Alert: 31,000 + Scientists Dissent! – Hurricane Link Withers
– Nitrogen the new Co2? - Endless W
Sampling of Articles in Past Few Days - May 19, 2008
BREAKING: 31,000 + scientists dispute UN's man-made global warming claims!
Financial Post article below:
[Note from organizers of petition: The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) will announce that more than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition rejecting claims of human-caused global warming. It is evident that 31,072 Americans with university degrees in science – including 9,021 PhDs, are not “a few.” Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,072 American scientists are not “skeptics.” Following the Press Club event, 10:00am, Monday May 19 at the Holeman Lounge at the National Press Club, 529 14th St., NW, Washington, DC - Dr. Robinson will host a lunch briefing on the Hill. Interested parties may join him in the Environment and Public Works hearing room, 406 Dirksen at noon for lunch on Monday May 19.] E-mails started coming in every day,” he explained. “And they kept coming. “ The writers were outraged at the way Al Gore and company were abusing the science to their own ends. “We decided to do the survey again.” Using a subset of the mailing list of American Men and Women of Science, a who’s who of Science, Robinson mailed out his solicitations through the postal service, requesting signed petitions of those who agreed that Kyoto was a danger to humanity. The response rate was extraordinary, “much, much higher than anyone expected, much higher than you’d ordinarily expect,” he explained. He’s processed more than 31,000 at this point, more than 9,000 of them with PhDs, and has another 1,000 or so to go — most of them are already posted on a Web site at petitionproject.org. Why go to this immense effort all over again, when the press might well ignore the tens of thousands of scientists who are standing up against global warming alarmism? “I hope the general public will become aware that there is no consensus on global warming,” he says, “and I hope that scientists who have been reluctant to speak up will now do so, knowing that they aren’t alone.” At one level, Robinson, a PhD scientist himself, recoils at his petition. Science shouldn’t be done by poll, he explains. “The numbers shouldn’t matter. But if they want warm bodies, we have them.” Some 32,000 scientists is more than the number of environmentalists that descended on Rio in 1992. Is this enough to establish that the science is not settled on global warming? The press conference releasing these names occurs on Monday at the National Press Center in Washington.
Scientist shifts view -- now says global warming NOT causing hurricanes! (AP)
[Note: The stunning news and “reconsiderations” just keep rolling in! Now Meteorologist Tom Knutson has reversed himself on a major aspect of the debate about global warming. Knutson joins Kerry Emanuel and the latest peer-reviewed research and evidence based data. The wheels of the man-made global warming fear machine continue to fall off. Even AP's Seth Borenstein is now being forced to write articles like below. Wow! See also: 'Global Warming Will Stop,' New Peer-Reviewed Study Says (LINK) & Prominent hurricane expert reconsiders global warming's impact (LINK) ]
Excerpt: Global warming isn't to blame for the recent jump in hurricanes in the Atlantic, concludes a study by a prominent federal scientist whose position has shifted on the subject. Not only that, warmer temperatures will actually reduce the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic and those making landfall, research meteorologist Tom Knutson reported in a study released Sunday. In the past, Knutson has raised concerns about the effects of climate change on storms. His new paper has the potential to heat up a simmering debate among meteorologists about current and future effects of global warming in the Atlantic. Ever since Hurricane Katrina in 2005, hurricanes have often been seen as a symbol of global warming's wrath. Many climate change experts have tied the rise of hurricanes in recent years to global warming and hotter waters that fuel them. Another group of experts, those who study hurricanes and who are more often skeptical about global warming, say there is no link. They attribute the recent increase to a natural multi-decade cycle. What makes this study different is Knutson, a meteorologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's fluid dynamics lab in Princeton, N.J. He has warned about the harmful effects of climate change and has even complained in the past about being censored by the Bush administration on past studies on the dangers of global warming. He said his new study, based on a computer model, argues "against the notion that we've already seen a really dramatic increase in Atlantic hurricane activity resulting from greenhouse warming." The study, published online Sunday in the journal Nature Geoscience, predicts that by the end of the century the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic will fall by 18 percent. The number of hurricanes making landfall in the United States and its neighbors — anywhere east of Puerto Rico — will drop by 30 percent because of wind factors.
http://www.theledger.com/article/20080518/BREAKING/813623488
A top scientist from the Philippine’s has now publicly dissented. Joining the 31,000 plus just announced!
Dissent Grows Louder: Award-winning scientist from Philippines raps Gore, dismisses climate fear as 'hyped up'
(Dr. Perry Ong is director of the Institute of Biology at the UP College of Science. Ong has a Ph.D. in science for behavioral ecology and evolutionary biology. He was given the Outstanding Young Scientist award by the National Academy of Science and Technology in 2000 for his contributions to the better understanding of Philippine wildlife diversity. He was a former representative of Conservation International.)
Excerpt: HUMANS MAY BE TAKING TOO much of the blame for climate change when it is largely triggered by natural causes, a biologist from the University of the Philippines said, citing nine errors in former US Vice President Al Gore’s documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth.” […] Ong said GHGs spawned by humans contribute merely 33 percent to global warming compared to the 67 percent traced to natural causes, which include changes in solar radiation, volcanic eruptions and the shifting of the Earth’s tilt and orbit. “Humankind is guilty of a lot of crimes against the Earth and pumping greenhouse gases is just one among many,” Ong stressed. The scientist echoed an unconventional and less popular view on such a “hyped up” environmental issue during his lecture at the UP Diliman on Wednesday. […] “Climate change has become a convenient excuse when there are other [environmental] issues that need to be addressed,” Ong said. “If we disproportionately blame ourselves for [climate change], our response will be different … we should look at the [bigger picture] and address other issues,” he added.
Is Nitrogen the New Carbon? Nitrogen called one of 'key causes of global climate change' - UVa scientist ties nitrogen to global climate change
Excerpt: One of the key causes of global climate change remains something of an unsung eco-villain, one University of Virginia researcher believes. In a study to be published in today’s issue of the journal Science, UVa environmental scientist James N. Galloway argues that reactive nitrogen is accumulating in the planet’s soil, water and air at an alarming rate. “Excessive reactive nitrogen is causing a negative environmental impact, which can be detrimental to humans and to ecosystems,” Galloway said.
The volume of reactive nitrogen being pumped into the environment has accelerated in recent years. During 1995, roughly 156 million metric tons of nitrogen were emitted worldwide. By 2005, that figure had jumped to 187 million. “We have a nitrogen issue,” he said. In its inert form, nitrogen is essentially harmless. It makes up around 78 percent of the planet’s atmosphere. Yet the widespread use of nitrogen-based fertilizers and the burning of fossil fuels have created large amounts of reactive nitrogen compounds, such as ammonia. These compounds are contributing to global warming, atmospheric ozone depletion, smog, haze, soil acidity, acid rain, fish kills, insect kills and respiratory ailments, Galloway said.
Say What? Norway's Moose threatened by climate change and causing it!?
[ Note: Sounds like the problem will resolve itself!]
See contradictory articles below: 1) Climate change threatens Norway's moose (May 15, 2008 - Aften Posten) versus 2) Norway's burping moose blamed for climate change - 'more destructive to environment than cars' (August 21, 2007 - Der Spiegel)
1) Climate change threatens Norway's moose (May 15, 2008 - Aften Posten)
Excerpt: Climate change threatens Norway's moose
Already chased by hunters and often run down by cars and trains, the popular Norwegian moose now faces another threat: Global warming. Greenery that's too mature can upset moose calves' digestive systems, and hurt their chances of surviving their first winter. Researchers claim the moose population is threatened by higher temperatures in the spring and early summer that can upset their food supplies. "We're not in any doubt," Bernt Erik Sæther of the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) in Trondheim told newspaper Aftenposten. "The moose is extremely vulnerable to climate changes. An especially warm spring and early summer can have immediate consequences on the mooses' reproductive abilities." That's because warmer temperatures will lead to earlier sprouting of the greenery on which moose calves feed. If it sprouts early, it may be too dry and fibrous by June, when the calves are born and start to feed. That in turn will cause problems for the calves' digestive systems and leave them too thin to survive their first winter. "They body weight is like a barometer for climate change," Sæther said. Researchers had thought Norwegian animals would generally be well-equipped to handle a warmer climate, and even benefit from less snow and ice. Instead, the opposite is true. "We were very surprised by the findings, and that a warmer climate prompts large swings in the moose population," Sæther said. "But all our analyses point in the same direction." The research on the moose population, which in general has increased in recent years, is part of the Norwegian Research Council's NORKLIMA program.
http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article2424960.ece
2) Norway's burping moose blamed for climate change - 'more destructive to environment than cars' (August 21, 2007 - Der Spiegel)
Excerpt: Norway's Moose Population in Trouble for Belching. The poor old Scandinavian moose is now being blamed for climate change, with researchers in Norway claiming that a grown moose can produce 2,100 kilos of carbon dioxide a year -- equivalent to the CO2 output resulting from a 13,000 kilometer car journey.Norway is concerned that its national animal, the moose, is harming the climate by emitting an estimated 2,100 kilos of carbon dioxide a year through its belching and farting. Norwegian newspapers, citing research from Norway's technical university, said a motorist would have to drive 13,000 kilometers in a car to emit as much CO2 as a moose does in a year. Bacteria in a moose's stomach create methane gas which is considered even more destructive to the environment than carbon dioxide gas. Cows pose the same problem (more) Norway has some 120,000 moose but an estimated 35,000 are expected to be killed in this year's moose hunting season, which starts on September 25, Norwegian newspaper VG reported.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,501145,00.html
Colorado Skiers enjoying ‘winter that just won’t seem to end’
It ain’t over ‘til it’s over. That’s what diehard skiers are saying this year, milking every last drop of pleasure from a a winter that just won’t seem to end. A storm late last week dropped about eight inches of snow on Arapahoe Basin, and the skiing surface was refreshed yet again with another eight inches reported between May 11-13.A-Basin skiers and boarders are reporting some of the best skiing of the season high on the East Wall, where winter-like snow lingers in the steepest notches and chutes. The relatively dense spring snow settles more quickly than mid-winter powder, and this is prime-time for the hike-to terrain. “It was sweet,” said Owen Collins said after snaking a line of GS turns down the North Pole run-out apron. “The drop-in was a little intense ... kind of rocky, but this snow is unreal.”A-Basin, the last ski area open in Colorado, is reporting a 59-inch base, with snow conditions transitioning from powder to spring. The snow surface can change hour to hour, depending on elevation, aspect and slope angle. It can even change from turn to turn on the same run, with the east-facing side of a gully warming to spring corn early in the morning, while the western aspect remains frozen solid until after lunch. Local backcountry skiers are talking about big lines on big peaks, with solid top-to-bottom coverage on favorites like Buffalo Mountain and Quandary Peak. The steady stream of storms has extended the harvest of spring corn snow and the potential for backcountry avalanches.
http://www.summitdaily.com/article/20080515/NEWS/522040402
Climate sightseeing: Travel industry promotes 'farewell tour' of Earth's greatest hits before global warming hits hard
Excerpt: "Let's face it, Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" and the time-lapse photography were not lost on a number of people," says Ann Mack, director of trendspotting for JWT, the nation's largest advertising agency. "And increasingly, people are wanting to see these sights of the world before they change shape or change form. As global warming is rising up the world's agenda, ecotourists are flocking to previously ignored places. "It's been called climate sightseeing, a kind of farewell tour of Earth's greatest hits. Hard data is not available — determining exactly why people go where they do is next to impossible. But a clear interest in ecotourism, coupled with much greater accessibility to places like the Earth's poles, means more people are visiting faraway and endangered sites, whatever their motives. The subject is full of paradoxes: The more you travel, for example, the more you're contributing to the problem that made you go to an endangered site in the first place. And some places — Canada, perhaps Russia and other cold climes — are likely to attract more tourists as they warm. Robert Henson, a meteorologist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research and author of "The Rough Guide to Climate Change," says: "Stay longer. Go ahead and travel, but do it smartly. Get direct flights; use a train to get around."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/travel/2004419854_webwarmingtrips18.html
NO NET GLOBAL WARMING SINCE 1940?
By Allan MacRae (Allan M. R. MacRae is a professional engineer)
Excerpt: Climate is a complicated subject. However, we now know enough to be reasonably certain that man-made CO2 is NOT a significant or dangerous driver of global warming. Here some key facts: Since ~1940 there has been a 900% INCREASE in human-made CO2 emissions and NO net global warming, as measured by our most reliable instrumentation. The average Lower Troposphere (LT) global temperature anomaly for January-April 2008 (inclusive) is +0.02 degrees C. There has been no net LT warming since ~1980, when such measurements began. We also know that global surface temperature (ST) declined slightly from ~1940 to ~1980. We further know that CO2 lags temperature (CO2 trends occur after temperature trends) at all measured time scales. This evidence leads to the following conclusions: Increased atmospheric CO2 is NOT a significant driver of global warming, and catastrophic human-made global warming does NOT exist. The public is becoming aware of these facts - the recent electoral defeat of Ken Livingstone by Boris Johnson for Mayor of London is clear evidence of this shift in public awareness.
http://antigreen.blogspot.com/2008/05/no-net-global-warming-since-1940-email.html
Temperature fluctuations since 1995 are random
Excerpt: An email from MIT Climate Scientist Prof. Richard S. Lindzen: We are probably making a mistake in saying that there has been no warming since 1998. The standard enviro response is that 1998 was an El Nino year. While this is not an entirely meaningful response, one doesn't have to deal with it at all, since there has been no statistically significant warming since 1995. Of course, communicating the meaning of statistical significance could be difficult.
http://antigreen.blogspot.com/2008/05/temperature-fluctuations-since-1995-are.html
UN IPCC Accused of Promoting ‘Web of Untruths’ (By Oliver K. Manuel, Emeritus Professor & Former NASA PI for Apollo Lunar Samples)
Excerpt: Questions remain: Why did international and federal agencies - like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), NASA, DOE, NSF, etc. - work together to promote this web of untruths? 1. CO2 from the tail pipes of Western economic engines caused global warming. 2. Earth's climate is immune from the cyclic changes in sunspots and solar activity. 3. Hydrogen fusion in the Sun bathes planet Earth in a steady and unchanging flow of heat. 4. Solar neutrinos from H-fusion in the Sun magically oscillate away before reaching our detectors. IPCC alone could not have convinced the public of the validity of this fairy tale. NASA and DOE were active partners; NSF did not speak out as this misinformation was presented to the public as scientific facts. I do not know the answer, but that seems to be the key question in the current debate over global warming. Comments from officials in NASA, DOE and NSF would be helpful.
Via CCNET
'SIGNIFICANT WARMING' (By Meteorologist Dr. Madhav Khandekar, IPCC Reviewer)
Excerpt: Allow me to expand on Prof Lindzen's comment on 'significant warming.' Per Phil Jones & Moberg's paper J of Climate January 2003, for the warming period 1977-2001, "significant warming trends are present in only 10-20% of the available grid boxes" Jones and Moberg use 5x5 deg grid boxes. So of the present warming, only one fifth of the grid boxes show statistically significant warming and a close look at these boxes reveal that for land-areas, most of these boxes are in the vicinity of large cities and urban centres of the world. So in essence the statistically significant warming is primarily due to urbanization and land-use change and NOT due to increased greenhouse gases. A recent paper by Ross McKitrick & Patrick Michaels , J of Geophysical Research December 2007 succinctly show that up to half of the present warming is due to extraneous factors, urbanization, land-use change, economic activity etc. Outside of the "significant warming' grid boxes, the warming is only modest and is of NO major concern. Further, this modest warming can be explained as due to changes in large-scale circulation patterns, solar variability etc. So we have the basic question once again: Where is the CO2-induced warming which is statistically significant? It is elusive and hard to locate. Finally Prof Lindzen's point re: "explaining statistically significant warming may be difficult" is of well taken, but I like to think that most trained scientists and professionals today would have a sense of significant warming without knowing the statistical test of significance that precedes it!
Via CCNET
Reuters: So what happened to global warming? [Note: Reuters still tows the man-made warming bandwagon, but it is significant that they are now asking the obvious question!]
Excerpt: So what happened to global warming? It’s not just that it’s disappeared from media headlines this year - shoved off by the credit crunch and natural disasters, for example. It’s not just that it’s disappeared from media headlines this year - shoved off by the credit crunch and natural disasters, for example. […] But [2007] wasn’t a record. In fact that was 1998, a full 10 years ago — the year of an exceptional El Nino, a Pacific weather pattern which heats the whole globe. So is global warming not living up to the hype? Two weeks ago Leibniz Institute’s Noel Keenlyside stirred an academic hornet’s nest by saying that we may have to wait longer - a decade or more - for another peak year, because a natural weakening in ocean currents may be cooling sea temperatures. […] But how long is a blip? No-one knows. It could be many years before there’s an El Nino as bad as 1998, scientists say. And in the meantime the doubts will grow, just as policymakers try to negotiate one of the most complex global treaties ever. A new Kyoto Protocol will affect issues of equity and poverty: in the case of poor countries the right to grow, for island states perhaps the right to exist, and for rich countries the right to compete on a level economic playing field. Meanwhile one or two doubters are already saying the present lull in warming casts doubt on just how far manmade greenhouse gases are influencing the climate. MIT’s Richard Lindzen reckoned that if it was as bad as all that temperatures would be rising faster.
http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2008/05/16/so-what-happened-to-global-warming/
Red Cross official warns global warming may lead to human extinction
Excerpt: Climate change killed the dinosaurs. Will it kill us as well? Will we let it destroy the human race? This was the grim, depressing message that hung in the background of the Climate Change Forum hosted on Friday by the Philippine National Red Cross at the Manila Hotel. "Not one dinosaur is alive today. Maybe someday it will be our fossils that another race will dig up in the future, " said Roger Bracke of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, underscoring his point that no less than extinction is faced by the human race, unless we are able to address global warming and climate change in this generation. Bracke, however, countered the pessimistic mood of the day by saying that the human race still has an opportunity to save itself. This more hopeful view was also presented by the four other speakers in the forum. Bracke pointed out that all peoples of the world must be involved in two types of response to the threat of climate change: mitigation and adaptation. "Prevention" is no longer possible, according to Bracke and the other experts at the forum, since climate change is already happening. The forum's speakers all noted the increasing number and intensity of devastating typhoons--most recently cyclone Nargis in Myanmar, which killed more than 100,000 people--as evidence that the world's climatic and weather conditions are turning deadly because of climate change. They also reminded the audience that deadly typhoons have also hit the Philippines recently, particularly Milenyo and Reming, which left hundreds of thousands of Filipino families homeless. World Wildlife Fund Climate and Energy Program head Naderev Saño said that "this generation the last chance for the human race" to do something and ensure that humanity stays alive in this planet. According to Saño, while most members of our generation will be dead by the time the worst effects of climate change are felt, our children will be the ones to suffer.
http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/storypage.aspx?StoryId=118533
Kidney Stones Blamed on Global Warming? (no Joke )
Excerpt: Washington, May 16 (IANS) Latest research indicates that global warming could have another unwanted spin-off - it may spur the formation of kidney stones. Dehydration, particularly in warmer climes and higher temperatures, will only exacerbate this effect. Consequently, the prevalence of stone disease may increase, along with the costs of treatment. Using published data bearing on temperature-dependence of stone disease, researchers applied predictions of temperature increase to determine the impact of global warming on the incidence and cost of kidney stone disease. The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has indicated significant increases in temperature by 2050. These findings were presented at the ongoing 103rd Annual Scientific Meeting of the American Urological Association.
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/world-news/kidney-stones-blame-global-warming_10049250.html
New Peer-Reviewed study questions Co2’s role in ocean warming
Excerpt: Comment by former Colorado State Climatologist Dr. Roger Pielke Sr.: „This paper illustrates yet another shortcoming of the global climate models that are used to predict the climate system in the coming decades. They cannot accurately simulate the important climate feature of the North Atlantic Oscillation (the NAO). As the authors, themselves write “it is premature to conclusively attribute these regional patterns of heat gain to greenhouse warming“. This shortcoming of the multi-decadal global models applies to other low frequency climate variations, such as ENSO and the North Pacific Decadal Oscillation, which are major factors in the climate that we experience.“ [...] A paper by M. Susan Lozier, Susan Leadbetter, Richard G. Williams, Vassil Roussenov, Mark S. C. Reed, and Nathan J. Moore entitled “The Spatial Pattern and Mechanisms of Heat-Content Change in the North Atlantic” originally published in Science Express on 3 January 2008, Science 8 February 2008. The abstract reads: “The total heat gained by the North Atlantic Ocean over the past 50 years is equivalent to a basinwide increase in the flux of heat across the ocean surface of 0.4 ± 0.05 watts per square meter. We show, however, that this basin has not warmed uniformly: Although the tropics and subtropics have warmed, the subpolar ocean has cooled. […] Hence, although the change in ocean heat content over the North Atlantic can be connected to the decadal trend in the NAO, it is premature to conclusively attribute these regional patterns of heat gain to greenhouse warming. Continued long-term monitoring of North Atlantic temperatures is needed to answer the question of whether the basin-average warming is reflecting anthropogenic forcing and/or natural variability. “
AccuWeather.com's senior meteorologist and long range expert Joe Bastardi sent the global warming center a copy of his open letter to the 2008 presidential candidates.
Excerpt: The nonsense that is the global warming debate can be likened to a Don King production, where the two main antagonists, well deserved ones at that, are still hours away from the main fight. Instead, we have under-cards that leave us simply wondering if we will ever get to the real deal. […] Within the first 100 days of office, get the top five SCIENTISTS on both sides of the issue in front of you in the oval office and let them argue it out. No cameras, no press, just you, your closest advisors, and the people that are qualified to do this. Have trusted members of both sides of the aisles, but get the politics out of it. The polar bear situation should push Americans over the edge. The long term population has increased. In addition, the cold this winter may simply be a preview of what is coming. That we are basically going to make it illegal to get oil, from an area that can perhaps help us get off foreign oil, because of yet another problem that may not exist, should be enough to clear the air and reveal that there are alot of people supporting this position that are not driven by the science, but what may be an almost fanatical madness, and that should resonate with people. Sir or Mam, if you are absolutely convinced, after seeing people who don't think polar bears are as important as the people you are elected to serve, that argue out the science, then commit the American people on a path that will basically spend their hard-earned money on a problem our chief rivals are probably simply paying lip service too, then I will support you. But if you have doubt, after clearing away the feelings and looking at the facts, then by proceeding you will put yourself in a rush to judgement before the facts are clear that has left many Americans disillusioned about our nation in other matters. This is not a matter of politics, it is not a matter of feelings. It is a matter of science and facts and educated men squaring off and displaying their knowledge. A non-conclusive answer in this matter is no answer at all, and no mandate to perhaps send us on path that could affect the chance for the very people we should have the most compassion for, to improve their lot. Yours very truly, Joe Bastardi
http://global-warming.accuweather.com/2008/05/an_open_letter_to_the_presiden_1.html
Keep the Beach House (Planet Gore – Marlo Lewis)
Excerpt: Who can forget Al Gore’s 20-foot wall of water inundating the world’s coastal cities in his Oscar-winning film, An Inconvenient Truth? In the book version, Gore warned that, “If Greenland melted or broke up and slipped into the sea — or if half of Greenland and half of Antarctica melted or broke up and slipped into the sea — sea levels worldwide would increase by 18 to 20 feet.” […] The IPCC believes that sea levels rose 1-2 mm/yr during the 20th century. However, a new study in Global and Planetary Change by Indian researchers finds that sea levels in the Indian Ocean rose between 1.06– 1.75 mm/yr, with an average of 1.29 mm/yr. “Imagine that,” comments World Climate Report, “once someone collects data in their part of the world, they seem to conclude that sea level is rising at a rate slower than the rate reported by the IPCC.” Another study in Global and Planetary Change, also reviewed by World Climate Report, finds that global sea levels rose 1.48 mm/yr from 1955 to 2003, with no observable acceleration through those five decades. My friends, 1.48 mm/yr translates into 14.8 centimeters in a century, which equals 5.8 inches. Now is certainly not the time to sell that beachfront property.
http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTFlNzU5OWMxNzRiYzNlYzY2MjI3NjEyY2E4MzMzMTg=
Gore calls upon U.S. graduates 'to be part of the third hero generation'
Excerpt: Former Vice President Al Gore on Sunday told graduates of Carnegie Mellon University they could become part of the next "hero generation" in American history by solving environmental problems. In a commencement address before a record crowd of about 10,000 people, the Nobel laureate said there had already been two "special generations" of Americans: one that founded the country and another that defeated fascism during World War II. "You, I hope and expect, will be called upon to be part of the third hero generation in American history," now that the U.S. is poised to reclaim its rightful place as the leader of the world as it faces the threat of global warming, he said. "We face a planetary emergency," Gore said. "The concentrations of global warming pollution have been rising at an unprecedented pace and have now given the planet a fever." Carnegie Mellon had provided "great leadership in confronting what I regard as the most serious crisis our civilization has ever confronted," partly by becoming a major buyer of retail wind power, he said.
Robust debate about ‘Climatecide’ (Climate Resistance)
Excerpt: What Johnnyrook writes in Why Climate Denialists are Blind to Facts and Reason: The Role of Ideology is, frankly, unmitigated and unimportant crap. But it does offer some insight into the 'thought processes' of grass-roots Environmentalism. Johnnyrook whines that “Anyone who has tried to discuss Climaticide with a climate change denialist knows just how frustrating it can be. No matter how well informed you are, no matter how many peer-reviewed studies you cite, or how many times you point out the overwhelming agreement based on the evidence that exists among climate scientists that global warming is real and is principally caused by human fossil fuel use, you will get no where.” […] Climaticide? Climaticide? Is it even possible to kill a climate? But moving on, Johnnyrook clearly believes himself to be in possession of a faultless argument. So it must be the rest of the world that's wrong. Who said environmentalism was emotional, arrogant, and infantile? […] Johnny's inability to reflect on his own ideology, his poor grasp of politics and his disregard for others all go some way to explaining his frustration, anger, and confusion. This is a symptom of the environmental movement. We have written before about the many different ways that Environmentalists have tried to diminish their opponents by questioning their psychology and moral character, and by trying to locate a conspiracy - in every way, in fact, other than through careful, honest, political argument. Johnny's emotions characterise the shrill, impatient, self importance of the environmental movement, which prefers trantrums to debate, and panic and alarmism to convincing arguments. It prizes emotion over intellectual engagement. Environmentalism isn't so much a cause to fight for, than a symptom of belonging to nothing. It is, nonetheless, an ideology - one that needs to be challenged.
http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/05/environmentalism-frustrated-angry-and.html
Carbon-trading boom could go bust
Excerpt: The carbon-credit business is booming in Thailand. But the key question is: how long is the boom going to last? […] The carbon-credit business is new globally. Some businessmen jokingly call it a trading of emptiness, while some activists claim it is tantamount to making money from global warming. This business is based on a tool called the clean development mechanism (CDM), initiated and designed as part of the Kyoto Protocol. Rich countries agreed to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, especially carbon dioxide, within an agreed timeframe. However, because of the impact it could have on their economies, the CDM was devised as an alternative. The CDM allows these countries to buy carbon credits from poor countries, which could reduce emissions despite their obligation under the protocol. "It is new and many opportunities are available. However, it is also an unstable business," said Anat Prapasawat of Advance Energy Plus. "Rules and regulations related to this business change rapidly, depending on the ongoing negotiations, and information about global warming is constantly updated by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. You have to be prepared," he said.
http://nationmultimedia.com/2008/05/19/national/national_30073381.php
Global warming causes truffle shortage
Excerpt: The exclusive delicacy the black truffle is becoming even more exclusive because of global warming. Latest harvests of the underground fungi are down 50 percent on expectations because many of the areas where they grow are experiencing prolonged drought. As a result prices for the reported aphrodisiac are soaring and are now three times that of 10 years ago. Experts have even warned that if global warming continues the prime growing regions of Italy and southern France may become too warm to continue producing black truffles. "The bad harvest years, which used to be the exception, are becoming the norm," said Jean-Charles Savignac, President of the Federation Francaise des Trufficulteurs. (FFT)
http://newslite.tv/2008/05/19/global-warming-causes-truffle.html
Where Are All The Drowning Polar Bears?
Excerpt: Last fall, as a massive media campaign reminded us, the extent of Arctic ice was at an all-time (since 1979) low, yet we cannot recall a single report of a drowned polar bear as a result. Surely, with all the attention on polar bear well-being that arose as the Interior Department considered its ESA decision, if there were evidence of polar bears drowning last summer, it would have been held up front and center. But it wasn’t. Because they weren’t. So where does this now omnipresent notion come from that polar bears—famously strong swimmers—will perish in droves under the warming waves as the distance between the ice edge and the shore becomes too great to overcome? Let’s have a look-see. The original source of the drowning polar bear story is a series of studies conducted by Charles Monnett and colleagues from the U.S. Minerals Management Service (MMS) out of Alaska which as been observing and counting polar bears on Alaska’s north shore for the past 30 years or so as part of a broader efforts to survey bowhead whale populations in the region and assess any impacts that oil and gas exploration activities may be having on them. Since the late 1970s, aerial surveys have been conducted from small airplanes flown during the late summer/early fall documenting the numbers of whales, polar bears, and other large marine mammals. […] This NASA web site shows the minimum extent of Arctic sea ice each summer since 1979. As you scroll down through the list of years, notice that in many if not most late summers, the edge of the sea ice is quite a ways from the north coast of Alaska. So, the sea ice conditions along the northern coast of Alaska were hardly that unusual during September 2004. No more so than they were in the years since or in many prior. So bears weren’t encountering unusual ice conditions in 2004. In fact, in the period 1992-2004, more than 50% of bear sightings were in regions of no ice (Monnett et al., 2005). Why an elevated number of bears were observed swimming in open water in 2004 is unclear, but it could be from any number of reasons, sampling effort, bear population dynamics, bear food dynamics, to name a few—but an unusual expanse of open water doesn’t seem to be one of them.
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2008/05/16/where-are-all-the-drowning-polar-bears
Unfounded climate fears called ‘most costly intelligence failure’
Excerpt: What do you think was the most costly intelligence failure of all time? […] It was the failure of many leading climate model builders to be modest enough about their predictions, and the politicians' and media's failure to ask the tough questions of these climate experts. As a consequence of what we now know was an overblown global-warming scare, everyone on the planet is paying substantially more for food and fuel than is necessary. […] The global warming zealots have just been handed another rude shock, when the peer-reviewed journal, Nature, reported on May 1 that according to a new (and hopefully improved) climate model, global surface temperatures may not increase over the next decade. […] "As a direct result of the global-warming hysteria, which, as noted above, was grossly overblown to say the least, governments reacted by restricting energy production from traditional sources, such as oil, gas and coal, and by enacting very costly regulations on CO2 emission sources. Governments also quickly jumped on the fad of "biomass" production, which, at least in the case of corn, does not result in less CO2 but more than standard oil and gas wells produce — a clear "intelligence" failure. The restrictions on oil and gas have greatly increased the cost of gasoline and home heating oil, and the production cost of almost everything else, especially plastics and food.
http://washingtontimes.com/article/20080518/COMMENTARY/673994116/1012
Prince Charles: Eighteen months to stop climate change disaster
Excerpt: The Prince of Wales has warned that the world faces a series of natural disasters within 18 months unless urgent action is taken to save the rainforests. In one of his most out-spoken interventions in the climate change debate, he said a £15 billion annual programme was required to halt deforestation or the world would have to live with the dire consequences. "We will end up seeing more drought and starvation on a grand scale. Weather patterns will become even more terrifying and there will be less and less rainfall," he said. "We are asking for something pretty dreadful unless we really understand the issues now and [the] urgency of them." The Prince said the rainforests, which provide the "air conditioning system for the entire planet", releasing water vapour and absorbing carbon, were being lost to poor farmers desperate to make a living.
Newsweek: Global Warming: It's Fat People's Fault
Excerpt: Now greenhouse deniers can imagine another conspiracy: it is all a plot to get rid of fat people.
The link between obesity and climate change has come up before, although subtly. An AP story last year noted that people could combat both of these problems by walking or bicycling rather than driving (so they burn calories, not gasoline). And writing in the Huffington Post, filmmaker Bryan Young (“Killer at Large”) cited a scientist who told him that “for every pound the average American is overweight, we use an additional 938 million gallons of gasoline per year. That's enough to fill 2 million cars with gasoline every year.” It’s straightforward physics: it takes more energy to move a lot of weight than it does to move a little weight (which is also why, everything else being equal, big cars get worse gas mileage than subcompacts).
Obesity Promotes Global Warming? (NY Times)
Excerpt: As someone who commutes by bicycle into Manhattan, I would normally applaud any scientific rationale for more bike lanes. But some calculations in the new issue of the Lancet make me uncomfortable. The authors argue that policies promoting cycling and walking are good for the planet because they could reduce obesity — and obesity, the authors calculate, contributes to global warming.
Do we really need to give fat people one more reason to feel guilty?
http://tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/16/lose-weight-for-the-earth
Are Tropical Cyclones Really Increasing in Number & Intensity? (Meteorologist Craig James of Michigan’s Wood TV)
Excerpt: I just read a small article published in the April 2008 edition of the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society titled “Are Atlantic Tropical Cyclones Really Increasing in Number, Intensity? Using data from 1966-2006, statistical models were used to determine: “it is improbable that the number of tropical cyclones has increased since 1966.”… “In addition, the rate at which storms become hurricanes appears to have decreased”. Also, “little evidence is found that mean individual storm intensity has changed, although the variability of intensity has certainly increased. This increase is probably due to changes and improvements of intensity measurements through time..” “This model was recently applied to worldwide tropical storms and resulted in similar conclusions.” The full article will be in a forthcoming issue of the Journal of Climate. I wonder how many people will ever hear about it? At least Kerry Emanuel from M.I.T., who had been a strong believer in increased tropical cyclone activity due to global warming has now modified his position. In an email to Andrew Revkin of the New York Times he stated: “The models are telling us something quite different from what nature seems to be telling us. There are various interpretations possible, e.g. a) The big increase in hurricane power over the past 30 years or so may not have much to do with global warming, or b) The models are simply not faithfully reproducing what nature is doing. Hard to know which to believe yet.” Isn’t it more likely both could be true?
http://blogs.woodtv.com/?p=3648
Climate Scientist Dr. John Christy: Facing fears & global warming
Excerpt: I am a climate scientist. My research and that of many others does not lead me to be afraid for the climate’s future. However, I am fearful for other reasons: I fear for my science. The truth is, our climate system is so complex that we cannot predict its state even into next month. Nonetheless, I see high-profile individuals (usually untrained in science) making claims with unwavering confidence about the climate’s trajectory and a looming catastrophe. […] I fear for humanity. When people speak about “doing something about global warming,” please listen carefully. What they advocate are “solutions,” which lead to rationing of energy while having no climate impact. A hidden consequence of these “solutions” is to make energy more expensive—a regressive burden disproportionately inflicted upon the poorest among us.
http://www.baptiststandard.com/postnuke/index.php?module=htmlpages&func=display&pid=7690
UK citizens do not consider environment among top concerns
Excerpt: As long pointed out on this site, public interest in ‘global warming’ and the environment is in steady decline here in the UK, and, according to the ΦPHI5000, the world’s largest daily public-opinion tracker, climate change and the environment have now fallen into bottom place [‘People Stop Worrying About The Environment As The Economy And Tax Take Centre-Stage’, PoliticsHome, May 16]:[…] Anthony Wells comments:, “This is no one-off blip: it’s a genuine change in priorities.” "As the economy heads for trouble, there has been a remarkable shift in the public priorities. Issues like the environment have moved down the agenda and people have started worrying about tax and inflation.”
http://web.mac.com/sinfonia1/Global_Warming_Politics/A_Hot_Topic_Blog/Entries/2008/5/16_Phi_On_Climate_Change.html & http://www.politicshome.com/Landing.aspx?Blog=909&perma=link#
UK Number Watch, 20 May 2006 (By Dr. John Brignell is a UK Emeritus Engineering Professor at the University of Southampton)
Excerpt: Governments of the leading economies have been sleep-walking into a disastrous situation in which that most vital commodity is in short supply. It is not just the inexorable workings of the law of supply-and-demand that apply; spurious "green" taxes also stoke the fire. Increase the cost of energy and you increase the cost of everything.
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/2006%20May.htm#Greenflation
The Global Warming Tutorial Media Should be Required to Take (Paleoclimate scientist Dr. Bob Carter)
Excerpt: Carter addresses five tests of the hypothesis espoused by the climate alarmists that there is "dangerous human-caused global warming": Has global temperature warmed over the last few years? Is today's global temperature unnaturally high? Does CO2 output correlate with temperature change? Does CO2 lead or lag temperature change? Does the pattern of temperature change match theoretical predictions of greenhouse warming?
EU risks missing Kyoto targets, goals unrealistic
E.ON AG. Chief Executive Officer Bernotat said the European Union will probably not meet the 2012 carbon dioxide emission targets of the Kyoto Protocol because consumers are using too much energy, Die Zeit reported.
Bernotat said in an interview with the weekly newspaper he is sceptical that the German government's longer-term emission target of one-quarter of energy consumption coming from renewable sources by 2020 can be met.
The projected annual increase in energy efficiency of 3 percent contrasts with a current improvement rate of 0.8 percent, he said in the interview to be published Thursday. The CEO also expressed doubt that 15,000 MW of off-shore wind power capacity can be erected by 2020, which is also part of the government plan. E.ON, Germany's largest utility, has internal plans to increase the share of energy coming from renewable sources to one quarter by 2030, Bernotat said. ludwig.burger@thomsonreuters.com lb/kf1 COPYRIGHT Copyright Thomson Financial News Limited 2008.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/24611450/for/cnbc
Polar bears listed as endangered, while global sea ice anomaly is above average
Excerpt: As the NYT article mentioned above made perfectly clear, this has been a battle over the alarmist’s fear of global warming, not about polar bears per se. Global warming, they worry, is going to yield an ice free Arctic, and the land bound ice in the Antarctic is on the verge of melting and flooding the coastal regions of the planet. So, how does the overall global sea ice extent look, as of today? While it has wiggled up an down about the average since satellites have been measuring it, and it stayed below average for several years, it is currently above average, as shown in figure 5, below. […] http://climatesanity.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/anomaly.jpgMy guess is that most of the alarmists are hoping and praying for a significant meltdown in the Arctic this summer. Without such a meltdown it won’t be polar bears that are endangered, but their credibility.
Proof of Man-made global warming? (By physicist Dr. Lubos Motl, formerly of Harvard University)
Excerpt: Her article is highlighted by a huge advertisement on the title page of nature.com. She "explains" the "methodology" of the "proof". They look at 829 phenomena related to ecosystems and they find that some of them have not been changing significantly since the 1970s while others exhibit a trend. Among those where a trend is observed, 90% of cases are consistent with warming. And this is supposed to be a proof of AGW. […] The actual "groundbreaking" article by Cynthia Rosenzweig et al. is here: Already in the abstract, they say that "these temperature increases at continental scales cannot be explained by natural climate variations alone." How do they figure out that the naturally looking variations we have seen since the 1970s cannot be explained by natural variations? Well, the essence of their "reasoning" is explained in the following sentence of the abstract: Given the conclusions from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report that most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-twentieth century is very likely to be due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations, ..Wow. So The Financial Times unapologetically tell you that there is a proof of man-made global warming and if you look what the proof actually is, you see that 14 mostly female authors are excited about parroting a pre-determined sentence from a summary of the IPCC report that they were helping to write themselves, anyway. […] I find it outrageous that similar garbage is being printed in journals that used to be prestigious and that average or downright stupid women and men who can't reach the ankles of people whom I consider scientists of global importance are being presented by dishonest journalists-activists as the world's leading scientists. This proliferation of idiots and parasites in the name of political correctness is just disgraceful. And it is very dangerous, too.
http://motls.blogspot.com/2008/05/female-alarmists-spam-nature.html
Global warming eco-monster? Actor Val Kilmer To Do Battle With Deadly Global Warming Parasite!
Excerpt: Move over deadly plants! The world is about to get a taste of a previously frozen nasty unleashed due to global climate change. Such is the plot for the new Indie-horror movie The Thaw — which has just signed on actor Val Kilmer in the lead role. The film also stars Martha MacIsaac (Michael Cera’s high school flame in Superbad) as Kilmer’s daughter. So how does this all go down? Well, apparently, a group of student-scientists stumble upon a thawing Woolly Mammoth in a melting ice cap. Unfortunately, the Mammorth is packing a deadly parasite that had laid dormant (and hungry we might add) for thousands of years. One-by-one, everyone becomes infected, all hell breaks loose, and well, you get the picture. According to the synopsis, “soon the survivors are left with only one choice - to make the ultimate sacrifice and burn everything to the ground… including themselves.” Toasty.
http://www.ecorazzi.com/2008/05/16/val-kilmer-to-do-battle-with-deadly-global-warming-parasite/
Senate climate bill to cut 'emissions per capita, to 19th-century levels' (By Climatologist Dr. Patrick Michaels)
Excerpt: Al Gore and his minions continue to chant that "the science is settled" on global warming, but the only thing settled is that there has not been any since 1998. Critics of this view (rightfully) argue that 1998 was the warmest year in modern record, due to a huge El Nino event in the Pacific Ocean, and that it is unfair to start any analysis at a high (or a low) point in a longer history. But starting in 2001 or 1998 yields the same result: no warming. The Keenlyside team found that natural variability in the Earth's oceans will "temporarily offset" global warming from carbon dioxide. Seventy percent of the Earth's surface is oceanic; hence, what happens there greatly influences global temperature. It is now known that both Atlantic and Pacific temperatures can get "stuck," for a decade or longer, in relatively warm or cool patterns. The North Atlantic is now forecast to be in a cold stage for a decade, which will help put the damper on global warming. Another Pacific temperature pattern is forecast not to push warming, either. Science no longer provides justification for any rush to pass drastic global warming legislation. The Climate Security Act, sponsored by Joe Lieberman and John Warner, would cut emissions of carbon dioxide — the main "global warming" gas — by 66 percent over the next 42 years. With expected population growth, this means about a 90 percent drop in emissions per capita, to 19th-century levels. […] Pressure to pass impossible-to-achieve legislation, like Lieberman-Warner, or grandstanding political stunts, like calling polar bears an "endangered species" even when they are at near record-high population levels, are based upon projections of rapid and persistent global warming. Proponents of wild legislation like to point to the 2007 science compendium from the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, deemed so authoritative it was awarded half of last year's Nobel Peace Prize. (The other half went to Al Gore.) In it there are dozens of computer-driven projections for 21st-century warming. Not one of them projects that the earth's natural climate variability will shut down global warming from carbon dioxide for two decades. Yet, that is just what has happened. If you think about it, all we possess to project the future of complex systems are computer models. Therefore, if the models that serve as the basis for policy do not work — and that must be the conclusion if indeed we are at the midpoint of a two-decade hiatus in global warming — then there is no verifiable science behind the current legislative hysteria. What does this mean for the future? If warming is "temporarily offset" for two decades, does all the "offset" warming suddenly appear with a vengeance, or is it delayed? Computer models, like the one used by Keenlyside, et al., rely on "positive feedbacks" to generate much of their warming. First, atmospheric carbon dioxide warms things up a bit. Then the ocean follows, raising the amount of atmospheric water vapor, which is a greater source of global warming than carbon dioxide. When the ocean does not warm up, it seems that the additional warming is also delayed. All of this may mean that we have simply overestimated the amount of warming that results from increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide. […] One final prediction: The teeming polar bear population will be listed as "endangered," and in the next year or two, Congress will pass a bill mandating large and impossible cuts in carbon dioxide. What is "settled" is the politics, not the science.
http://washingtontimes.com/article/20080516/EDITORIAL/8210510/1013/EDITORIAL
Christian Leaders Launch 'We Get It' Green Movement
Excerpt: The 'We Get It' declaration speaks for me, and I believe it speaks for the vast majority of evangelicals, who are as tired as I am of being misrepresented by people who don't bother to get their theology, their science or their economics right," said Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.). "Consequently, they put millions of the world's poor at risk by promoting policies to fight the alleged problem of global warming that will slow economic development and condemn the poor to more generations of grinding poverty and high rates of disease and early death."
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200805/CUL20080516a.html
Obesity Contributes To Global Warming - Study
Excerpt: Obesity contributes to global warming, too. […] Because thinner people eat less and are more likely to walk than rely on cars, a slimmer population would lower demand for fuel for transportation and for agriculture, Edwards said. This is also important because 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions stem from agriculture, he added. The next step is quantifying how much a heavier population is contributing to climate change, higher fuel prices and food shortages, he added. "Promotion of a normal distribution of BMI would reduce the global demand for, and thus the price of, food," Edwards and Roberts wrote.
http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/48375/story.htm
UK council spends $1.5 million to protect 'rare newts' only to discover none lived there
Excerpt: Leicestershire County Council delayed a major road-building scheme for three months after evidence of great crested newts was found on the site. The species is protected by law, but after the authority paid hundreds of thousands of pounds for special newt-fencing and traps, not one of the rare creatures was discovered. The action was taken on the strength of a report from environmental experts, which found there could have been between one and 10 of the 6in amphibians on the site. Officials yesterday lodged a complaint with the government, claiming the outlay would have a knock-on effect on local services. The council leader David Parsons said: "I'm not happy that we have gone a million pounds over on the bypass and then found no great crested newts. "It's completely unacceptable. I've written to the minister concerned, and all he can say to me is that it's because of European Union regulations." The possible colony was found near the £15 million Earl Shilton bypass in Leicester during surveys last summer. A 1,000-yard exclusion zone was erected around ponds while further tests were carried out and hundreds of thousands of pounds was spent on newt-proof fences and traps to move the amphibians when hibernation ended in spring. Workers were even required to inspect the traps twice a day once temperatures rose above 41F (5C). But Derek Needham, council engineering manager, confirmed yesterday: "We have caught a number of normal newts but no great crested newts."
# #
Marc Morano
Communications Director
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) Inhofe Staff
202-224-5762
202-224-5167 (fax)
Good Neighbor Committee
P.O. Box 155 - La Salle, CO 80645
info@goodneighborlaw.com
| Good Neighbor Law© 2006 |