Thousands protest over G20 summit

There are many opinions regarding the Global Warming/Cooling debate, not least of which is the cost to the 'average' person, the one who works hard to make a better life for themselvs and then have their tax money wasted on loads of scientist who cannot agree on one thing. Having said that, we are in the mist of a global economy crisis so could someone please explain why we are now spending another 19 million to have a summit for world leaders to agree on nothing ?

Tens of thousands of protesters are taking part in rallies, marches and stunts to coincide with the G20 summit in London.

Campaigners waving flags and placards have braved wet weather to be part of the Put People First march, which comes amid anger at the £19 million cost of staging the conference at a time of economic downturn.

Climate change activists, anti-war campaigners, trade unionists, charity workers and students will take part.

Organisers of some of the protests have complained that police briefings have given the impression that the demonstrations will be mounted by anarchists intent on causing trouble.

http://www.orange.co.uk/news/topstories/3700.htm?linkfrom=hp1&link=ticker_pos_1_link_1&article=index

Read more...

Global Cooling is Here - Evidence for Predicting Global Cooling for the Next Three Decades

I know that those who read this think I don't believe we are heading for Global warming, if the truth be told I find it hard to believe anything with so many conflicting evidence, if this issue was before a High Court Judge then a mis trial would be declared as no reasonable person can really give an argument either for or again, and there lies my problem.

IF there is Global Warming or IF there is Global Cooling then I will do all I can to help with the situation and I will give my consent to my tax dollars * as if they ask me anyway* being used to find some solutions to the problems, all I ask if proof first, is that so bad ?

Despite no global warming in 10 years and recording setting cold in 2007-2008, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climatic Change (IPCC) and computer modelers who believe that CO2 is the cause of global warming still predict the Earth is in store for catastrophic warming in this century. IPCC computer models have predicted global warming of 1° F per decade and 5-6° C (10-11° F) by 2100 (Fig. 1), which would cause global catastrophe with ramifications for human life, natural habitat, energy and water resources, and food production. All of this is predicated on the assumption that global warming is caused by increasing atmospheric CO2 and that CO2 will continue to rise rapidly.

However, records of past climate changes suggest an altogether different scenario for the 21st century. Rather than drastic global warming at a rate of 0.5 ° C (1° F) per decade, historic records of past natural cycles suggest global cooling for the first several decades of the 21st century to about 2030, followed by global warming from about 2030 to about 2060, and renewed global cooling from 2060 to 2090 (Easterbrook, D.J., 2005, 2006a, b, 2007, 2008a, b); Easterbrook and Kovanen, 2000, 2001). Climatic fluctuations over the past several hundred years suggest ~30 year climatic cycles of global warming and cooling, on a general rising trend from the Little Ice Age.

PREDICTIONS BASED ON PAST CLIMATE PATTERNS

http://my.auburnjournal.com/detail/108731.html

Read more...

The 'Global Warming Three' are on thin ice

Part of the argument for global warming is that the ice cap is getting thinner, thus causing problems all over the world. Only one thing I can see wrong with this - the ice is actually getting thicker ! So can someone, preferbly one who is costing trillions in tax dollars please explain this to me ?

The only problem with a project to prove that Arctic ice is disappearing is the fact that it is actually getting thicker, says Christopher Booker.

What a wonderful parable of our time has been the expedition to the North Pole led by the explorer Pen Hadow. With two companions, he is measuring the thickness of the ice to show how fast it is “declining”. His expedition is one of a series of events designed to “raise awareness of the dangers of climate change” before December’s conference in Copenhagen, where the warmists hope to get a new treaty imposing much more drastic cuts on CO2 emissions.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5028380/The-Global-Warming-Three-are-on-thin-ice.html

Read more...

Global warming is in the news once more. Following more calls to change the way we live, to protect the earths resources * and don't get me wrong, I am all for recycling and not wasting as much as we do as a country, but its wrong to make me pay more for doing the right thing, but thats another post for another day * but it seems that until there can be a definitive answer to the questions and scientific data that is being quoted then who do we believe ? And how much more is it going to cost us to come to the conclusion that no one really knows what is actually happening ?

Global Warming Teach-In

Global warming is not a crisis, but it may be creating a crisis of intellectual integrity.

By Jane S. Shaw

March 02, 2009

Last month, college campuses held a “National Teach-in on Global Warming Solutions.” The thrust of the message was that there is a crisis because global temperatures are rising, endangering the world’s future, and humans are to blame.

I agree that there may be a crisis, but I don’t believe that it is a crisis of impending heat; it is, rather, a crisis of intellectual integrity.

First, let me point out something that most people may not realize. Since 1998, there has been no trend in world temperatures, neither up nor down, in spite of population growth, greater resource use, and lots of carbon dioxide production. True, 1998, was the warmest year on record, and we are still in a warm period, but world temperatures are no higher than when today’s college seniors began middle school. The likelihood of the catastrophic effects that gave Al Gore a Nobel Peace Prize is weak.

Read more...

Climate models falling outside acceptable scientific boundaries

It seems there is no end to the He said /She said arguments that surround the Global Warming debate, on the one side are those who say we are heading for a man made crisis and it will cost trillions to even try to find a solution and on the other side there are those who say it is Mother Natures doing what she has done since the beginning of time and it is not man made and the research daa being spouted by the media is flawed, so who do we believe ? Where do we get the true facts ? And how much is it going to cost to get those facts ? Interesting article to read and think about

Last month former vice president Al Gore made a well publicized appearance before a Senate committee warning of the dangers of global warming. Lesser known is the appearance of a climatologist before a House subcommittee two weeks later that called into question the models on which anthropogenic [manmade] global warming advocates use to base their assertions on.

http://www.examiner.com/x-219-Denver-Weather-Examiner~y2009m2d26-Climate-models-falling-outside-acceptable-scientific-boundaries

Read more...

Global Warming or Global Cooling?

Now I am really confused, there is supposed to be Global Warming, this is something that is costing us trillions a year in research and experiments, money going to prove we are causing this man made problem, and how we are going to make things right, with me so far ? Well now it seems that we have Global Cooling!!! News flash to all those scientist, if something is hot it cannot be cold at the same time !! So what is it, Warming or Cooling, at this rate it is costing us trillions for everyone to agree it is Global, the rest it seems depends on who you listen to

by Prof. Don J. Easterbrook

Department of Geology, Western Washington University

Global Research Editor's note

The following article represents an alternative view and analysis of global climate change, which challenges the dominant Global Warming Consensus.

INTRODUCTION

Despite no global warming in 10 years and recording setting cold in 2007-2008, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climatic Change (IPCC) and computer modelers who believe that CO2 is the cause of global warming still predict the Earth is in store for catastrophic warming in this century. IPCC computer models have predicted global warming of 1° F per decade and 5-6° C (10-11° F) by 2100 (Fig. 1), which would cause global catastrophe with ramifications for human life, natural habitat, energy and water resources, and food production. All of this is predicated on the assumption that global warming is caused by increasing atmospheric CO2 and that CO2 will continue to rise rapidly.

However, records of past climate changes suggest an altogether different scenario for the 21st century. Rather than drastic global warming at a rate of 0.5 ° C (1° F) per decade, historic records of past natural cycles suggest global cooling for the first several decades of the 21st century to about 2030, followed by global warming from about 2030 to about 2060, and renewed global cooling from 2060 to 2090 (Easterbrook, D.J., 2005, 2006a, b, 2007, 2008a, b); Easterbrook and Kovanen, 2000, 2001). Climatic fluctuations over the past several hundred years suggest ~30 year climatic cycles of global warming and cooling, on a general rising trend from the Little Ice Age.

http://my.auburnjournal.com/detail/108731.html

Read more...

Nobody listens to the real climate change experts

Image by manfred-hartmann via Flickr

As I have said time and time again, there are two sides to every argument, but unfortunatly when it comes to the Global Warming issue the media only shows one side, the side that is costing you tax dollars. Questions still remain and no answers are being given, is there a crisis ? Can we prevent it ? Will it worsen or will it rectify itself with no intervention from us if it is Mother Nature running true to form ?

I found this great article which will give you more of an insight, hope you enjoy it and I hope it makes you ask yourself some questions, all too often we are expected to trust and have faith in the ones who run our country, my question is....... Would you let a stranger who you have no real knowledge of control your finances like we are allowing all these scientists and polititans?

Considering how the fear of global warming is inspiring the world's politicians to put forward the most costly and economically damaging package of measures ever imposed on mankind, it is obviously important that we can trust the basis on which all this is being proposed. Last week two international conferences addressed this issue and the contrast between them could not have been starker.

None of the government-funded scientists making these claims were particularly distinguished, but they succeeded in their object, as the media cheerfully recycled all this wild scaremongering without bothering to check the scientific facts.

You can read the full article here

Read more...

Global Warming To Cost Trillions More

What do Global Warming, Climate Change and the Government all have in common ?
At first glance nothing, but look closer, they all have the ability to cost the tax payer more money for no reason.

There has been no definitve proof that global warming or climate change is something man has done, and looking at the results from both side of the argument there are so many things that don't add up, but one thing that is adding up is the cost to us to try to either prove or disprove the theories being thrown around, and then it will cost trillions more to figure out that there is nothing we can do about it as it is Mother Nature running true to form and following a pattern that has been in existance for centuries.

President Obama's climate plan could cost industry close to $2 trillion, nearly three times the White House's initial estimate of the so-called "cap-and-trade" legislation, according to Senate staffers who were briefed by the White House.

A top economic aide to Mr. Obama told a group of Senate staffers last month that the president's climate-change plan would surely raise more than the $646 billion over eight years the White House had estimated publicly, according to multiple a number of staffers who attended the briefing Feb. 26.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/18/obama-climate-plan-could-cost-2-trillion/

Read more...

Seems Consensus Is Waning

What is the truth, the REAL truth about global warming ? Why is it costing billions to research something that no one can agree on ? And if it is really that much of a problem, in tht it will destroy the whole planet, then why is there no joining of all the forces together, ie the scientists, the enviromentalist etc to work together to try to determine what is needed to be done, and another thing, why are the worlds leaders not pooling their funds together, what is the point of the US researching something that the UK are as well, and why are only these two countries the only ones concerned ? Is it because we are spendthrifts and love to give money to any one and everyone ?

Disinformation is something that I really despise. After looking into the manmade global warming hysteria over the last few months, I am now convinced that this is a movement based upon fabrications. The entire consensus that Al Gore and his cronies tout is totally bogus. It is time that the truth be revealed.

It appears that there will be a gathering this week of credible people who carry a viewpoint that the argument over manmade global warming is not over. These individuals believe the evidence provided to prove "man's destruction of the Earth" is not credible. I tend to follow their reasoning.


http://therevolutionagain.blogspot.com/2009/03/seems-consensus-is-waning.html

Read more...

Increased Number Think Global Warming Is “Exaggerated”

Image by uopfindsomt via Flickr

More and more are now thinking while there might be something in all the 'global warming' hype that is costing the world billions in research, it is greatly exaggerated rather than underestimated

As recently as 2006, significantly more Americans thought the news underestimated the seriousness of global warming than said it exaggerated it, 38% vs. 30%. Now, according to Gallup's 2009 Environment survey, more Americans say the problem is exaggerated rather than underestimated, 41% vs. 28%.

The trend in the "exaggerated" response has been somewhat volatile since 2001, and the previous high point, 38%, came in 2004. Over the next two years, "exaggerated" sentiment fell to 31% and 30%. Still, as noted, the current 41% is the highest since Gallup's trend on this measure began in 1997.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/116590/Increased-Number-Think-Global-Warming-Exaggerated.aspx

Read more...

Ice Age or global warming?

The same question is being asked as the UK freezes and there is snow in Vegas, what are we heading for ? An Ice Age or A Heat Wave ? wish they would make up their minds, and stop spending tax money while they try to disprove each others theories.

It looks more like an Ice Age than global warming.

There is so much snow in Oslo, where I live, that the city authorities are resorting to dumping truckloads of it in the sea because the usual storage sites on land are full.

That is angering environmentalists who say the snow is far too dirty – scraped up from polluted roads — to be added to the fjord. The story even made it to the front page of the local paper (’Dumpes i sjøen’: ‘Dumped in the sea’).

Great article and lots of information on this site, you make up your own mind

http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2009/02/24/ice-age-or-global-warming/

Read more...

It seems that more and more are questioning Man Made Global Warming * a.k.a.climate change*
As more evidence, and I use that term very loosely, is being called into question surely there should now be an investigation into all the funds and money spent on research ?

Here are some questions every American should ask their elected officials – especially those supporting “climate change” legislation: If it is proven that climate change is not man-made, but natural, will you be relieved and excited to know that man is off the hook? Will you now help to remove all of the draconian regulations passed during the global warming hysteria, since it was all wrong headed and harmful to the economy and our way of life?

Their answers to these questions should be very illuminating as to the true agenda they seek to impose. Is their agenda really about helping to protect the environment, or is it about creating a new social and economic order, using the environment as the excuse?

http://www.climatechangefraud.com/

Read more...

The Myth of Dangerous Human-Caused Climate Change

Whether dangerous human-caused climate
change is a fact, possibly a fact or a fabrication
depends on who you choose to believe. Many of
us line up somewhere between probable and
possible on this spectrum. (John Roskam,
Australian Financial Review, 2006.)


I have been dismayed over the bogus science and
media hype associated with the (dangerous)
human-induced global warming hypothesis. My
innate sense of how the atmosphere-ocean
functions does not allow me to accept these
scenarios. Observations and theory do not
support these ideas. (Professor Emeritus William
Gray, Colorado State University, 2006.)

Human-caused global warming has become the environmental cause
celebre of the early 21st century. The strong warming alarmist camp
currently includes the United Nations, most Western governments, most
of the free press, many large corporations (including Enron, before it
failed), the major churches, most scientific organisations and a large
portion of general public opinion. This phalanx of support
notwithstanding there is no scientific consensus as to the danger of
human-induced climate change. There is, therefore, a strong conflict
between the level of public alarm and its scientific justification. How can
this be?
In a democracy, the media serve to convey to the public the facts and
hypotheses of climate change as provided by individual scientists,
governmental and international research agencies, and NGO and other
lobby groups. In general, the media have promulgated an alarmist cause
for climate change; they have certainly failed to convey the degree of
uncertainty that is characteristic of climate science, or a balanced
summary of the many essential facts that are relevant to human causation.
Climate change is as much a geological as it is a meteorological issue.
Natural climate changes, both warmings and coolings, are indeed a
societal hazard. We usually deal with geological hazards by providing
civil defence authorities and the public with accurate, evidence-based,
general information about events like earthquakes, volcanic eruptions,
tsunamis and floods, and then by adapting to the effects when a damaging
event occurs. As for other major natural disasters, the appropriate
preparation for extreme climate events is to mitigate and manage the
negative effects when they occur, and especially so for dangerous
coolings. Attempting instead to ‘stop climate change’ by reducing human
carbon dioxide emissions is a costly exercise of utter futility. Rational
climate policies must be based on adaptation to dangerous change as and
when it occurs, and irrespective of its sign or causation.

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/200705-03AusIMMcorrected.pdf

Read more...

Paying Yet More Taxes

This is a weird and wacky story, not content with using billions of the tax payers money to study and research climate change it now seems that the rubbish thrown away is going to be monitored and an extra charge will have to be paid, this on top of the money already being paid by the tax payers to have the garbage collected. Bear in mind the collections have gone from weekly to once every two weeks with no reduction in the cost to the tax payer, it seems that we are now going to be approximatly another £100 out of pocket per year as well

Read the whole article at http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/116087/Secret-plans-reveal-pay-as-you-throw-is-ready-to-go.html

HUNDREDS of thousands of household rubbish bins are being SPIED ON —despite claims Pay As You Throw tax plans have been shelved.

A News of the World probe reveals many town halls have secrettly geared up ready to launch the controversial new bin tax.

An estimated FOUR MILLION families, or one in five, now have bins fitted with microchips about the size of a 2p piece in readiness to log their rubbish.

We have seen contracts between councils and technology firms which show DUSTCARTS being fitted with chip readers, and DATABASES set up to record bin contents and weight via SATELLITE tracking systems.

Read more...

The Solution to a Problem

Problem ? There is always a solution it seems

Read more...

TEN MYTHS of Global Warming

MYTH 1: Global temperatures are rising at a rapid, unprecedented rate.

FACT: Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain top observations made over the last three decades have not shown any significant change in the long term rate of increase in global temperatures. Average ground station readings do show a mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8Cover the last 100 years, which is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas ("heat islands"), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas ("land use effects").

There has been no catastrophic warming recorded.

MYTH 2: The "hockey stick" graph proves that the earth has experienced a steady, very gradual temperature increase for 1000 years, then recently began a sudden increase.

FACT: Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time. For instance, the Medieval Warm Period, from around 1000 to1200 AD (when the Vikings farmed on Greenland) was followed by a period known as the Little Ice Age. Since the end of the 17^th Century the "average global temperature" has been rising at the low steady rate mentioned above; although from 1940 – 1970 temperatures actually dropped, leading to a Global Cooling scare.

The "hockey stick", a poster boy of both the UN's IPCC and Canada's Environment Department, ignores historical recorded climatic swings, and has now also been proven to be flawed and statistically unreliable as well. It is a computer construct and a faulty one at that.

MYTH 3: Human produced carbon dioxide has increased over the last 100 years, adding to the Greenhouse effect, thus warming the earth.

FACT: Carbon dioxide levels have indeed changed for various reasons, human and otherwise, just as they have throughout geologic time. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, the CO₂ content of the atmosphere has increased. The RATE of growth during this period has also increased from about 0.2% per year to the present rate of about 0.4% per year,which growth rate has now been constant for the past 25 years. However, there is no proof that CO₂ is the main driver of global warming. As measured in ice cores dated over many thousands of years, CO₂ levels move up and down AFTER the temperature has done so, and thus are the RESULT OF, NOT THE CAUSE of warming. Geological field work in recent sediments confirms this causal relationship. There is solid evidence that, as temperatures move up and down naturally and cyclically through solar radiation, orbital and galactic influences, the warming surface layers of the earth's oceans expel more CO₂ as a result.

MYTH 4: CO2 is the most common greenhouse gas.

FACT: Greenhouse gases form about 3 % of the atmosphere by volume. They consist of varying amounts, (about 97%) of water vapour and clouds, with the remainder being gases like CO₂, CH₄, Ozone and N₂O, of which carbon dioxide is the largest amount. Hence, CO₂ constitutes about 0.037% of the atmosphere. While the minor gases are more effective as "greenhouse agents" than water vapour and clouds, the latter are overwhelming the effect by their sheer volume and – in the end – are thought to be responsible for 60% of the "Greenhouse effect".

Those attributing climate change to CO₂ rarely mention this important fact.

MYTH 5: Computer models verify that CO2 increases will cause significant global warming.

FACT: Computer models can be made to "verify" anything by changing some of the 5 million input parameters or any of a multitude of negative and positive feedbacks in the program used.. They do not "prove" anything. Also, computer models predicting global warming are incapable of properly including the effects of the sun, cosmic rays and the clouds. The sun is a major cause of temperature variation on the earth surface as its received radiation changes all the time, This happens largely in cyclical fashion. The number and the lengths in time of sunspots can be correlated very closely with average temperatures on earth, e.g. the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period. Varying intensity of solar heat radiation affects the surface temperature of the oceans and the currents. Warmer ocean water expels gases, some of which are CO2. Solar radiation interferes with the cosmic ray flux, thus influencing the amount ionized nuclei which control cloud cover.

MYTH 6: The UN proved that man–made CO2 causes global warming.

FACT: In a 1996 report by the UN on global warming, two statements were deleted from the final draft. Here they are:
1) “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases.”
2) “No study to date has positively attributed all or part of the climate change to man–made causes”

To the present day there is still no scientific proof that man-made CO2 causes significant global warming.

MYTH 7: CO2 is a pollutant.

FACT: This is absolutely not true. Nitrogen forms 80% of our atmosphere. We could not live in 100% nitrogen either. Carbon dioxide is no more a pollutant than nitrogen is. CO2 is essential to life on earth. It is necessary for plant growth since increased CO2 intake as a result of increased atmospheric concentration causes many trees and other plants to grow more vigorously. Unfortunately, the Canadian Government has included CO2 with a number of truly toxic and noxious substances listed by the Environmental Protection Act, only as their means to politically control it.

MYTH 8: Global warming will cause more storms and other weather extremes.

FACT: There is no scientific or statistical evidence whatsoever that supports such claims on a global scale. Regional variations may occur. Growing insurance and infrastructure repair costs, particularly in coastal areas, are sometimes claimed to be the result of increasing frequency and severity of storms, whereas in reality they are a function of increasing population density, escalating development value, and ever more media reporting.

MYTH 9: Receding glaciers and the calving of ice shelves are proof of global warming.

FACT: Glaciers have been receding and growing cyclically for hundreds of years. Recent glacier melting is a consequence of coming out of the very cool period of the Little Ice Age. Ice shelves have been breaking off for centuries. Scientists know of at least 33 periods of glaciers growing and then retreating. It’s normal. Besides, glacier's health is dependent as much on precipitation as on temperature.

MYTH 10: The earth’s poles are warming; polar ice caps are breaking up and melting and the sea level rising.

FACT: The earth is variable. The western Arctic may be getting somewhat warmer, due to unrelated cyclic events in the Pacific Ocean, but the Eastern Arctic and Greenland are getting colder. The small Palmer Peninsula of Antarctica is getting warmer, while the main Antarctic continent is actually cooling. Ice thicknesses are increasing both on Greenland and in Antarctica.

Sea level monitoring in the Pacific (Tuvalu) and Indian Oceans (Maldives) has shown no sign of any sea level rise.

Source: Friends of Science website.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Nicholas Stern: Spend billions on green investments now to reverse economic downturn and halt climate change (guardian.co.uk)
• The Hockey Stick Hoax (powerlineblog.com)

Read more...

Finally a bit of sense is seen, the minister I wrote about yesterday has not been fired from his job for refusing to allow ads promoting CO2 ads to be shown , read the complete article here

Despite petitions calling for his sacking and even fellow unionists accusing him of turning Northern Ireland into a laughing stock, the Democratic Unionist party is sticking by climate change sceptic Sammy Wilson, who is the province's environment minister.

All the major parties in the Northern Ireland assembly have now said Wilson is unfit to hold the office, after he used his powers this week to ban government television adverts from the province's airwaves. Wilson said the Act On CO2 ads were insidious green "propaganda".

In what appeared to be a rebuke from the government in Westminster, Joan Ruddock, the minister for energy and climate change said: "My commitment to this [advertising] campaign is guided by the best science, the most up-to-date information and the evidence – the increasing frequency of extreme weather we are experiencing and seeing across the globe."

However, the only politician with the power to sack the DUP minister is his party colleague, Peter Robinson, Northern Ireland's first minister. Robinson according to senior DUP sources has "absolutely no intention" of firing Wilson, who remains a popular figure inside his party regardless of his unorthodox views on global warming.

The protest against Wilson came from across the board – nationalists, unionists and environmentalists. Roy Beggs junior, the Ulster Unionist spokesman on the environment said:

"Sammy Wilson's views on climate change, whilst mildly amusing, are out of kilter with mainstream political opinion and more importantly the overwhelming consensus view of climate scientists throughout the world. His latest action in trying to block UK government information on energy efficiency again shows his 'himself alone' attitude to environmental matters.

"He has effectively made a Unilateral Declaration of Independence against Her Majesty's Government on this crucial issue and is making Northern Ireland a laughing stock around the world. It is high time the first minister reined this maverick in, or perhaps this is merely a continuation of the DUP's battle against science and reason."

Recently the DUP's education spokesman Mervyn Storey called for creationism to be taught in Northern Ireland's schools alongside Darwin's theory of evolution.

Northern Ireland's Green party set up an online petition yesterday calling for Wilson to be removed. The Greens said the DUP MP for East Antrim had brought "the people and government of Northern Ireland into international disrepute." Friends of the Earth also entered the controversy with its Northern Ireland director John Woods accusing Wilson of being "completely irresponsible" in blocking the Act on CO2 ads.

Related articles by Zemanta

• DUP stands by climate change sceptic environment minister (guardian.co.uk)
• DUP Speaker orders colleague out of Stormont in Gerry Adams IRA row (guardian.co.uk)

Read more...

Irony for Gore

Al Gore is scheduled in front of John Kerry's committee in the Senate on Wednesday in Washington, DC. The irony of the situation is that there is a winter storm watch for the DC area with snow and possible ice accumulation. (see here)

Of course, the global warming alarmists say that the extreme winter we are experiencing is due to man-made global warming. Well, a couple more years of climate like this and we will uncover this hoax for what it is.

Next up, the search for Santa Claus.

Read more...

Global Warming Well

Read more...

Global Warming?

Has anyone else noticed the temperatures recently? Yesterday, Las Vegas got snow. This is a city that is in the middle of the desert. And it got snow. Malibu got snow also. For those of you who do not own a globe, that is near Los Angeles. Southern California got snow? What the hell is going on here?

All across the country we are seeing conditions such as these. What makes this incredible is that we are sold a bill of goods by our politicians and the media that we are being threatened by global warming. How is this warming? To me, it is obvious that there is some cooling taking place.

This got me thinking. I am always skeptical when most of the politicians and the mainstream media agree on anything. That usually means we are in trouble. And, when I hear someone like Al Gore say "the debate is over" when it pertains to science, I really sit up and take notice. Getting scientists to agree on anything is impossible. It is like trying to get economists to see things the same way; they never will.

So, what is the truth? To be fair, I will admit that I have studied this subject in some detail. I am not a scientist nor do I profess to be. I only looked at this subject because much of what I heard defied common sense. This led me to look at this closer myself. And guess what I found. We are being misled by those in charge. Is anyone surprised?

Evidently, the Earth goes through periods of warming and cooling. It is a natural cycle that occurred for millions of years. Recently, we notice that the Earth is operating in 25-30 year cycles. The cycle of warming just ended and now we are seeing a period of cooling. This is why we are seeing temperatures in certain areas that haven't occurred in 100 years. Some are believing that we are at the beginnings of another "Mini Ice Age". That is a far cry from the catastrophic warming we are told to fear.

Why so much misinformation? It is simple. MONEY!!! Global Warming is a giant money maker. Everyone is funding it because it is impossible to say "no" to. All the governments around the world are buying into it as is the UN. With Obama in charge, we are now going to see the United States on board. Welcome to the party.

I will write more about this in following posts. However, one thing that is interesting is how the name of this occurrence changed the last few years. Anytime this occurs, I see some fancy shenanigans be played. This is a move the political and media establishments do to us all the time. So, I really took notice when "global warming" because "climate change". Now why do you suppose that happened?

This is meant to drive home a point of how manipulated we are by those in power. If you feel this is not a correct assessment about the global climate, I challenge you to do some research. I want you to prove where there is no debate about the direction of the Earth's temperature and the link to man causing it. Do a search on "global cooling" to see what results you get. You will find some highly qualified scientist who have researched this topic. Interestingly, they do not have the huge research grants of the warming crowd. Again, that in itself ought to make you wonder.

Follow the money if you want to get to the truth. Or if you are in Las Vegas, just look out your window.

Read more...