Login    Forum    Search    FAQ

Board index » Racing Forum » Ken0069's Blog




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 417 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 ... 28  Next
Author Message
 Post Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:28 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
No, 2015 Was Not The Hottest Year Evah…
by James Delingpole21 Jan 2016

Over the next few days and weeks you will hear lots and lots of stories about how 2015 was the “Hottest Year Evah”.

Quote:
Every time you do so, reach for your Browning. Whoever makes this claim will be an idiot, a liar, a charlatan – or, in the case of many establishment climate scientists, most likely all three.

Here is why they’re all talking rubbish and you needn’t worry about that “Hottest Year Evah” one bit.

The claim is meaningless anyway

Here’s how Dr. Richard Lindzen, an emeritus Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences at MIT, puts it:

“I urge you when looking at a graph, check the scales! The uncertainty here is tenths of a degree.”

“When someone points to this and says this is the warmest temperature on record. What are they talking about? It’s just nonsense. This is a very tiny change period. And they are arguing over hundredths of a degree when it is uncertain in tenths of a degree.”

“And the proof that the uncertainty is tenths of a degree are the adjustments that are being made. If you can adjust temperatures to 2/10ths of a degree, it means it wasn’t certain to 2/10ths of a degree.”

Much more with graphs and other links can be seen HERE

_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Sat Jan 23, 2016 11:28 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
Looks like even a German Scientist is also sounding the alarm about data manipulation by climate researchers!

German scientist: Researchers fiddling with temperature data
December 12, 2015
by CFACT Ed

Quote:
A German scientist is raising serious questions as to whether government data-keepers have been tampering with scientific data to conjure up warming trends where none exist.

“It is important to understand whether CO2 truly causes climate change,” said Professor Dr. Friedrich-Karl Ewert, “We rely entirely on simulation models. Reality looks very different from simulations.”

Dr. Ewert is professor emeritus of geophysics at the University of Paderborn. He spoke at a scientific conference put on by EIKE, the European Institute for Climate and Energy in Essen, Germany that was co-sponsored by CFACT and the Heartland Institute.

Ewert conducted exhaustive research comparing climate computer models to real world temperature. His findings confirm what others have concluded, that the models run far hotter than measured observations. He points out that the UN IPCC likes to carefully select the dates and data it presents, but that, “if we look at temperature changes over a larger period, any temperature trend disappears.”

In the course of his research, Ewert found something shocking.

“In 2012, we realized that the data offered by NASA was not the same as that offered in 2010. The data had been altered. If in 2010 someone had, for instance, looked up the data for Palma de Mallorca, they would have seen a cooling of .0076 degrees. But in 2012 it suddenly showed a temperature increase of .0074 degrees. This is not a one-off.”

“Until then measurements were sacrosanct. Can you call it fraud or falsification? I’m not a lawyer, but I can say it has been changed retroactively. If I show you the data a negative judgment is justified. In 2012 there was twice as much warming in the sample we examined compared with just two years prior.”

Warming campaigners have been confounded by a lack of any global warming since last century. This contradicts large numbers of computer model projections that warming should have occurred. They’ve attempted to gloss over this inconvenient fact by trumping up records. They routinely claim some period of time as the “hottest ever,” in the expectation that the casual observer will never realize that their records are set by meaningless hundredths of a degree. These tiny measurements run far below the margin of error. Even the word “hottest” is unjustified. Global temperature has been running around one half degree above baseline with just a few years above. Nothing hot about that.

It is fundamental to the scientific method that scientists must adapt their conclusions to fit their data. They must never alter their data to serve a favored conclusion.

In just a few hours we expect negotiators at COP 21, the UN climate conference in Paris to announce a final climate agreement that will shift global power, harm economies, redistribute fortunes and cost trillions of dollars. It is ever increasingly apparent that that deal rests on false promises and false premises.

Dr. Ewert presents a powerful case. If we cannot trust the keepers of the scientific data taxpayers paid for, what is there about global warming we can trust?

Image

See this article HERE


_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Sat Jan 23, 2016 5:47 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
Do you REALLY want to trust the care of world wide temperature data, which is the most critical scientific information on climate, to those who's livelihood is provided through political appointee Government positions or grants? And don't tell me that they approach this with an "unbiased" view! They WILL tow the line of the "warming" AGENDA or the money WILL stop!

Image

_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 6:20 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
Ten Years Ago Today Al Gore Said The World Would End Because of Climate Change
Andre Walker | Jan 27, 2016

Read about this JOKE and the joker HERE

Image

Quote:
Watch out world, and we are sorry if you had not realised before reading this, the world is ending today. That’s because today is the day that climate change entrepreneur, and former US Vice President, Al Gore warned us would be the beginning of a global emergency.

Mr Gore told his supporters a decade ago that the world had until 27th January 2016 to end its addiction to fossil fuels or the it would come to an end. Gore did not specify what householders might expect to happen today, but he was clear that this would be the end.

The claim was part of the marketing campaign for his hit documentary “An Inconvenient Truth", which he maintains was not a cheap attempt to make money off the green frenzy. Although, by sheer coincidence, it did make him a pile of cash.

Shortly before the film’s release Gore warned today would see "a true planetary emergency." Once again, he offered few details of the problems you might face on your weekly visit to Walmart.

He went on to tell the press: "If you accept the truth of that, then nothing else really matters that much… We have to organize quickly to come up with a coherent and really strong response, and that's what I'm devoting myself to."

Townhall would always warn readers in advance of any impending emergency but on this occasion we feel confident you need not stock up on canned beans. Gore has been making the same claim every week for the past ten years… Which has led us to believe his grim predictions might well be unfounded.

We think you should have a drive in your SUV today to celebrate how great life in America really is. Then crack open a cold beer to offend the health lobby too!

_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 7:47 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
Everything you ever needed to know about "climate change"!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdxaxJN ... e=youtu.be

_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 5:05 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
CLIMATE 'SCIENCE' IS NOT REAL SCIENCE - IT'S POLITICAL ACTIVISM
Posted 30 January 2016

http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?o ... 5&Itemid=1

"If not science, what is 'climate science'? It is a political ideology-movement that has effectively sold itself as being a scientific endeavour. Don't be fooled into thinking it is anything other than political activism. Again, consider that climate 'scientists' are not seeking the best answer to a question - they are seeking no questions to their answer." A withering letter in Farmers Weekly by Dr Robert MacBride, a New Zealand soil scientist.

Download the pdf document here

Quote:
It's Not Science – It’s Political Activism So called “climate science” is not science.

Science is a process typically involving controlled experiments to isolate a single variable in an effort to get the best answer to a specific question.

This is not as straightforward as it sounds – for example, I was recently co-author of a paper that criticised the data and conclusions drawn from a series of pasture fertility experiments.

Our critique was in turn criticised in a follow-up paper. This critique of the critique will no doubt receive further criticism, and so it goes in all fields of science–science is a rigorous and relentless refinement of knowledge in an effort to determine the best answer to a question.

Contrast this with “climate science” that starts with a conclusion and only seeks evidence that supports that conclusion. The “Climategate” email scandal in 2009 revealed that top climate “scientists” around the world were collaborating to manipulate data, subvert the peer review
process and control what information was published.

Since then nothing has changed. Attacks on anyone who questions aspects of the alleged “settled science” of human-caused global warming have intensified. This is perhaps the most compelling evidence that “climate science” is something other than science–increasingly we are seeing calls to make criticism a criminal offence.
Think about the implications of making it a crime to question.

If not science, what is “climate science”? It is a political ideology-movement that has effectively sold itself as being a scientific endeavour. Don’t be fooled into thinking it is anything other than political activism!

Again, consider that climate “scientists” are not seeking the best answer to a question–they are seeking no questions to their answer.

Dr Robert McBride graduated with a PhD in soil science in the US and now works for agKnowledge in the South Island.

_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2016 8:51 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
Poll: 91% Of Americans Aren’t Worried About Global Warming
by Michael Bastach
11:10 AM 02/01/2016

From this article

Quote:
A YouGov poll of 18,000 people in 17 countries found only 9.2 percent of Americans rank global warming as their biggest concern. Only Saudi Arabians were less concerned about global warming at 5.7 percent. The biggest concern for Americans was global terrorism — 28 percent of Americans polled listed this as their top issue.

Despite a big PR push by President Barack Obama to tout his administration’s global warming agenda, most Americans have been unconvinced it’s the country’s most pressing issue. A Fox News poll from November found only 3 percent of Americans list global warming as their top concern.

_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2016 11:54 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
El Nino collapse appears to be underway
Anthony Watts / 21 hours ago February 10, 2016

Image
Change in sea surface temperature anomalies in the last month; courtesy NOAA

Quote:
This naturally occurring oceanic cycle that produces warmer-than-normal sea surface temperatures (SSTs) in the equatorial region of the Pacific Ocean began in earnest early in 2015 and strengthened throughout the year to comparable intensity levels of the strong El Nino episodes of 1982-1983 and 1997-1998 although the warmest region relative-to-normal set up in somewhat different locations. El Nino has had widespread consequences around the world and will continue to do so in the near future. By later this year, colder-than-normal sea surface temperatures are quite likely to appear in the tropical Pacific Ocean as predicted by multiple computer forecast models and this flip to La Nina will also have extensive consequences around the world.
Rapidly changing SST anomalies

The latest sea surface temperature anomalies show noticeable changes from just one month ago across the tropical Pacific Ocean (above). Specifically, while the sea surface temperatures in that region are still above-normal, they are noticeably less so than just four weeks ago. This trend should continue over the next few months as sea surface temperatures drop off rapidly in the equatorial region of the Pacific Ocean.

Another link to same story HERE

Image

The collapse of El Nino in the tropical Pacific Ocean has begun and it will be rather dramatic. The current strong El Nino event reached its peak intensity level in December 2015 and all indications suggest it will completely flip to La Nina conditions by later this year. One of the important consequences of the current strong El Nino event in the equatorial Pacific Ocean was a spike in global temperatures. However, if recent history is any guide, expect global temperatures to drop sharply after La Nina conditions become well-established in the tropical Pacific Ocean – likely during 2017 and perhaps beyond. –Paul Dorian, Vencore Weather, 5 February 2016

_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 11:29 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
2016: Already Almost 50 New Peer-Reviewed Papers Refuting Alarmist CO2 Science …Show Natural Cycles Indisputable!
By P Gosselin on 23. February 2016

From THIS article:

Quote:
What follows below is a list of 48 scientific papers published this year alone showing that CO2 climate science is not what the press and activist scientists like to have us believe it is.

Recently I posted here on about 250 papers published in 2015. That post was shared or liked a few thousand times.

Well, the number of skeptic papers seems to be accelerating as already this year there have been almost 50, and it’s only February!

The following lists 48 scientific papers listed show that CO2 climate science is exaggerated and that natural factors are indeed dominant climate forces that will not be tamed by man emitting a trace gas.

These newest findings of course are no surprise to skeptics.

The list below includes the abstracts, where the special points have been emphasized. Two of the papers have been discussed already at NTZ here and here. The papers have been sorted according to categories.

Again do feel free to bring this newest list to the attention of your lawmakers, and ask them if there might be much better things to do with the billions of dollars spent on junk climate measures. It’s becoming crystal clear as to who the real deniers really are.

See the rest of this article HERE

_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:25 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
New paper shows there was a global warming hiatus this century
by Thomas Richard
February 24, 2016

See this article HERE

Quote:

Climate researchers have published a new paper this week in the journal Nature Climate Change that acknowledges there has been a global warming slowdown from 2000-2014. Their research shows a hiatus did indeed occur and continued into the 21st century, contradicting another study last June that said the hiatus was just an artifact that "vanishes when biases in temperature data are corrected." This is not the first time activists have tried to hide the hiatus by using dodgy methods.

This new paper shows a global warming slowdown or hiatus, the authors write, which has been "characterized by a reduced rate of global surface warming, has been overstated, lacks sound scientific basis, or is unsupported by observations." They add, "The evidence presented [in this paper] contradicts these claims." Ouch.

In this new paper, the authors show there is a "mismatch between what the climate models are producing and what the observations are showing," says lead author John Fyfe, a climate modeller at the Canadian Center for Climate Modelling and Analysis in Victoria, British Columbia. "We can't ignore it." Fyfe prefers the term slowdown over hiatus and adds the usual caveats lest he be taken away from the global warming cash cow: it in no way undermines "global warming theory."

Gavin Schmidt, a climate activist and a director at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said it's a "tired discussion and nothing more than academic bickering." He adds, "A little bit of turf-protecting and self-promotion I think is the most parsimonious explanation. Not that there's anything wrong with that."

Snarking aside, this new paper says that natural variability (like volcanic eruptions, solar radiance, ocean heat uptake, etc...) are important elements in evaluating our climate. As such, they should be factored in when trying to interpret the temperature record and the millions of variables that affect our climate.

Karl Thomas, the lead author of the so-called "pause busting" study says it's "important to investigate how short-term effects might impact decadal trends, but says that these short term trends do not necessarily elucidate the long-term effects of rising greenhouse-gas concentrations in the atmosphere."

Fyfe and his colleagues argue that "Karl's approach was biased" because of a flat temperature pause between the 1950s and 1970s. Fryfe says that his research took into account events that affect decadal temperature trends such as volcanic eruptions, which dampen solar radiation. As an example, climate models underestimate volcanic eruptions and how they impact how much solar radiation hits the planet, specifically at the start of the 21st century.

Susan Solomon, a climatologist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, says that Fyfe’s research helps put "twenty-first-century trends into perspective, and clearly indicates that the rate of warming slowed down at a time when greenhouse-gas emissions were rising dramatically." Solomon says, "It’s important to explain that. As scientists, we are curious about every bump and wiggle in that curve."

The UN's climate body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has already noted that there was a hiatus in global temperatures this century in its last assessment report. As we've noted on numerous occasions, the most accurate method for measuring temperatures is the satellite dataset. It shows no warming for 18 years 8 months with 2015 being an unusually warm year due to a naturally occurring El Niño event.

Fyfe's paper concludes by saying their "results support previous findings of a reduced rate of surface warming over the 2001-2014 period — a period" when emissions like carbon dioxide increased at a steady rate of about two parts per million each year. They point out that the climate models did not predict the warming hiatus that occurred during the first 14 years of the 21st century, even while so-called greenhouse gases have risen. This "mismatch" is a problem that deserves more scientific scrutiny, they add.

_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2016 11:54 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
Now Even Michael Mann Admits The ‘Pause’ In Global Warming Is Real; Throws Allies To Wolves O:)
by James Delingpole28 Feb 2016

See this article HERE

Quote:
The “Pause” in global warming is real – not an urban myth concocted by evil ‘deniers’ – a study has found, signalling the development of a major schism within the climate alarmist camp.

Quote:
“It has been claimed that the early-2000s global warming slowdown or hiatus, characterized by a reduced rate of global surface warming, has been overstated, lacks sound scientific basis, or is unsupported by observations. The evidence presented here contradicts these claims,” the paper in Nature Climate Change says.


Though the paper’s findings are not controversial – few serious scientists dispute the evidence of the temperature datasets showing that there has been little if any global warming for nearly 19 years – they represent a tremendous blow to the climate alarmist “consensus”, which has long sought to deny the “Pause’s” existence.

First, the study was published in Nature Climate Change a fervently alarmist journal which rarely if ever runs papers that cast doubt on the man-made-global-warming scare narrative.

Secondly, it directly contradicts a widely-reported study produced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) last year which attempted to deny the existence of the “Pause” (also known as the “hiatus”). This NOAA study was widely mocked, quickly debunked and is now the subject of a Congressional investigation by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX)

What’s novel about this new study in Nature Climate Change, though, is that it’s not skeptics and Republicans doing the mocking and the debunking: it’s the kind of people who in the past were very much in the alarmist camp, including – bizarrely – none other than Michael “Hockey Stick” Mann, who co-authored the paper.

What we have here, in other words, is signs of a major rift within the climate alarmist camp with different factions adopting different tactics to cope with the failure of their collapsing narrative.

On one side are people like Thomas Karl and Thomas Petersen, the hapless NOAA scientists given the unenviable task of producing that risible paper last year which did its best to deny that the Pause was a thing.

On the other are what might be called the “rats deserting the sinking ship” faction who have produced this new paper for Nature Climate Change, in which finally they concede what skeptics have been saying for many years: that there has been no “global warming” since 1998.

This divergence in the alarmist camp is now going to create a dilemma for all those liberal media outlets – from the BBC to the Guardian to the LA Times – which reported on NOAA’s “death of the pause” study as if it were a reliable and credible thing.

Are they now going to report on the counter-narrative? Or are they going to ignore it and hope no one notices?

The man who would like more than anyone to know the answer to this question is David Whitehouse, Science Editor of the Global Warming Policy Foundation and a former science editor at the BBC (till the point when his skepticism became too much for his employer).

That’s because in 2007, he was one of the first scientists to draw attention to the mysterious slowdown in global warming.

As he recalls in the Spectator:

Quote:
In 2007 I pointed out that it was curious that in recent years the global annual average temperature had not increased at a time when greenhouse gasses were increasing rapidly and when the media was full of claims that the earth’s temperature was getting higher and higher. I proposed no explanation but said that it was a curious observation that would probably change in the near future. I was lambasted for being a denier and liar. Yet in the following years the global temperature did not increase.

Some vocal scientists spent more time saying it was wrong than actually looking at the data. While many in the media portrayed the phenomenon as a desperate weapon used by sceptics to undermine climate science, real scientists took notice and began to study the warming pause. It was not long before it was being discussed at conferences and in scientific journals. Something was clearly different about the nature of global temperature change since 1997 than it had been in the previous two decades. It was not only slower, but not increasing at all for many years. Indeed it was said in the prestigious scientific journal Nature that the “pause” or “hiatus” is the biggest problem in climate science.


Whitehouse is too polite to name the alarmist shills and activist attack dogs who have fought so hard over the years to discredit anyone who has dared suggest the existence of a Pause. So I will. But in a separate article. It seems to me that these people are so disgusting, corrupt, nauseating and malign that they shouldn’t simply be tacked on to the end of a news story. They should be made to perform the internet equivalent of Cersei’s Walk of Shame; or, at the very least, to be put in the stocks and pelted with excrement.

In the meantime let us all draw comfort from the fact that a) the alarmists are finally being forced to concede that their skeptic adversaries are right and b) that they are starting to turn on one another. This is the beginning of the end for the alarmist “consensus”. And not before time.

_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 9:29 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
Oh The Humanity: Yale Closes Its Climate & Energy Institute
by James Delingpole3 Mar 2016

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... 3/3210996/

Quote:
Yale University is to close its Climate & Energy Institute.

With sweet serendipity, the heartbreaking announcement on the university’s website coincides with the news that the institute’s founding head Rajendra Pachauri has been formally charged with sexual harrassment.

How different things were in 2009 when the Institute was launched, with great pride and fanfare, by Yale University president Richard C Levin.

YCEI will provide seed grants, support postgraduate study, sponsor conferences and workshops, and foster interdisciplinary research spanning from basic atmospheric science to public policy. Nearly 100 Yale scientists, engineers, physicians, social scientists and policy experts have joined together to launch the enterprise.

In those days, man-made global warming was still very much the fashionable cause of the moment and Pachauri – a former railway engineer, novelist, vegetarian and tantric sex guru – was at the peak of his influence as chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Yale is being rather coy about the reasons for the closure which, unsurprisingly, has caused much consternation among beneficiaries of the Climate & Energy Institute’s largesse.

“It can’t be a budget thing. It can’t be. I don’t want to say that Yale doesn’t support [the YCEI], but … I think it’s the administration’s lack of interest,” said YCEI New Haven Energy Scholar Intern Matthew Goldklang ’16. “I had no idea we were going to be completely cut. It’s really sad.”

He added that he has received emails from YCEI alumni who were furious with the announcement, and he said there are many undergraduates who are also upset.

The YCEI had an extensive budget under Levin’s administration, Goldklang said. Although Goldklang did not provide specific figures, he said the YCEI had enough money to pay its student fellows, fund research and create new classes in the Energy Studies Program.

The institute was one of the few groups on campus that regularly engaged with Yale administrators to solve issues of climate change, Goldklang said.

But one possibility is that no one in their right mind gives a damn about “climate change” in a world where there has been no “global warming” for nearly 19 years – and can certainly think of better ways to spend their money than funding research into a non-existent problem.

The announcement comes only a month after Australia’s leading scientific bureau – the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) – decided to abandon its research into “climate change” with the loss of more than 300 jobs.

CSIRO’s head Larry Marshall said the backlash – which included protests from the IPCC and the World Meteorological Organisation – made him realise how early climate scientists must have felt in the 1970s fighting the oil lobby.

“I guess I had the realisation that the climate lobby is perhaps more powerful than the energy lobby was back in the ’70s – and the politics of climate I think there’s a lot of emotion in this debate.”

“In fact it almost sounds more like religion than science to me. I’ve been told by some extreme elements that they’ve put me at the top of the climate deniers list and what perplexes me is how saying that we’re going to shift more resources to mitigation – i.e. doing something to address climate change versus just measuring and modelling it – I don’t see how that makes me a climate denier.”

Make no mistake, these are dark and terrible times for the climate change industry. If you have a son or a daughter studying at university in a field like ecology, environmental studies or similar, do be sure to encourage them to polish up their burger-flipping or lap-dancing skills.

_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Sun Mar 13, 2016 2:36 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
Banning fossil fuel benefits

Does their abysmal grasp of energy and economics make Hillary and Bernie unfit to govern?
By Paul Driessen

http://iceagenow.info/banning-fossil-fuel-benefits/

Quote:
“Natural gas is a good, cheap alternative to fossil fuels,” former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi famously intoned. (Psssst. Ms. Nancy, natural gas is a fossil fuel.)

“If I thought there was any evidence that drilling could save people money, I would consider it. But it won’t,” President Obama said in 2008. “We can’t drill our way out of the problem” of high energy prices and disappearing supplies, he still insisted two years later. How shocked he must be now.

Horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing – aka, fracking – has unleashed a gusher of oil and natural gas, sent oil prices plunging $100 a barrel since 2008, dropped US oil imports to their lowest level in 45 years, and saved American families tens of billions of dollars annually in lower energy costs.

But if price and “peak oil” rationales fail, there is always “dangerous manmade global warming” to justify carbon-based energy and fracking bans, and renewable energy mandates and subsidies.

Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton contend that climate change is an “existential threat” to people and planet. Senator Sanders says bluntly, “I do not support fracking.” He also wants legislation that would keep America’s abundant oil, gas and coal “in the ground.”

Mrs. Clinton opposes all fossil fuel energy extraction on federal lands. She rejects fracking if “any locality or state is against it,” any methane is released or water contaminated, or companies don’t reveal “exactly what chemicals they are using.” Under her watch, there won’t be “many places in America where fracking will continue.” She will “stop fossil fuels” and ensure 50% renewable energy by 2030.

One senses that these folks inhabit a parallel universe, cling like limpets to anti-hydrocarbon ideologies, or perhaps embody Mark Twain’s admonition that “It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you’re a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”

One also senses that as president the two Democrat candidates will continue Mr. Obama’s imperial practices. If Congress resists their policy initiatives, they will simply issue more Executive Branch diktats, and ignore their impacts on jobs and the economy, the absence of evidence that fracking harms human health or water quality, the reality that renewable energy “alternatives” also cause serious problems – and scientists’ continuing inability to separate human from natural influences on climate and weather events and trends that are essentially the same as during the twentieth century.

Officially, 7.8 million Americans are still unemployed. But add the long-term unemployed, those who looked for a job once in the past year but not in recent weeks, and those who are working involuntarily in low-pay, part-time positions – and the total swells to 16.8 million. Over 46 million are on food stamps.

The federal debt hit $19 trillion in February and is projected to reach $23 trillion by 2020. In FY2015, the US Treasury collected $3.2 trillion in taxes and other revenues, but spent $3.7 trillion. Profligate state and local spending has swollen these deficits by tens of billions more, for the same reason: politicians are in cahoots with unions, crony capitalist rent seekers, and assorted grievance, victim and welfare groups.

Mountains of federal regulations cost businesses and families $1.9 trillion annually – half of our national budget. They drag down investment, job creation and tax revenues. State and local rules add more pain.

To borrow the Greens and Democrats’ favorite term, this is unsustainable.

Oil, gas and coal account for 82% of all US energy and 78% of US electricity generation – reliably and affordably. Producing this abundant energy also generates positive cash-flow: fossil fuel bonuses, rents and royalties from federal lands totaled $126 billion between 2003 and 2013; corporate and personal taxes resulting from the jobs and activities powered by that energy added tens of billions more.

Wind, solar and biofuel programs, by contrast, are black holes for hard-earned taxpayer subsidies – and rarely work unless consumers are required to use that energy, and pay premium prices for doing so.

Even getting to 50% “carbon-free” energy fifteen years from now will require: vastly more subsidies and mandates; turning entire forests into fuel; blanketing croplands and habitats with enormous biofuel plantations, wind farms and solar installations; and killing millions of birds, bats and other wildlife in the process. However, biomass and biofuels are also carbon-based and also release carbon dioxide – and their energy per volume is paltry, their energy efficiency deplorable, compared to hydrocarbons.

A renewable energy future means scenic, wild and agricultural lands become industrial zones and high voltage transmission corridors – feeding urban centers where people will have lower living standards.

Environmentalists used to tell poor countries they could never have the lifestyles of people in developed nations, as it wouldn’t be sustainable. Now they say our living standards are unsustainable and aren’t fair to the world’s poor. Therefore, their lives should be improved a little via wind, solar and biofuel energy, while ours are knocked down a peg via climate and sustainability regulations (except for ruling elites).

Environmentalists and other liberals are also hardwired to be incapable of acknowledging the countless health, welfare and technological blessings that creative free enterprise capitalism has bestowed on humanity – or to recognize the dearth of innovation by repressive socialist regimes.

Liberals like to say Republicans want to control what you do in your bedroom. But Democrats want to control everything you do outside your bedroom – but for the noble, exalted purpose of changing genetically coded human behavior, to Save the Planet for future generations. That means unelected Earth Guardians must control the lives, livelihoods, living standards, liberties and life spans of commoners and peasants, especially in “flyover country.”

Fossil fuel and fracking bans are part of that “fundamental transformation.” They will force us to use less oil and gas, but they also mean we will import more petroleum from Saudi Arabia and Iran, though not from Canada via the Keystone pipeline. Energy prices will again climb into the stratosphere, more jobs will disappear, manufacturing will shrivel, and royalty and tax revenues will evaporate.

The billionaire bounties that Hillary, Bernie and their supporters also need to pay for all the free college, ObamaCare, renewable energy subsidies, income redistribution and other “entitlements” will likewise be devoured quickly, while millions more people end up on welfare and unemployment rolls. The bills will simply be forwarded to our children and grandchildren.

Meanwhile, despite any US bans, other countries will continue using fossil fuels to create jobs and grow their economies. So total atmospheric CO2 and greenhouse gas concentrations will continue to rise.

Of course, “climate deniers” and other members of The Resistance will have to be dealt with. Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse will pave the way on that. In the process, as Obama and Clinton mentor Saul Alinsky put it in his Rules for Radicals, the ruling elites will pick, freeze, personalize and polarize their targets. They will repeat their allegations and maintain their pressure until all resistance crumbles. Facts will be irrelevant. Power and perceptions will rule.

Blue collar, middle class and minority families feel they are fighting for their very survival, against policies and regulations that profoundly impair their jobs, incomes and futures. Indeed, the governing classes are actively harming the very people they claim to care the most about – and actually killing people in the world’s poorest nations, by denying them access to energy and other modern technologies.

That’s why Trump, Cruz, Carson and other “outsider” candidates have resonates. People are fed up.

Perhaps it’s time to borrow a page from Alinsky – Rule Four, to be precise – and make “the enemy,” the ruling elites, live up to their own rules. Watching them scream and squeal would be most entertaining.

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (http://www.CFACT.org) and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power – Black death.

_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2016 7:57 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
Global Temperature Report: Warmest Ever February, driven by El Niño
Anthony Watts
March 2, 2016

Get the full explanation including unaltered temp data sets and graphs HERE

_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2016 12:39 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
The old saying goes, "You just couldn't make this crap up!" applies here!!

NOAA declares current El Niño stronger than 1997-98 event, then says record warm temperatures have little to do with it
Anthony Watts / 21 hours ago March 18, 2016

Read this and other articles HERE

Quote:
From the department of ENSO denial, “the Brady Bunch” and NOAA’s weather.gov comes this ridiculous statement:

Was El Niño solely responsible for the record warm winter for the contiguous United States? No, but for some areas, like the northern U.S., the El Niño likely played a role. We know that other factors including climate patterns in the north Atlantic, Pacific, and tropics also influenced our weather during winter. Longer-term climate change was also a player, similar to Alice, the Brady family’s housekeeper—an ever-present force influencing outcomes to varying degrees.

They say that with a straight face, while at the same time pushing this graph showing about 90% of the CONUS above normal:

Image

It seems blindingly obvious to me (and to Dr. Ryan Maue) that ENSO is the main driver of these warmer and record temperature, but NOAA would never show the public a graph like this that clearly demonstrates global temperature tracks the tropical temperature increase from the 2015-2016 ENSO event very, very, well:

Image

It is instructive to look at what NOAA wrote about the 1997-1998 super El Niño:

The winter of 1997-1998 was marked by a record breaking El Nino event and unusual extremes in parts of the country. Overall, the winter (December 1997- February 1998) was the second warmest and seventh wettest since 1895. Severe weather events included flooding in the southeast, an ice storm in the northeast, flooding in California, and tornadoes in Florida. The winter was dominated by an El Niño-influenced weather pattern, with wetter than normal conditions across much of the southern third of the country and warmer than normal conditions across much of the northern two-thirds of the country.

The first two months of 1998 were the warmest and wettest in the 104-year record of temperatures and precipitation measurements for the contiguous 48 states.


Source: National Climatic Data Center Technical Report No. 98-02 (PDF) NCDC-tr9802-1998-elnino-event

Much more on this HERE

_________________
Big Boyz Toyz!

Image

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 417 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 ... 28  Next

Board index » Racing Forum » Ken0069's Blog


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 
 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron