Global Warming Hoax Weekly Round-Up, Jun. 17th 2010

Lindsay Graham changes his mind about global warming science, wind farms increase CO2 emissions, hippies unwitting unleashed a molepocalypse and electric cars cannot save the planet.  It’s another busy week, handily rounded-up for you.

Part One: Al Gore & Friends

The Goreacle has been in the news again this week, but mostly because of his conjugal crisis rather than any ‘climate crisis’.  It turns out that the perfect union of Tipper and Al wasn’t so perfect.  She was prone to ‘jealous rages‘ and he was prone to porking the producer of An Inconvenient Truth.  All of this is personal tragedy, nothing to do with global warming.  Except that by divorcing Al and Tipper will double their carbon footprint.  Some people stay together for the kids… can’t the Gore’s do it for Gaia?

It would be easy to point a finger and call Al a hypocrite, but that’s become his standard modus operandi.  Without any trace of irony, the man who routinely excludes the press from his events chastised the media for ‘censoring’ news from the Gulf.

Al celebrated the swing in public support against offshore drilling and brags that it is the end of ‘drill baby drill’.  One question, America still needs the oil, none of the alternative energies are anywhere near efficient or reliable enough… so where will the oil come from.  My guess, the law of unintended consequences will see a rush back to drilling, but on land where the risks are much reduced and costs lowered.  ANWR, anyone?

Hide the decline!  The number of Climate project presentations slumps dramatically in only a year. Oddly, one lucky Welsh student will be indoctrinated trained by Al.  Assuming the student wants to go home once his time with manbearpig is over, Gaia will be 1.5 tonnes of CO2 richer.

Part Two: AGW Scaremongers

Jolly Prince Chuckles, the future King of England, delivered a speech about population control, one of the warmist’s favorite dreams of preventing global catastrophe.  The logic goes that there are too many people on the planet, specifically too many poor people who dream of middle class lifestyles enjoyed by the richer economies of the world.  Population control advocates simply cannot abide the idea of poor  brown people wanting cars (gasp) and appliances (shock), they would far rather they all die quietly.

Lindsay Graham, the mostly RINO Senator who did much to promote cap and bend over laws for the US, casually waves off the matter:

“The science about global warming has changed,” he noted, offhandedly. “I think they’ve oversold this stuff, quite frankly. I think they’ve been alarmist and the science is in question,” Graham told reporters. “The whole movement has taken a giant step backward.”

Good thing we didn’t spend $65 trillion on it then, right?

Warmists and ecotards always say that greening the economy (code for killing it) will create ‘green jobs’.  Only now we do find out that the Obama administration actually has no idea what a green job is.

Last week saw the defeat of the Murkowski amendment, a last ditch attempt to wrest control of America’s economy from the EPA.  But that didn’t stop warmist hippies from being upset that the vote was close.

An ex-warmer has written a book that shows clearly one of the greatest threats to the environment; environmentalists:

Ridley shows that the green movement poses a devastating threat to the environment, which throughout history has always benefited most from the very economic growth and progress, fueled by fossil energy, that the Greens are dedicated to ending.

Aussie hippies want to have products labeled with ‘carbon footprints’ so that consumers can feel adequately guilty about the products they purchase.  The UK does this already to some extent, so of course the good sheeple of Australia want to follow suit.

destroying Gaia, one spin cycle at a time

Barbara Boxer, a US Senator from California who appears to be several sandwiches shy of the full picnic, suggested that ‘carbon pollution’ would cause wars. Damn that trace gas, is there nothing it won’t stop at?

He’s back!  After a hacked blog and some downtime, uber-skeptic Gore Lied returns to the skeptic arena and wonders where his money from the cast right wing conspiracy is.  He’s not the only one, the VRWC finance department is slow to pay.

Andrew Bolt skewers alarmist Tim Flannery, using terrifying Tim’s own words to show him up as a two-bit scaremonger.  How dare Bolt use accurate quotes and remember inconvenient statements.  Diabolical skeptic.

NASA is caught using something most of us would call awful math.  Vectors are involved, which gives me an excuse for this:


Facts, schmacts.  The White House ‘listens’ to scientists, twists what they said to fit a pre-arranged agenda and hides the truth with claims of ‘peer-review’ and ‘consensus’.

Russia has plans for polar bears.  The plans might involve barbecues and a nice side salad.  That popping sound you hear is PETA heads exploding.

The IPCC head, a railway engineer with a penchant for writing soft pr0n decides that the debate actually isn’t over and maybe skeptics have something to say after all.  That popping sound you hear is Marc Morano’s head exploding.

A hippie rails against capitalism and exposes the watermelon agenda.

President Obama took time out of his busy golf schedule (video at link) to speak to the American people about the Gulf oil spill.  Or, more accurately about all the new green laws he wants to pass on the back of the disaster, because it’s the Emmanual way.

Hippies hate genetically modified foods, claiming it will poison us all, or something.  Turns out that free range eggs will kill you faster.

Brave Katie Couric might buy a Prius.  Couric isn’t known for her observational skills, she’ll probably end up with a Hummer.

Remember, weather isn’t climate.  Unless it is convenient.

Oh noes, Emo-Joe Romm is disappointed with Obama.  Surely a sign that the end times are almost upon us.

Scaremongers, warmists, ecotards, hippies.  Whatever you call them, they are bad for science.  By pretending that global warming caused by man is a ‘fact’, they undermine a basic tenet of science:

If the point is to convince the public that AGW is a “fact” as the general public understands the term–as in a thing that is indisputably true–this is nonsense on its face since the assertion made is based in the article on a “preponderance of the evidence.”  A preponderance of the evidence might be described as a majority of the evidence (in law it means generally 50% +1), which means there is contrary data, and indeed, that the alleged “fact” might not be true.  Here is a standard dictionary definition of the word “fact:”

Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed: Genetic engineering is now a fact. That Chaucer was a real person is an undisputed fact.

Clearly, AGW is not a matter of certainty as are the existence of genetic engineering or the life of Chaucer.  Thus, the public is not going to believe that AGW is a “fact,” and will correctly conclude that the word “fact” employed in association with AGW is entirely misleading.

Part Three: Inconvenient Truths

Hippies love the outdoors.  What a pity that their gear is killing the planet.

Alternative, renewable energies are nice, but you can’t use solar power to lubricate your transmission.  No matter how hard you try, solar ain’t oil. And renewables will never get the job done.

Botanist David Bellamy, a man hated by hippies for daring to be a climate skeptic, joined a march against a wind farm. Giant bird shredders aren’t very good at much except wrecking views and killing birds, but they sure do generate cash. Oh, and inconveniently, wind farms increase CO2 emissions.  Oops.

The UN is trying to position biodiversity as the replacement facade for imposing a Marxist agenda on the worlds major economies, but fortunately the game is up and their first report has been found to contain many errors.

Wharton business school doesn’t think much of global warming science.

Global warming is killing coral reefs.  Oh, wait, nevermind.

Was the Iron Lady the first climate skeptic?

NOAA, the folks responsible for one of the datasets used in global warming models, suggests that collecting accurate data is not such a big deal.

Another unintended consequence of warmist hysteria, the zombie mole invasion.  Okay, they’re not actually zombies, but it sounded better like that.

the (zombie) molepocalypse is coming to a lawn near you

Mo’ nukes, mo’ nukes, mo’ nukes:

Things have not looked so good for nuclear power since the dawn of the Atomic Age. The public is more accepting of the potential role of nuclear power than at any time since the early 1970s

If you listen carefully, you can hear Joe Romm screaming as Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick receive an award for their work exposing  flawed climate science.

That pesky Medieval Warming Period was warmer than today, a peer-reviewed study finds.

Science working as it’s supposed to.  The dark matter theory is challenged and may be reviewed or scrapped.

The Lamborghini Murcielago is the least green car in the world.  I figure if every reader of this week’s round up drops $75 into the tip-jar, I might be able to buy one.   I’ll never get one if I wait for the VRWC to pay up, and BP looks dodgy for any future Big Oil bucks, so its up to you dear reader to put your humble correspondent in a Lambo.  Or not, I don’t the color anyway.

not so fast, not so green

A lot of hippies turn to hybrid or electric cars rather than supercars, but it turns out that hippiemobiles are useless and electric cars use too much power to be green.

The man who made GE great, Jack Welch, doesn’t approve of his once proud firm becoming a green subsidy whore.

Modern farming, despised by hippies, is actually great for Gaia.

Oh noes, CO2 doesn’t cause global warming.  Wait, what?

Friend and fellow skeptic blogger at Climate Change Fraud, Tom was interviewed by Home of Solar Energy.  It’s a fair interview, good for Tom and the site for getting together.

Why do Democrats want Americans to be without oil?

Global warming killed 50% of the UK’s goldcrest population.  Oh, wait… that was cold weather?

Rare earth minerals are running out as production of ‘green’ batteries and solar panels ramps up.  Good to know that most of the world’s resources are in Brazil, China, Congo and Russia.  Two commies and two basket cases hold all the cards for green tech.  It’s perfect, if you think about it.

Part Four: AGW in the News

Junk science is hard to dump.  Who knew?

Green cars you can believe in.  Hydrogen is the best hope of replacing oil to power cars, and now a UK city is trying out the tech with 30 cars.  Top Gear featured a hydrogen car last year:


Brits are turning away from their belief in global warming after a rough winter and Climategate.  Shame the new government isn’t in tune with the people.

The IPCC, fundamentally flawed, not that the media notices.

Where did Mars’ oceans go?

The famous consensus that the IPCC hyped as being a good reason to believe in AGW nonsense, turns out not to be thousands of scientists, but only a few dozen.

Reuters promotes the global warming hoax, but then they have money to make from your fear.

Here are some carbon offsets not even Al Gore could sell.  Whale dung.  Yeah, I know.

President Obama is in trouble when even Slate calls him part of the problem on climate.

The Federal Government loves solar power so much it charges twice the fees that private landowners demand.

Some ‘scientist’ at Cambridge suggests that the world will suffer a catastrophe in 2014.  Global warming isn’t specifically mentioned so the disaster may just be a sequel to 2012, who knows?


Part Five: Global Hottie

The Daily Bayonet  is taking a short vacation.  To celebrate, this week’s hottie is a personal favorite, Reese Witherspoon.

click, but nicely

Thanks for reading.

13 thoughts on “Global Warming Hoax Weekly Round-Up, Jun. 17th 2010”

  1. Back yet again I see.

    Part 1…Gore Derangement Syndrome. Blah, Blah Blah.

    Part 2…The usual ad hominem attacks. And the old ‘CO2 isn’t a greenhouse gas’ canard recyled yet again. That’s just sad. If their ‘research paper’ was true, Venus would have to literally *GLOW* in visible light in the night sky because of internal heat and they would have overturned 150 years of thermodynamics. But don’t let mere facts get in the way of crackpot science.

    Onward…Let’s see…Conflating the local temperature record of East Antarctica 130,000 years ago with the claim that the Medieval Warm period was globally warmer than today. Tracing it backwards to the original paper, the claim about the ‘Medieval Warming’ period being warmer than today, even for just Antarctica, appears to have been pulled right out of ‘C3 Headlines’ ass with nothing supporting it in the paper. Nothing quite makes for good headlines like simply lying about what is in a paper. Gee, where have I seen THAT kind of dishonest tactic used before….. Oh. That right, I seen it here on this blog. You might begin to think that lying about science was a frequent tactic by AGW denialists or something.

    Continuing…’I don’t understand how temperature trends are determined’ stuff from the “Math is hard, let’s go shopping” crowd…

    Part 3…Blah, blah. A repeat of the garbage paper purporting to ‘prove’ CO2 isn’t a greenhouse gas from part 2. Lost track of what you already posted? Ah well. More blah….

    Part 4…Blah blah. Deliberate misquoting and out of context quoting by Andrew Bolt of Mike Hulme. Andrew Bolt didn’t even get his Mike’s name right). But you can read what Mike Hulme actually wrote for yourself.

    1. Technically Ben, you’re the one who’s back, I live here.

      A word of advice for future comments – including more than one link triggers the spam filter.

  2. In the past the Earth was covered with ice, right into the 30s in Latitude. It has happened several times to varying degrees. The sun has the biggest influence on the planet’s temperature. But during these ‘snowball’ earth phases the planet was a giant mirror which dramatically reduced the sun’s ability to heat the planet.

    This was a tough situation because, left unchecked, a snowball Earth would never have evolved humans. So what changed those conditions, giving us the chance to be here today? Who was our buddy way back when? It was the volcanoes. They continued to spew out all kinds of things including CO2 for many 10s of thousands of years increasing the CO2 content of the world to 1000s of ppm. There was no place for the CO2 to go … land was covered with ice and cold oceans covered by ice absorb CO2 but at greatly reduced rates. They could not match the rate of volcanoes over time.

    So it turns out that CO2 was our real buddy back then. Its concentration eventually reached a level where the atmosphere retained enough heat to re-hydrate and start the melting process. The change in humidity is about 4% for every change of 1 degree F.

    CO2 was our buddy back then.

    I’m not too sure whether CO2 is our buddy today.

  3. Great website! The wackos who actually believe that CO2 will cause runaway global warming are, quite frankly, nuts. It’s never happened before, even with CO2 at 7,000 ppmv. Today, CO2 is under 400 ppmv; the biosphere is starved of CO2. Furthermore, rises in CO2 always follow temperature rises, not vice-versa. Effect cannot precede cause, except in the minds of those afflicted with cognitive dissonance.

    Cognitive dissonance explains their terror. Fortunately for normal scientists, CD does not affect skeptics, because skeptics have nothing to prove. It is the purveyors of the CO2 scare who have the burden of showing that their catastrophic hypothesis is valid. Needless to say, the have failed completely: the climate is well within its long term parameters. Nothing unusual is happening.

    Anyone can see that the globaloney scaremongering is entirely political, not scientific. It is fed by money, not by science. If the huge amounts of grant money were cut off, the CO2 scare would be relegated to an asterisk in an un-read paper by a CD afflicted alarmist.

  4. Dave,

    Belief has nothing to do with physics. ‘F=ma’ is not a matter of belief it is a matter of knowledge. So is E=mc2 or E=hv.

    Physics tells us that the last time the earth had CO2 concentrations of 390 ppm the equilibrium temperature of the planet was about 5 C hotter. Physics tells us that hotter air can contain more water vapor … about 4% for every degree F. Physics tells us that water vapor is the planet’s greatest and most powerful greenhouse gas.

    See where I’m going with this argument? No beliefs are necessary. If your beliefs are different than what the physics tells you, then it’s your beliefs that are wrong. Now there is no law that says you can’t be wrong and certainly in today’s world there is no reason why you can’t understand the world around you totally based upon your belief systems.

    From our knowledge we know the following:

    1. CO2 starvation is quite wrong. The average age of a species is between 1.8 and 2.2 million years. Pretty much every species on the planet today evolved to exist in a CO2 environment much like what we have had in the past 800,000 years. To say that life is CO2 starved is nonsense based upon the science. To have that belief is up to you. However, it’s not knowledge.

    2.From my piece on snowball earth, you see the physics of the recovery from the snowball phase. Unless you can produce another explanation which is a product of knowledge and not belief then CO2 is the only candidate that has a chance of rescuing the world from being a snowball. It was not the sun because the earth was a mirror; it was not water vapor because the air was cold and dry. On the other hand, there were few places for the CO2 coming out of volcanoes to go and the rate at which they could take CO2 out of the atmosphere was less than the CO2 production rate. Time was not a factor other than enough had to go by until the increasing CO2 concentration heated the air and the recovery began.

    3. CO2 concentrations in the 1000s have been the case in the past and were the main driving force for the recoveries from the various snowball earth phases. You are correct in calling attention to that fact. You are also correct in indicating that we have not been in a runaway condition where either the earth froze solid or boiled away the seas. You make these correct statements but you seem to have no curiosity as to what physical principles governed the earth’s recovery in the past. Like for instance how did the world deal with CO2 concentrations in the 1000s? The greenhouse effect should have burned the earth to a crisp. It just so happened that as the earth melted more of the ocean was uncovered providing more CO2 sink. Then as the land masses were uncovered all the rock formed by the volcanoes was uncovered. That new rock that had been spewing out for 10s to 100s of thousands of years came into contact with the high concentration of CO2 in much hotter atmosphere. The CO2 weathered the rock forming carbonates and was taken out of the atmosphere. It called the 500,000 year long thermostat by Dr. Alley.

    4. Changes in the past in temperature or CO2 concentrations and the like happened gradually over 1000s of years allowing evolution to work its magic so that life survived the changes. We are radically changing the environment in a hundred years or so to a very different one. Evolution cannot keep up. As a result species will die off. We don’t know which species will die off but many will and some of them will be ‘keystone’ species. These species control the fate of many, many other species so if they go whole ecosystems are weakened or die outright.

    5. And finally, we, that is, humans need a healthy world around us to live a decent life. Everyone wants that for themselves and their families going forward. If we change the world so much that the ecosystem crashes even in a minor way, we as one of the top species will suffer unimagined grief. Keeping the world a healthy place for critters makes sense from every point of view you can imagine because a healthy world will allow us as humans to have the best life possible.

    Earth’s geophysical history is an incredible story. It is well worth the investment in time and energy to discover it for yourself.

  5. “CO2 is the only candidate that has a chance of rescuing the world from being a snowball.”
    What about that big orange thing in the sky called THE SUN!?

  6. Hey Benjamin Franz, hold on there a second.

    Because Venus orbits 0.72 AU away from the Sun, the surface temperature should be something like 288 K / sqrt(0.72) = 339 K which is 66 °C if the albedo, the composition of the atmosphere, and details of the greenhouse effect were equal with planet Earth.
    In reality the surface temperature is about 300-400 °C warmer than that.

    So you want to blaim this on co2.
    OK lets try it.

    The concentration of CO2 on Venus is something like 300,000-500,000 times greater than the same quantity on the Earth (92 times higher total pressure; 3,000-5,000 times higher a percentage)= co2 is about 95% of the atmosphere.

    The question is how many times would you have to double 280 ppm co2 (Earth pre-industrial level) to make co2 95% of the atmosphere? The answer is 18 times (ever play backgammon? Trust me it adds up fast.)
    On Earth a doubling of co2 adds 3 C degrees of warming (according to the IPCC – I could quibble with that amount but, for the purposes of this discussion I’ll let it ride.)
    On Venus a doubling of co2 will add 1.2 °C and 18 CO2 doublings should give about 18 x 1.2 °C = 22 °C (no water feedbacks on Venus): note that co2 warming decreases logarithmically for each successive doubling, so this is a generous estimate.
    Total warming on Venus due to the greenhouse effect, less then 88 °C.

    That’s using the IPCC numbers.

    Where did the other 300 °C come from? Here’s a clue. A Deisel engine doesn’t use a sparkplug, instead it lets heat from the piston’s compression ignite the fuel. They generally operate at a 25:1 compression ratio.

    Venus operates at a 92:1 compression ratio.

  7. Pingback: Free Canuckistan!

Comments are closed.