Page 1 of 2

Climate change models vs reality

Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 5:54 am
by kevm14
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress. ... eans11.png

That's pretty embarrassing. The good news is tax payers financed probably just about all of these.

Re: Climate change models vs reality

Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 6:09 am
by kevm14
It turns out there are other factors. Amazing!

http://climategrog.wordpress.com/?attachment_id=902

When all the funding is to attribute human actions to climate change, you'll have a harder time finding links like this. Of course I've always said volcanoes spew more crap in a single eruption than humans do over a long period of time, so to paraphrase Family Guy, "To be honest wichyoo, I'm not surpraaaazed."

Re: Climate change models vs reality

Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 6:23 am
by kevm14
Some genius suggested burying CO2. Surely he won't hugely profit from his suggestion...

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/08/28/g ... derground/
Tell him to go stand on the edge of the Grand Canyon. You’ll see several hundred millions years of carbon sequestration in the vertical walls of the limestone rock. Those thick limestone layers go on for several hundred miles in the western US and there are limestone deposits all over the world. Most of that CO2 was in the atmosphere at one time. Mother nature is still busy sequestering CO2 in warm shallow seas and will continue to do so whether we want her to or not.

Re: Climate change models vs reality

Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 6:34 am
by kevm14

Re: Climate change models vs reality

Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 6:38 am
by kevm14
Probably isn't volcanoes, either. No corresponding decrease in atmospheric transmission over this "startling" period of non-warming.

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/webdata/gr ... ission.gif

Re: Climate change models vs reality

Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 6:41 am
by kevm14
This.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/08/28/g ... e-stories/
The Guardian story is another in a stream of articles in the mainstream media, apparently designed to counter growing public and political awareness that IPCC science is wrong. Increasingly, they take the form used by a person or group losing an argument. It is known as an ad hominem, defined as “attacking an opponent’s character rather than answering the arguments.” It usually applies to an individual, but the modern form is collective. You identify a group with a name, such as “birther”,“conspiracy theorist”, “global warming skeptic”, or “climate change denier”, which marginalizes them and destroys their credibility. Is a collective ad hominem an oxymoron? It is further evidence of the political nature of the climate debate. As US commentator, George Will, said, “When a politician says the debate is over, you can be sure of two things; the debate is raging; and he’s losing it.”

Re: Climate change models vs reality

Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2014 7:19 am
by kevm14
When I mention economic impacts to dangerous and elitist policy, this is what I mean:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/06/t ... -response/

Basically the "Green" parties of the world (in organization and mindset) would drive us to what sounds a lot like communism. Think I'm crazy?
That’s United Nations-speak. The UN System is set up to create one world governance. Already its International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) has offices all over the world and they are, in fact, controlling cities and regions whose elected officials have been brainwashed by activist organizations, funded by billionaire foundations and others, into accepting the word of ‘experts’ about what is and is not sustainable.

Renewables are, of course, part of the grand scheme of things. They will help lead us back to something like a neolithic world in which red meat, appliances, automobiles and private ownership of land are “not sustainable”. They call it communitarianism. It is totalitarianism.
Quote by Louis Proyect, Columbia University: “The answer to global warming is in the abolition of private property and production for human need. A socialist world would place an enormous priority on alternative energy sources. This is what ecologically-minded socialists have been exploring for quite some time now.”
Source: C3
And here's the real hilarious slap in the face for environmental folks who think the problem is just rich right wing people invested in keeping everyone on oil, because money.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/mainstrea ... le/2548405

Some folks are suggesting that the real problem is we need to ditch democracy. You know, for totalitarianism.

Re: Climate change models vs reality

Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2014 7:26 am
by kevm14
From this article:
Invisible fact: the environmental movement is a mature, highly developed network with top leadership stewarding a vast institutional memory, a fiercely loyal cadre of competent social and political operatives, and millions of high-demographic members ready to be mobilized as needed.

That membership base is a built-in free public relations machine responsive to the push of a social media button sending politically powerful “educational” alerts that don't show up on election reports.

Big Oil doesn't have that, but has to pay for lobbyists, public relations firms and support groups that do show up on reports.
Driessen pointed out another unperceived sector of Big Green: government donors. “Under President Obama, government agencies have poured tens of millions into nonprofit groups for anti-hydrocarbon campaigns.”

Weather Channel co-founder John Coleman adds, “The federal government is currently spending $2.6 billion [per year] on climate change research (and only those who support the ‘carbon dioxide is a pollutant/major greenhouse gas' receive funding).”
The issue at its core:
This web of ideological soul-mates, like all movements, has its share of turf wars and dissension in the ranks, but, as disclosed on conference tapes I obtained, it shares a visceral hatred of capitalism, a worshipful trust that nature knows best, and a callous belief that humans are not natural but the nemesis of all that is natural.
As is this:
Much of the appeal of environmentalism in the first place is the claim of superior motives.

Because I am altruistic and you are greedy and selfish, I DESERVE power, and you do not. That arrangement of status is more important than trivialities like the vote.
Have you seen pictures of the ghost cities in China? They were part of the building frenzy there. The plan is to move the peasant farmers into dense vertical housing in the sustainable cities – planned with bicycle paths and streets too narrow and winding for regular vehicular traffic. The design is similar to what ICLEI and one its sister organizations, the American Planning Association are using in American and Canadian cities. The farm holdings in China will be take over by government corporations.

In rural parts of America, Canada and Australia, governments are taking over private property to be used as wild lands and wet lands or heritage lands that will be off limits to citizens. The government breaks up the asphalt leading to the once private properties and puts locked gates to previous road access. In some places, the wild lands are being stocked with wolves to make sure people won’t trespass. The wolves, however, trespass on farming land and attack sheep and, I guess, other livestock. All of this is being done to move people from the rural areas – and to save Earth from man.

Am I making this up? Talk to friends and relatives in your state – except Alabama where Agenda 21 has been de-agended by the state.


You are not making it up, it was tried here in our small community about ten years ago. But thankfully it was stopped but I also see (as the current old timers pass on, and they were the ones that stopped it) the new generation will cave.
This is the kind of stuff that worries me.

Re: Climate change models vs reality

Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2014 7:31 am
by kevm14
The money reported to the Federal Election Commission is barely the beginning of what's really happening. It doesn't show you Big Green's mobilized boots on the ground, the zooming Twitter tweets, the fevered protesters, the Facebook fanatics or the celebrities preaching carbon modesty from the lounges of their private jets.

When self-righteous victims of Educated Incapacity insist that Big Oil outspends the poor little greenies, keep in mind the mountains of IRS Form 990s filed by thousands of groups, land trusts, lawyer outfits, foundations, and agenda-makers, just waiting for America to wake up and smell Big Green's untold hundreds of billions.
So the media will have to decide what's more juicy: the "end of the world" or that maybe all this climate change hysteria is beyond reasonable.

Re: Climate change models vs reality

Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2014 7:39 am
by kevm14
In case it is not obvious, all this really amounts to is a large group of very well-funded folks to rise to power under the auspices of climate change. That's it.

There is nothing noble, altruistic or even environmental about it.