Saturday, October 22, 2016

Global Warming

by -
Obama Mad

Ouch. In a recent Fox News poll, just 3% of Americans listed Obama’s favorite issue, “climate change,” as the most important issue facing the country.

That means, despite Obama’s efforts to make global warming a major wedge issue, 97% of Americans really just don’t care all that much.

In fact, even among Democrats, only 6% listed global warming as their biggest concern. Just 1% of Republicans did.

And, worse for liberals, the issue is quickly faded from consciousness altogether. The Fox News poll shows a considerable dropoff in support from August. In August, people who cared about climate change was at 5%–nearly double to what it is now.

Almost since the day Obama was elected–infamously vowing to stop the rise of the seas–he tried to make global warming a major issue, but so far, he’s failed on almost every front.

One of the first major fights of his presidency centered around cap-and-trade–essentially, a surtax on companies that pollute–which failed to pass, even with Obama’s then-overwhelming supermajority in the Senate.

And, since then, the so-called “consensus” in the United States has lost even its lukewarm appetite for global warming regulation.

The bad news comes as Obama plans to meet world leaders in Paris for a United Nations summit on climate change. Obama’s plan is to force through a global agreement to reduce carbon dioxide emissions–but if other countries think like America, it may not stand a chance.

by -

NASA has made a claim that might shake the liberal environmental establishment to its very core—that there might not be any evidence of global warming in Antarctica.

In a recent study, NASA proved that not only is Antarctica not losing ice—but it’s actually gaining ice.

“For east Antarctica and the interior of West Antarctica–there, we see an ice gain that exceeds the losses in the other areas,” explained Jay Zwally, the report’s author, in a NASA press release. Meaning ice is forming much faster than its melting.

Massive ice melt is what doomsday environmentalists cite as the biggest disaster facing the world because of global warming, largely because the ocean rising several feet could wipe out a large number of coastal towns.

But, coupled with evidence that the earth abruptly stopped warming in the mid-1990s, NASA’s new study about how ice fields in Antarctica are growing is another nail in the coffin of the fear mongering global warming establishment.

However, the facts might not be enough for “party of science” Democrats, who have long claimed the “debate is over” on global warming, and refuse to accept any new studies that might prove the opposite.

In 2015 alone, Barack Obama’s budget has pledged billions to help offset the affects of global warming. He’s also issued executive orders to gut coal production and coal power—which many suspect led to a surprise Republican gubernatorial victory last week in Kentucky, the heart of coal country.

But the day NASA released their study, Obama took to his Facebook page to talk about climate change—and didn’t mention anything about the new findings.

In the video he posted to Facebook, Obama walks on a glacier and says, “Not only do I want future presidents to be able to take walks like this, I want to make sure that the American people are able to enjoy the incredible national parks, incredible beauty, the mountains, the oceans, that have been one of the greatest gifts we’ve ever received.”

Luckily, if NASA’s study is right, it looks like we’ll get to experience the “incredible beauty” of America’s national parks, no matter who’s in office.

by -

Bill Gates, the richest man on the planet, thinks you’re selfish if you’re against socialism and the resulting massive tax hikes.

The controversial claims, from someone worth $79.2 billion, came during an interview with The Atlantic, where he said that the private sector was “in general inept” when it came to dealing with global warming.

He admitted that, while the government will also be “somewhat inept,” only socialism could save the planet. Because people are too selfish otherwise.

Gates said:

“There’s no fortune to be made [with climate change technology]. Even if you have a new energy source that costs the same as today’s and emits no CO2, it will be uncertain compared with what’s tried-and-true and already operating at unbelievable scale and has gotten through all the regulatory problems.

Without a substantial carbon tax, there’s no incentive for innovators or plant buyers to switch.

Since World War II, US-government R&D has defined the state of the art in almost every area. The private sector is in general inept.

The climate problem has to be solved in the rich countries. China and the US and Europe have to solve CO2 emissions, and when they do, hopefully they’ll make it cheap enough for everyone else.”

Gates represents a paradox of the liberal Left: someone who’s rich enough to pay, essentially, whatever tax the government can levy. And unleash a cadre of accountants to get his tax rate down.

Someone with more money than they could ever spend in several lifetimes has the luxury of calling for higher taxes to fight a liberal pet issue like climate change.

But it’s troubling that Gates doesn’t seem to have any faith in the private sector to fix the world’s problems, considering his own history of innovation. Microsoft’s computers revolutionized the way the world does business—largely because of free market competition. There’s a reason why computers were invented in the United States, where Gates could be motivated by profit, rather than in Soviet Russia, where there was little incentive to improve or innovate technology.

But now that Gates is retired, and worth more than any other person on the planet, it’s clear that he’s slamming the door on free market capitalism—and slamming Americans’ for being “selfish” by not wanting to pay sky-high taxes.

by -

In a heavy and ham handed effort to make the facts fit the theory, scientists at the taxpayer- funded National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have found a way to “explain” why there has been a 15-year “pause” in global warming: Temperature readings needed to be “adjusted” to give warming temperatures context over a greater period of time.

The new climate data by NOAA scientists first doubles the warming trend since the late 1990s by adjusting previous temperatures downward and then inflating recent temperature readings in more recent years – in effect, resetting the timeframe for heating and cooling periods to make it seem as if “warming is a natural part of a cooling trend”.

“Newly corrected and updated global surface temperature data from NOAA’s [National Centers for Environmental Information] do not support the notion of a global warming ‘hiatus,’” wrote NOAA scientists in their study presenting newly adjusted climate data.

This is NOAA’s version of “cooking the books”.

To increase the rate in warming, NOAA scientists put more weight on certain ocean buoy arrays, adjusted ship-based temperature readings upward, and slightly raised land-based temperatures as well. Scientists said adjusted ship-based temperature data:

“…had the largest impact on trends for the 2000-2014 time period, accounting for 0.030°C of the 0.064°C trend difference.” They added that the “buoy offset correction contributed 0.014°C… to the difference, and the additional weight given to the buoys because of their greater accuracy contributed 0.012°C.”

Writing for The Daily Caller, Michael Bastasch says that for the years of 1998 and 2012
NOAA’s “new analysis exhibits more than twice as much warming as the old analysis at the global scale,” at 0.086 degrees Celsius per decade compared to 0.039 degrees per decade.

“This is clearly attributable to the new [Sea Surface Temperature] analysis, which itself has much higher trends,” scientists noted in their study. “In contrast, trends in the new [land surface temperature] analysis are only slightly higher.”

Global surface temperature data had shown a lack of statistically significant warming over the last 15 years, which baffled climate scientists, any effort to explain the hiatus in warming is rendered unnecessary by NOAA’s new “study”.

The new numbers seen in a different light allows NOAA to claim that the overall warming trend beginning with the year 1880 shows that the warming trend has not been significantly changed.

“Our new analysis now shows the trend over the period 1950-1999, a time widely agreed as having significant anthropogenic global warming, is 0.113 [degrees Celsius per decade], which is virtually indistinguishable with the trend over the period 2000-2014″ of 0.116 degrees per decade, according to the study.

The U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s “statement of two years ago – that the global surface temperature has shown a much smaller increasing linear trend over the past 15 years than over the past 30 to 60 years’ — is no longer valid…” the study claims.

Scientists Richard Lindzen, Patrick Michaels and Chip Knappenberger with the Cato Institute say the adjustments made by NOAA were “guaranteed to put a warming trend in recent data.”

Cato scientists also argued that NOAA’s new data is an outlier compared to other global temperature records, which overwhelmingly show a hiatus in warming. The three scientists write:

“Adjusting good data upwards to match bad data seems questionable, and the fact that the buoy network becomes increasingly dense in the last two decades means that this adjustment must put a warming trend in the data…”

Bastasch further writes that:

“scientists and climate experts skeptical of man-made global warming have become increasingly critical of temperature adjustments made by government climate agencies like NASA and NOAA. Skeptics charge that agencies like NOAA have been tampering with past temperatures to make the warming trend look much more severe than is shown in the raw data.”

This all boils down to one thing. The United States should make sure a problem exists before developing and implementing solutions for it.

by -

Despite hysterical alarmist claims of man-made global warming and climate change, the data from the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) shows the US in a steady cooling trend.

NOAA typically releases data only after “adjusting” it, with the adjustments nearly always making the warming trend seem more pronounced. Previously they have been caught manipulating data from as far back as the 1930s to make it seem hotter in modern times.

The raw data, though, is available on NOAA’s website – and it paints a starkly different picture from the public narrative.

Meteorologist Anthony Watts, curator of the popular climate site Watts Up With That, compiled the raw data from NOAA’s US Climate Reference Network (USCRN) and graphed it. The trend is undeniable: The US has been cooling for the last ten years.

The USCRN data comes from a series of over 140 temperature stations scattered throughout the US. These stations are NOAA’s premier data collection method, with a mission of collecting data that doesn’t “need” adjustment to provide accurate information. According to NOAA boss Tom Karl:

“These stations were designed with climate science in mind. Three independent measurements of temperature and precipitation are made at each station, insuring continuity of record and maintenance of well-calibrated and highly accurate observations. The stations are placed in pristine environments expected to be free of development for many decades. Stations are monitored and maintained to high standards and are calibrated on an annual basis.”

In other words, the USCRN is the star in NOAA’s lineup, even though the agency never mentions the raw data from the network in their regular reports on the climate.

Despite the obvious and gaping holes in the climate change narrative, the true believers are still charging full speed ahead. The latest public figure to throw his hat into the ring on behalf of climate hysteria is Pope Francis, who issued an encyclical today calling for global action to end climate change.

The irony of the Pope coming down on the side of climate alarmism is particularly delicious, since the climate change pushers have long denied that their fervor resembles organized religion. Many on the left proudly proclaim that environmentalism is incompatible with religion, and now religion has officially joined them.

So here we are again, with more evidence that the “settled science” is in fact bogus science. That doesn’t seem to bother President Obama, who said on May 20th that global warming is a clear security threat to the United States, and on Tuesday promised a series of executive actions to promote “green” energy in an effort to combat climate change.

Like the rest of the climate alarmist crowd, the President refuses to learn the lessons of past failures like Solyndra, and insists we must continue to tilt at the global warming windmill – even though the government’s own data says the warming isn’t happening.



When Comey, the director of the FBI decided not to charge Hillary Clinton, it looks like it had more to do with money than...