Page 2

      If your stomach is strong, and you can tolerate the inhurnanity of our forefathers, this extensive document shows a background which seems to be mirrored in our present frenzy to repel the natural forces of nature by extreme measures dislocated from both science, reality and experience.
      Witches are still, in this day and age, being put to death for causing (amongst other things) crop failures.  Not in the west.  Not in the developed countries.  No.  We are going to penalise our disbelievers in other, more subtle ways.  But underlying this is the same madness and the same superstition of the past.
Witchcraft, Weather and Economic
Growth in Renaissance Europe
Emily Oster
“…This chapter ends with a line that leaves no room for doubt about the perceived power of witches: “Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that, just as easily as they raise hailstorms, so can they cause lightning and storms at sea; and so no doubt at all remains on these points.”
“It has long remained a mystery why the witchcraft trials re-emerged in the mid-sixteenth century, and why they did so with such force. The textual evidence shows us why it would be possible in this time to believe that witches controlled the weather. Moreover, the evidence on climate change suggests that important and noticeable weather changes during this period would have severely affected food production. Temperatures began to drop around the beginning of the fourteenth century (after a 400-year “medieval warm period”), and the world was warming again by the early 1800s. The coldest segments of this “little ice age” period were in the 1590s and between 1680 and 1730; Fagan, 2000. The temperature over the period was about two degrees Fahrenheit lower than it had been in previous centuries…”
Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 18, Number 1—Winter 2004—Pages 215–228
“Breaking News: News has reached us that Al Gore will receive an honorary doctorate on April 15, from Lausanne University, Switzerland. The Swiss newspaper Weltwoche wrote an angry protest, reminding its readers that the same university had awarded an honorary doctorate to Benito Mussolini in 1937. It writes that the success of both comes from the same type of political agitation and that Gore, with his fanatical worldwide campaign, has pushed half of mankind into climate hysteria.”
By Gerrit van der Lingen
Absence Of Clouds Caused Pre-human Supergreenhouse Periods

ScienceDaily, Apr. 11, 2008 — In a world without human-produced pollution, biological productivity controls cloud formation and may be the lever that caused supergreenhouse episodes during the Cetaceous and Eocene, according to Penn State paleoclimatologists.

By the way do you know what a nursery will do to increase plant growth in their green houses? They pump it full of carbon dioxide, three times the levels that exist in the atmosphere.
Love that Dirty Water
By Art Horn, Meteorologist, The Art of Weather

Climate change or climate con?

A PDF document to think on.
“There is now unequivocal evidence that the temperature of the planet is dropping like a stone.”
An Emerging Truth
Melanie Phillips
The Spectator, 10 April, 2008
Climate change confirmed but global warming is cancelled
Owen McShane
“So by late last year we not only knew IPCC forecasts of atmospheric global warming were wrong; we were beginning to understand why they are wrong.”
The National Business Review
  Two clips from an important stand taken by a man of principle:
RESPECTED academic Don Aitkin has seen the ugly side of the climate change debate after being warned he faced demonisation if he challenged the accepted wisdom that global warming poses a danger to humanity.
The story of the human impact on climate change, which Professor Aitkin calls Anthropogenic Global Warming, “doesn’t seem to stack up as the best science”, according to his own research.
Academic cool on warming
By Brad Norington
The Australian. April 09, 2008,25197,23509775-2702,00.html
The Chill Is On
The United Nations World Meteorological Organization is reporting that global temperatures have not risen since 1998. That would be the same temperatures that models from the U.N.’s Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change said would be scorching the earth into an unlivable wasteland — except for those coastal areas flooded by seas gorged with water from melting ice sheets.
Have a look at this graph
then go to the full story below:
Did the IPCC recent AR4 prediction/projections correctly estimate the magnitude of warming? Did the IPCC correctly communicate the uncertainty in their estimate of the central tendency based on their hierarchy of models?
I think the answer to both question is no.
The Blackboard, April 4, 2008
There’s no Inuit word for robin…
You think?
Try: “Accompanying the descriptions of each location are the phonetic words for “robin” in several other Eskimo tongues, including “Kre-kuak’tu-yok” (Mackenzie Eskimo) and “Shab’wak” (Alaskan Eskimo).”
Though it is often assumed that Arctic temperatures are currently at record levels, and that manmade “global warming” is to blame, the truth is that it was warmer in the Arctic in the 1940s than today.
Scare Watch, April 1, 2008
Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the UN’s climate panel, says it had better find out where it got its sums wrong.
Lord Lawson, a former UK Treasury Secretary, says the panel should be scrapped.
Global warming profiteers are wrong
Christopher Monckton
The Tribune, April 3, 2008
  Extracts from a compelling article:
“The new religion of global warming, however convenient it may be to the politicians, is not as harmless as it may appear. Indeed, the more one examines it, the more it resembles a Da Vinci Code of environmentalism. It is a great story, and a phenomenal bestseller. It contains a grain of truth – and a mountain of nonsense”. Lord Nigel Lawson, former UK Chancellor the Exchequer.
      So far as food production is concerned, it is not clear why a warmer climate would be a problem at all. Even the IPCC concedes that for a warming of anything up to 3 per cent, “globally, the potential for food production is projected to increase”.
      As to health, in its most recent report, the IPCC found only one outcome which they ranked as “virtually certain” to happen – and that was “reduced human mortality from decreased cold exposure”.
      But the greatest curse of the developing world is mass poverty, and the malnutrition, disease and unnecessary death that poverty brings. To impede their escape from poverty by denying them the benefits of cheap carbon-based energy would damage them far more than global warming ever could.
      We appear to have entered a new age of unreason, which threatens to be as economically harmful as it is profoundly disquieting. It is from this, above all, that we really do need to save the planet.
     There is some interesting stuff to be found under the ice:
“This recent warming has melted ice on some high passes in the Swiss Alps, uncovering artefacts from the Medieval Warm Period and the prior Roman Warm Period.”
      And David Archibald, in the same PDF, also shows: “…that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is not even a little bit bad. It is wholly beneficial. The more carbon dioxide we can put into the atmosphere, the better the planet will be – for humans, and all other living things.”
Solar Cycle 24: Implications for the United States (and. I note,  the rest of us, come to that.)
      An edit to add this sobering line from the same document:
“Our generation has known a warm, giving Sun,
but the next generation will suffer a Sun that is less giving,
and the Earth will be less fruitful.”
“…the earth’s thermometers have dropped for the first time in 30 years. Three global monitoring sites measured a decline of 0.5 to 0.7 degree C. Now we learn that the ocean warming stopped even earlier, 4-5 years ago.
      We should have been expecting this, because the sunspot index turned down nine years ago. There’s a 79 percent correlation between the sunspots and the earth’s sea-surface temperatures�with roughly a ten-year lag.  Is ten years the time required for the oceans to respond to changes on the sun?”
The oceans have stopped warming!
By Dennis T. Avery
web posted March 31, 2008
   Interesting clip from one of the authors of “The Chilling Stars”
“As for the remark about possible global cooling — in an updated 2008 edition of our plain-language book The Chilling Stars (newly out with Totem in the USA, and Icon in the UK and Canada) Svensmark and I comment that we’ve been advising our friends to enjoy the global warming while it lasts.” (Nigel Calder)
Source: Watts Up With That, 31 March, 2008
“We have never begun to enter the modern era.
“We have never really left the old anthropological matrix behind.” [Bruno Latour (1991/1993)]
1589, however, was particularly of note because of the rather dramatic attempts to bring the bride of King James VI, Anne of Denmark, to Scotland. These were thwarted over and over again by absolutely treacherous weather. You can just see the headlines in Ye Guardian (Ye Scots Edition, September 3, 1589): “Anne’s Royal Tryst Thwarted By Global Cooling”.
Global Warming,  27 March, 2006
“Another LIA (Little Ice Age) type climate seems to be bearing down on us. And we’re worried about C02, which not only is NOT the enemy, but which we have benefited greatly from, and will benefit even more from predicted future rises. We’ll need all the growing power we can get!”
Extract from a post by  Bruce Cobb
New sunspots, but still solar cycle 23 spots
Watts Up With That, 27 March, 2008
“There is no consensus. But the controversies about the science are puny compared with those about the economics. On this we are being asked to rely on the Stern review, described by William Nordhaus, of Yale University, perhaps the world’s leading environmental economist, as ‘completely absurd’.”
At last some brave UK politicians…
27 March, 2008
“But as is often the case, the real ambition differs from the stated goal. The environmental movement, which has largely become a loose league of global warming hysteria peddlers, is almost rabidly anti-business and tends to be offended by corporate profits.”
The more active the sun – the shorter the interval: the solar cycle runs more intense and the higher the global temperatures.
Mar 24, 2008
This Long Cycle Should Portend a Cooling
By Joseph D’Aleo, CCM      
      Leading on to:

The Armagh plot goes back to cycle 4, Friis Christensen around cycle 10. You can see the long cycles around the Dalton Minimum in the early 1800s and again in the late 1800s to early 1900s. …. Landscheidt suggested a lag in temperatures to changes in solar input (I believe I recall 8 years). Wigley suggests a 5 year lag to irradiance. This would imply the cooling that appears to have started in 1998/99 or 2001/02 depending in data set used is real and will continue/accelerate.
Wish I’d thought of using Eeyore.  Perfect fit:
Meanwhile, however, snow is falling, and Eeyore, the Old Grey Donkey, can’t even find the thistles to eat. Gloom indeed.
Global Warming, Sunday March 23, 2008
With catastrophe off the agenda, for most people the fog of millennial gloom will lift, at least until attention turns to the prospect of the next ice age. Among the better educated, the sceptical cast of mind that is the basis of empiricism will once again be back in fashion. The delusion that by recycling and catching public transport we can help save the planet will quickly come to be seen for the childish nonsense it was all along.
Climate facts to warm to
Christopher Pearson | March 22, 2008
The Australian,25197,23411799-7583,00.html
     It is a sad day indeed that these remarks by Al Fin can be seriously made and must be seriously considered.  It says little for our overall maturity. Much about primitive instincts remaining in this year of 2008 that one would have hoped could have been applied to a much earlier age and thence dismissed as something we have passed on from.  It is to our shame that we have not.
It seems to me that trillions of dollars and the future of Earth’s economy rest upon what the next US President decides to think and do about “climate change.” At this time, the science is largely–but not completely–irrelevant. George Bush listens to Lindzen and a few other scientists, and Bush is the only thing currently standing between total holy-warmer-mania and the taxpayers of the developed world. If the next POTUS decides to go with the flow and join the climate orthodoxy, the science becomes completely irrelevant.
Al Fin in Watts Up With That?
21 March, 2008
To give yourself some perspective it is worth reading:
Environmental Media Service
Overview – Motivation
Noting as you do these facts:
Registrant Organization:Environmental Media Services
National Center for Policy Analysis
Daily Policy Digest  March 20, 2008
      Two small extracts:
…However, polar bears are currently abundant in all populations, and are not threatened with extinction by sea ice reductions, says Dr. Mitchell Taylor, a biologist recently retired from the Nunavut Territorial government in Canada.
According to a recent paper from the U.S. Geological Survey, the total reduction in optimal polar bear ice habitat will be only 30 percent in 100 years.  Polar bears have always sustained viable populations in areas where they seek onshore retreats during the open water season, says Taylor.
Ups And Downs Of Sea-Levels
‘The ocean floor has got on average older and gone down and so the sea level has also fallen,’ said Bernhard Steinberger at the Geological Survey of Norway … The trend will continue,’ he told Reuters.”
“Over time, Muller told Science in a podcast interview there would be fewer mid-ocean ridges and a shift to more deep plains in the oceans as continents shifted. The Atlantic would widen and the Pacific shrink.”
Global warming Politics
Friday, March 7, 2008
(Report of the Danish Meteorological Institute)
“The Danish Meteorological Institute has issued its report on the State of the Ice in the Artic Seas, 1930. In European Arctic waters there was extraordinarily little ice. In the Barents Sea and around Spitsbergen open water was more extensive than in any other year during this century.” 
And much, much more.
Another newspaper, another article from that time (1922-1923)
Explorers and Fishermen Find Climate Moderating About Spitzbergen. FIRST NOTED ABOUT 1918 Old Glaciers Have Disappeared — Changes in Flora and Fauna.

February 25, 1923, Sunday

(Credit: Michael Ronayne on Watts Up With That?)
Hey, Nobel Prize Winners, Answer Me This
by Roy W. Spencer
University of Alabama in Huntsville
15 March, 2008
“I fear that the sloppy science that too many climate researchers have lapsed into could, in the end, hurt our scientific discipline beyond repair. The very high level of certainty (90%) claimed by the IPCC for their manmade explanation for warming can not be justified based upon the scientific evidence, and is little more than an expression of their faith that they understand the causes of climate variability – which they clearly don’t.”
Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt.
Nov. 2, 1922 edition of The Washington Post:
(By the Associated Press)
Full text here:
Watts Up With That?

“The unfortunate truth is that to many activists, those things are more important than science.”
One Cooler Head
IBD Editorials
By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, March 12, 2008
“Future dangers will not come from the same source. The ideology will be different. Its essence will, nevertheless, be identical — the attractive, pathetic, at first sight noble idea that transcends the individual in the name of the common good, and the enormous self-confidence on the side of its proponents about their right to sacrifice the man and his freedom in order to make this idea reality.”
What I had in mind was, of course, environmentalism and its currently strongest version, climate alarmism.
Verbatim: Vaclav Klaus On Climate Alarmism
By VACLAV KLAUS | Posted Wednesday, March 12, 2008
IBD Editorials
A note from Richard Lindzen…
…and a very interesting graph.
“Look at the attached.  There has been no warming since 1997 and no statistically significant warming since 1995.  Why bother with the arguments about an El Nino anomaly in 1998?”
 (And more, with the “comments” to be watched as they appear over the next days.)
Watts Up With That?
11 March, 2008
Why Bringing Sanity Back on Climate Change Won’t Be Easy
By Joseph D’Aleo, CCM
Mar 10, 2008
“We are seeing increasing stories the last year in the news about cold and snow and global data bases based on satellite and station and ocean data suggest temperatures have leveled off over the last decade. These facts even have the IPCC head Dr. Rajendra Pachauri questioning whether natural forces are at least temporarily offsetting greenhouse forcing. The media and most alarmists have largely ignored these facts or attributed them to a temporary decrease in sunspot numbers or La Ninas, factors they scoffed at before or in the case of La Nina would admit only to regional importance…”
   On going cold turkey on CO2:
“It is foolish to think that our efforts, even if wrong, will be benign.
They could well be devastating.”
When they speak in thousands they have crossed the line into science fiction.
“This is tremendous,” Schmittner said. “I was struck by the fact that the warming continues much longer even after emissions have declined. . . . Our actions right now will have consequences for many, many generations. Not just for a hundred years, but thousands of years.”
Carbon Output Must Near Zero To Avert Danger, New Studies Say
By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, March 10, 2008;
Freedom, not climate, is at risk
By Vaclav Klaus
Published: June 13 2007
      Nine months on and his words gain further strength as much of the developed world goes into a tailspin of woe is us for we are sinners (in spades), and the less developed world seizes the opportunities for extortion (the new cargo cult with menace).
      Two examples from the linked article:
As someone who lived under communism for most of his life, I feel obliged to say that I see the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity now in ambitious environmentalism, not in communism. This ideology wants to replace the free and spontaneous evolution of mankind by a sort of central (now global) planning.
I agree with Professor Richard Lindzen from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who said: “future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21st century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a roll-back of the industrial age”. 
International Climate Science Coalition
“The International Climate Science Coalition is an association of concerned individuals who wish to ensure that the public is given complete, accurate and unbiased information about the science of climate change.
It aims to promote better public understanding of the causes and consequences of climate change and to encourage open discussion about appropriate responses.”
Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change
“Global warming” is not a global crisis
Affirming that global climate has always changed and always will, independent of the actions of humans, and that carbon dioxide (CO2) is not a pollutant but rather a necessity for all life;
Now, therefore, we recommend —
That world leaders reject the views expressed by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as well as popular, but misguided works such as “An Inconvenient Truth.”
That all taxes, regulations, and other interventions intended to reduce emissions of CO2 be abandoned forthwith.
     Meanwhile, yesterday…
A Washington, D.C. resident John Lockwood was conducting research at the Library of Congress and came across an intriguing headline in the Nov. 2, 1922 edition of The Washington Post: Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt.
The article mentions “great masses of ice have now been replaced by moraines of earth and stones,” and “at many points well-known glaciers have entirely disappeared.”
      And much, much more to make a man-made global warming enthusiast’s heart sink.

Global warming is hoax that has become dogma
Friday, January 18, 2008
By Burton Anderson
Smoking Out The Warm-Mongers
By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, March 05, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Climate Change: The founder of the Weather Channel wants to sue those who sell carbon offsets as scam artists who participate in the “the fraud that is global warming.” Indeed, on global warming the jury is still out.
    A “Google” search today for “2008 International Conference on Global Climate Change” listed 24 stories running, the majority in the USA.
      Some managed to bring in the Clinton-Obama story as well.
      That is just a single search the day after the conference closed.
      One had this sobering quote within it:
Joseph Bast, president of the sponsor, The Heartland Institute, said at the International Conference on Climate Change, Global Warming: Truth or Swindle:
“It is my hope, and the reason The Heartland Institute organized this conference, that public policies that impose enormous costs on millions of people, in the U.S. and also around the world, will not be passed into law before the fake ‘consensus’ on global warming collapses.
“Once passed, taxes and regulations are often hard to repeal.
“Once lost, freedoms are often very difficult to retrieve.”
Courts Confront Climate Change
By S. Fred Singer, 3/4/2008 2:22:06 PM
A forthcoming report by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) … may provide needed balance.
(NIPCC—which includes many IPCC authors and expert reviewers—was created to provide a second opinion on the IPCC’s official findings…)
Among the findings, expected to be published early this spring: 
*Human activities—such as transportation and industrial production—contribute little to global warming.
*The leading cause of observed climate warming appears to be variability of solar emissions and solar magnetic fields.
2008 International Conference on Climate Change
In his concluding remarks, Heartland President Joseph Bast:
“…reported on the extensive press attention the conference had received, reporting interviews on CBS, ABC, BBC, CNN, PBS, Glenn Beck’s television program, Fox News, and a score of print publications including The New York Times, Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal.”
    Reports from the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change can be read here:
       Reports #1 and #2 already available at time of posting.

04 May, 2008
Until the debate over global warming was politicized in the 1990s, the scientific “consensus” was that the Modern Warming is moderate and natural. Books and recent literature reviews suggest this is still the consensus, even though it contradicts the alarmists’ views.
Distinguished scholars from the U.S. and around the world have addressed these questions seriously and without institutional bias. Their findings suggest the Modern Warming is moderate and partly or even mostly a natural recovery from the Little Ice Age; that the consequences of moderate warming are positive for humanity and wildlife; that predictions of future warming are wildly unreliable; that the costs of trying to “stop global warming” exceed hypothetical benefits by a factor of 10 or more; and more.
      Two clips from the “Background” tab of:
      The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change
      A refreshing viewpoint on this subject, by stas peterson, has breadth and depth put in a most reasonable way in a posting on Watts Up With That? on the 27th of February.
      Two short clips to whet the appetite:
“That is during the passing transitory phenomenon of a fossil fuel based civilization transitioning to better energy sources. Fusion beckons long before 2100, and a lot sooner than many including within the scientific community anticipate.”
“The developed countries have made great progress in cleaning the environment. It is much better than it was at mid-century past. The air, water, land and biosphere are cleaner and healthier than then.”
      A clip from a post by “tadcronn”
Watts Up With That
“Now THIS is interesting: Pielke on Dr. Joanne Simpson”
      is worthy of serious consideration; as is the excerpt at the top of the page.

      “The real problem is the proposals of the eco-lobby, especially at this time when our economy is already looking like it could take a nosedive, would irresponsibly inflict more suffering on people by raising prices on fuel, raising taxes, restricting business, etc. And those are the mild proposals. The harsher ones would greatly restrict personal freedoms. Some of them are downright scary.
      “And all of this is over a roughly 1-degree rise in average temperatures (depending on what year you measure from, or which may not even be based on accurate temperature readings), of which CO2 is only about 3 percent responsible, with 97 percent of THAT portion being from natural sources.
      “It turns out humans’ possible contribution to global warming is demonstrably so miniscule that we couldn’t change the average even if we were trying. So the next time someone says “Wouldn’t it be wise to …,” tell them the wisest thing is to preserve liberty and free societies because it is free societies that are the cleanest and the best hope for preserving our environment.”
In “Where have all the sunspots gone?” Randy Washburn says in part:
      Our solar heater shines down on the Earth and laughs at all those who call themselves wise and all those who are ultimately stupid. This means Al Gore, John McCain, Joe Leiberman, Kyoto et. al.
      Our political hacks are so caught up with warming that they are going to be the cause of famine, disease and death in the forthcoming Dalton-Maunder-Sporer minimum. If the solar physicists and other intellegent people who look at the Sun as the source and moderator of climate on Earth are correct then we should be preparing for failed crops, no heating oil, little rain, bitterly cold winters and rampant disease from unhealthy people.
Watts Up With That?
      This is not just a game being played by shysters and political point-scorers.
      This is the future of Earth and our children being put in the balance for personal gain and egocentric gratification.
      They will sell the future for one brief moment in the spotlight; or a lousy buck.
“A Crock of Sh–”
 DETROIT (Reuters) – General Motors Corp Vice Chairman Bob Lutz has defended remarks he made dismissing global warming as a “total crock of s—,” saying his views had no bearing on GM’s commitment to build environmentally friendly vehicles.
      Lutz, GM’s outspoken product development chief, has been under fire from Internet bloggers since last month when he was quoted as making the remark to reporters in Texas.
      Is this the man who will save us from the destroyers of civilization as we know it? 
      Save us from the hucksters and preachers who would see our economies reduced to ruins for the sake of their wild-eyed mission? (With apologies to the hucksters, who will maintain their own wealth and continue to enjoy the fruits of our labors and the labors of our forefathers. Just deny them to the rest of us. They are nasty, but not stupid.)
      Speak on, Bob Lutz; the whole world needs you.
   No link needed. Simply type the full headline above (with the missing letters included) into a search engine and options galore will appear in the search results.
    Much to ponder in the article linked below; not the least of which is the violation of forcasting principles applied to the research in discussion.
The Amstrup report, for example, simply accepted the projections made by selected general circulation models concerning the number of future ice-free days in the Arctic.  But these projections themselves violate forecasting principles and ignore significant evidence to the contrary.  For instance, climate scientist David Legates has noted that the decline in snow and ice pack in the Arctic region has not been uniform.  In Greenland, he notes, recorded coastal temperatures show cooling and the average summer air temperature at the summit of the Greenland Ice Sheet has decreased by 4° F per decade since measurements began in 1987.
In addition, records from Russian coastal stations show that the extent and thickness of sea ice has varied greatly over 60- to 80-year periods during the past 125 years.  Moreover, the warmest air temperature they report for the past century was in 1938, when it was nearly 0.4° F warmer than in 2000.  Finally, a study commissioned by Canada’s Department of Fisheries and Oceans examining the relationship between air temperature and sea ice coverage concluded that “the possible impact of global warming appears to play a minor role in changes to Arctic sea ice.”
Polar Bears on Thin Ice, Not Really! Redux 
Brief Analysis No. 610 February 21, 2008
by H. Sterling Burnett
“Surprisingly, the BBC stood out as one media agent that took enough care to balance its coverage. Under the Web site headline “Global Warming ‘May Cut Deaths,’ ” it reported 20,000 deaths are linked to the cold each year in the U.K. and that those deaths fell 3% a year from 1971 through 2003, a period in which summers warmed but heat-related deaths did not change.
      In the U.S., a warmer climate could save tens of thousands. Thomas Gale Moore, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution who has studied and written extensively about global warming, believes as many as 40,000 American lives would be spared each year.”
Will Global Warming Save Lives?
By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, February 14, 2008 4:20 PM PT
“Stenger does not acknowledge that there has been no significant global warming for the past ten years in spite of continuing atmospheric CO2 increases. Even the manmade global warming activists at the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] now acknowledge this. Rajendra Pachauri, head of a UN panel, says he will look into this apparent temperature plateau.”
LETTER- No global warming proof
by Charles G. Battig  published February 14, 2008
      No Room For Reason would be an excellent title for the shambles this critical debate has become.  A simple acknowledgement that the science is conflicting would be an excellent fall-back point from which to adventure forth again, feeding in the plethora of new knowledge which is published daily of new understandings of the individual pieces of the jigsaw which are moving toward at least a primitive picture of what makes Sammy run.
    With “slants” still being presented by scientists, the science is definitely not yet “done”.
Different Perspective On Global Warming To Be Shared At Cowan Center
Tyler Morning Telegraph …  News  …  February 10, 2008
Susan Thomae-Morphew, the center’s director, said Dr. Baliunas’ research will present an alternative view to what’s been widely publicized in the mainstream media.
“There are so many different opinions about global warming. There isn’t a question of whether we have global warming, but as to what’s causing it is what she’ll address,” said Ms. Thomae-Morphew.
Perceived as controversial by some climate scientists, Dr. Baliunas’ work with fellow Smithsonian astronomer Willie Soon suggests global warming is more directly related to solar variability than to increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
“Her opinion of course is controversial, because most of what’s out there is a certain slant,” Ms. Thomae-Morphew said. “There’s the Al Gore slant on global warming, and this is another slant. I think it will be interesting.”
     There is, of course, the mandatory tipping of the hat to the monster of global warming  (what girl would be seen without one?), but the message from these scientists signals caution in the choice of snake-oil purchases.  Hallucinations and other disorientations can result from even internationally recognised brands.
      Perhaps even old-fashioned, out of date, nature was at work in the collapse of the Larsen B Ice Shelf in Antarctica in 2002…
Antarctic Ice Shelf Collapse Blamed On More Than Climate Change
ScienceDaily (Feb. 11, 2008)
“It’s likely that melting from higher ocean temperatures, or even a gradual decline in the ice mass of the Peninsula over the centuries, was pushing the Larsen to the brink”, said co-author Ted Scambos of University of Colorado’s National Snow and Ice Data Centre.
Although from May last year (2007), this report remains relevant if used only to highlight the obscenity of instilling fear in children as a method of driving a commercial agenda; or any agenda.
      This, in itself, is reason enough to condemn all those who have any part in such contemptible malpractice.  They shame us all, and raise doubt that we have risen any level at all above our primitive ancestors.
      Childhood, that brief moment in life when hope and expectation can flourish undimmed, is precious to each and every being.  It should never be allowed to be despoiled by the sour or the greedy or the bitter.
      But this is not the only reason (although reason enough on its own) to consider this story.
The voices of rank and file scientists opposing climate doomsayers can serve as a counter to the alarmism that children are being exposed to on a daily basis. (See Washington Post April 16, 2007 article about kids fearing of a “climactic Armageddon” ) The media’s climate fear factor seemingly grows louder even as the latest science grows less and less alarming by the day. (See Der Spiegel May 7, 2007 article: Not the End of the World as We Know It ) It is also worth noting that the proponents of climate fears are increasingly attempting to suppress dissent by skeptics. (See UPI May 10, 2007 article: U.N. official says it’s ‘completely immoral’ to doubt global warming fears )
Shifting: Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming – Now Skeptics
By EPW Blog …  Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Consensus? What consensus?
by John McLean
February 2008
The Sun Also Sets
By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY … February 07, 2008
“Solar activity fluctuates in an 11-year cycle. But so far in this cycle, the sun has been disturbingly quiet. … This solar hibernation corresponded with a period of bitter cold that began around 1650 and lasted, with intermittent spikes of warming, until 1715. Frigid winters and cold summers during that period led to massive crop failures, famine and death in Northern Europe…”
When the world ceases questioning, accepted knowledge becomes dangerous.
      This letter is interesting, but undated. 
      Perhaps of greater interest are the “Comments” found below it, the latest dated Feb 7, 2008.
Letter: Man-caused global warming a hoax
By Adrian Arp, PH.D., Twin Falls, Idaho
The following quote is from “Comments” and is just a teaser:

“…water in all its states resists temperature changes. This means that this century’s temperature changes are due to effects imposed in large part by influences that happened over decades and centuries before.” (Boxorox wrote on Feb 6, 2008 8:08 AM:)
It is all this ridiculous “new research” which is to blame for the growing doubt that the science is “done”.
Coral Reefs May Be Protected By Natural Ocean Thermostat
ScienceDaily (Feb. 8, 2008) — Natural processes may prevent oceans from warming beyond a certain point, helping protect some coral reefs from the impacts of climate change, new research finds.
Man-made global warming cannot be disputed?
The science is done?
Diabetes Study Partially Halted After Deaths
Published: February 7, 2008 (New York Times)
But a major federal study of more than 10,000 middle-aged and older people with Type 2 diabetes has found that lowering blood sugar actually increased their risk of death, researchers reported Wednesday.
      “It’s confusing and disturbing that this happened,” said Dr. James Dove, president of the American College of Cardiology. “For 50 years, we’ve talked about getting blood sugar very low. Everything in the literature would suggest this is the right thing to do,” he added.
The Recovery from the Little Ice Age and Global Warming
By: Dr. Syun-Ichi Akasofu … January 29, 2008
“I am concerned about the inevitable backlash against science and scientists, when the public eventually learns the correct information about climate change. Even if the IPCC is not directly responsible for the present confusion, they should take the necessary responsible action to help rectify the confusion. I request that the IPCC make an appropriate statement in this regard before the next G8 meeting in May 2008.”
      …and much more.
Arctic sea ice back to its previous level, bears safe; film at 11
      In the late summer and early fall of 2007, there were a number of alarming media reports about the arctic sea ice melting. Additionally, there were predictions that it would not recover to its previous levels.
      But, we have this graph charting the rise and fall of arctic sea ice for the last 365 days, notice that the arctic sea ice is right back where it started at in February 2007.
Truth does not diminish with time; nor does the wisdom of true insight.  Aesop, c.1670, has demonstrated this with his fable, The Boy Who Cried Wolf.
      The damage done to science by the shrill alarms of man-made global warming hucksters of international recognition is a sore blow to the most important discipline of mankind.  Science.
      The moral of the story of the shepherd boy and the wolf is sobering:  “Even when liars tell the truth, they are never believed. The liar will lie once, twice, and then perish when he tells the truth.”
      Talk on the street, on the forums, in the “Letters” columns has become cynical of much science.  There is good reason for cynicism; but little good to come from it.
      Until measured words of considered opinion, and open to informed debate, replace the raucous cries of the carnival barker, mankind is missing a necessary rudder.  In this time mankind is also open to the danger of a genuine wolf.
      Wikipedia notes: In the American intelligence community, “crying wolf syndrome” is labeled as a condition where threat analysts are reluctant to report on an imminent threat, such as a terrorist attack, due to the fact that if the threat is unfounded or greatly inflated, future threats will not be believed.
      The opposite extreme; and therin lies danger, too.
…rapid loss of the world’s glaciers and ice caps, a dramatic global sea level rise that would threaten low-lying coastal areas, the spread of tropical diseases, and severe drought and floods.
These dire predictions are not, however, the result of scientific forecasting; rather, they are the opinions of experts.  Expert opinion on climate change has often been wrong, say Kesten C. Green, of the Business and Economic Forecasting Unit, Monash University, and J. Scott Armstrong, of the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania. (Daily Policy Digest. Global Warming. February 1, 2008)
At this point it is well worth repeating this quote from Page 2:
As my high-school physics teacher admonished us in those we-shall-conquer-the-world-with-a-slide-rule days, “Begin all of your scientific pronouncements with ‘At our present level of ignorance, we think we know . . .'”
My Nobel Moment

Continues on Page 3.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: