" between alarmist climate models and real-world facts, climate scientists, the media and our elected officials would be wise to take notice. Whether or not they do so will tell us a great deal about how honest the purveyors of global warming alarmism truly are.
James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at The Heartland Institute and managing editor of Environment & Climate News.


Winter is Coming: Scientist Says Sun Will Nod Off in 15 Years
Posted: 07/13/2015

Might want to start stockpiling those down jackets: The sun could nod off by 2030, triggering what scientists are describing as a “mini ice age.”
Professor Vlentina Zharkova of Northumbira University presented the frigid findings at the National Astronomy Meeting in Llandudno, Wales. Modern technology has made us able to predict solar cycles with much greater accuracy, and Zharkova’s model predicts that solar activity will drop by more than half between 2030 and 2040.
Solar activity was thought to be caused by a turbine-system of moving fluid within the sun. In search of a more accurate system of prediction, Professor Zharkova and her team discovered fluctuating magnetic waves in two layers of the sun. By studying the data of the dual waves, she says, predictions are far more precise.
“Combining both waves together and comparing to real data for the current solar cycle, we found that our predictions showed an accuracy of 97 percent,” said Zharkova, whose findings were published by the Royal Astronomic Society.
Using this method, she and her team discovered that there will be far less solar activity in sun cycles 25 and 26, leading to a prolonged period of solar dormancy
“In cycle 26, the two waves exactly mirror each other -- peaking at the same time but in opposite hemispheres of the Sun. Their interaction will be disruptive, or they will nearly cancel each other. We predict that this will lead to the properties of a ‘Maunder minimum’,” said Zharkova.

The Maunder Minimum is the title given to periods of time when sunspots are rare. It last occurred between 1645 and 1715, when roughly 50 sunspots were recorded, as opposed to the standard 40,000. That time was marked by brutal, river-freezing temperatures in Europe and North America.


Sunspot activity is the driving force of earth's climate.


Ditto Barack Obama, "Prince Charles", Al Gore, Hollywood celebrities, and on and on