Hillary is really hitting the ground running. The State Department is in good hands.

I agree! We are EXTREMELY lucky to have Hillary Clinton at the helm of the State Department.

You go Hillary!! You are truly the one for this task. God Speed!!

Last week was strong and competent. This week we have both Obama and Clinton hitting the ground will full force. Like Hillery said, this is smart power and smart diplomacy. Wow.

Global warming is not a problem on the Cape in New England. 5* again this morning and we usually have a January thaw at this time. Global cooling in MA

The Bush administration emasculated the State Department for the last 8 years. It's good to see them back in action where they belong.

Yay, Hillary gets the ball rolling on stopping a natural global occurance. I love when our government takes control on Theoretical issues. You guys are dumb.

I respect Hillary Clinton a lot but right now the whacko environmentalists are out of control and unfortunately our recently elected and appointed officials are more concerned with appeasing that group than they are listening to common sense and acting upon it. Of course when you think about it the environmentalists are just as faith based as the whacko evangelicals.

This is SO long overdue. Thank you, President Obama. With each new day comes a new wave of relief. Finally we're coming out of the dark ages in this country. Thank you Thank you Thank you.

President Obama and Secretary Clinton are continuing to show that they are going to make addressing global warming a top priority as they are putting their team in place in record time. Oh how refreshing a change from the last eight years of no leadership and no progress. So now we have real leadership on this issue, let's hope that we can make real progress by Copenhagen. (I discuss some of the hints of that change that Clinton and Todd Stern outlined here:

This team will have to get up to speed fast, start to reach out to other countries, and begin to flesh out the US positions as the pace of the negotiations are set to pick up speed following the meeting in Poznan, Poland this past December. In just over 60 days, this team will be sitting with other countries at the negotiating table as the next international negotiations will be held the end of March in Bonn, Germany.

A climate envoy? Is this a joke? Is climate control now a legitimate State Department function? Obama, Clinton, and Stern are arrogant and ignorant. The further we move into a multi-year cooling cycle that started in 1998, the shriller the activists get and the more dire the consequences "if we don't act quickly!" With our tax dollars of course, despite our objections. We'll see how much liberals care about "global warming" when they're freezing from record cold this winter and coping with joblessness and hunger. I very much doubt "fighting climate change" will be their top priority. Just ask the citizens of Iceland who are now rioting after their government collapsed due to the economic crisis. I don't see them all that concerned about climate change. They learned what was important in a hurry. We obviously aren't there yet.

Here comes Socialism in the guise of going green. 80% of the toxins are produced by emerging countries outside of the US, yet we in the US are Guilty, Guilty, Guilty, we are the evil ones who will be forced to pay for the World's mess. And the gulible ones will think they are cleaning earth's air.
Get ready for your economy and standards of living to be brought down to the ground.

Hit the ground running, I hate that saying. When you hit the ground running you should literally, splat and stay there. There would be a force great enough you dig yourself a hole.

WAIT.....STOP!!!!!

How the hell can they pass over Al Bore????

This is a travesty!!!!

Sunday, 01 July 2007

THE GLOBAL WARMING MYTH

by Prof David Bellamy

Am I worried about carbon induced global warming? The answer is no and yes. No because there has been no sign of global warming in New Zealand since 1955, this year snow has fallen in Portugal for the first time in 52 years and 3 US states are united by the fact that they have recorded their lowest temperatures ever. Yes because it has become a political football that has lost its foundations in real science.

What especially worries me is that if anyone dares to question the dogma of the global warming doomsters who repeatedly tell us that C not only stands for carbon but for climate catastrophe, we are immediately vilified as heretics or worse as deniers.

I am quite happy to be branded a heretic because throughout history heretics have stood up against dogma based on bigotry.

I don’t like being called a denier because deniers don’t believe in facts. There are no facts linking the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide with imminent catastrophic global warming there are only predictions based on complex computer models.

Name calling may be acceptable in political circles but it has no place in the language of science, indeed what is happening in the annals of global warming smacks of Macarthyism complete with witch hunts.

Robust science is carried out in a robust way through reasoned argument based on well researched data and although it may dent the ego of the loser it does not smear the name of science.

I offer two simple data sets that are already in the public domain.

The most reliable global, regional and local temperature records from around the world display no distinguishable trend up or down over the past century.

The last peak temperatures were around 1940 and 1998, with troughs of low temperature around 1910 and 1970.

The second dip caused pop science and the media to cry wolf about a catastrophic ice age just around the corner. Our end was nigh! As soon as the temperatures took an upward turn in the 1980’s the scaremongers changed their tune switching their dogma to imminent catastrophic scenarios of global warming all based on computer models some that were proved to be as bent as the hockey stick which no longer features in IPCC’s armoury.

I used to discuss climate change with my undergraduates and point out that there was much good scientific evidence that the latest of a string of ice ages had affected the climate and sea levels around the world. Thank goodness it began to come to an end a mere 18,000 to 20,000 years ago The Romans grew grapes in York and during the world wide medieval warm period when civilization blossomed across the world, Nordic settlers farmed lowland Greenland (hence its name) and then got wiped out by the Little Ice Age that only started to wane around 1850).

Back to the data, how can a sixty-year cycle of changing temperature give any credibility to claims that carbon dioxide is causing an inexorable march towards a climate Armageddon.

The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has risen throughout this time frame, yet the temperature has gone up and down in a cyclical manner. How can this be explained unless there are other factors in control overriding the effect of this greenhouse gas? There are of course many to be found in peer reviewed literature, solar cycles, cosmic ray cloud control and those little rascals El Ninos and La Ninas all of which are played down or even ignored by the global warming brigade. As are the positive aspects of carbon dioxide in the growth of plants.

Add to that the fact that since 1998 the world’s average temperature has shown a tendency to fall not rise. This fact the warmers play down by arguing that you need a 10 year period, or better still a 30 year period to register a convincing change. Well 2008 is just around the corner and sadly another 20 years on the next natural cycle will have done its best or worse vindicating carbon dioxide as the villain of the piece.

Turning to Al Gore’s doom and gloom laden Oscar, I will pose but two questions. Why scare the families of the world with tales that polar bears are heading for extinction when there is good evidence that there are now twice as many of these iconic animals, most doing well in the Arctic than there were 20 years ago? Why cry wolf on a rise in the spread of malaria thanks to rising temperatures when this mosquito borne disease was a main killer of people throughout the Little Ice Age in Britain and northern Russia?

To date it has cost the world around $ US 50 billion to spread global warming doom and gloom. However now thanks to questions asked by we the sceptics The New Zealand National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research’s Dr Jim Renwick has spilt the beans that "Climate prediction is hard, half of the variability in the climate system is not predictable, so we don't expect to do terrifically well." Later on New Zealand radio, Dr Renwick said: " The weather is not predictable beyond a week or two." The spin of a coin starts a rugby match the spin on 50 million greenbacks surely deserves an unbiased referee.

New Zealand leads the world in the eradication of feral plants and animals making restoration of the natural ecosystems that kept the biosphere in balance long before the IPCC was invented. Habitat destruction and the loss of biodiversity is one of the greatest threats to climate and landscape stability. I beg your government to continue to lead the world in this sustainable endeavour.

In the words of a great mathematician and satirist Tom Lehrer, “Don’t be scared be prepared”.

David Bellamy
June 2007

There are a couple of very common sense things here that the global warming...opps...(that term just doesn't work with current data) i mean "climate change" folks seems to want to ignore!

Prof Belamy brings them to light. He is correct that the only "evidence" that this is really "killing" the planet comes from sophisticated computer models. We use similar computer model technology to predict the weather. Have ANY of you seen a weather forecast for April 20, 2033 ?

Why not?...BECAUSE WE CANNOT PREDICT WEATHER PATTERNS THAT FAR IN ADVANCE.

If this technology was so spot on, why cant we predict when a tornado will form, or where a hurricane will form weeks before it happens?

BECAUSE WE CANNOT PREDICT WEATHER PATTERNS THAT FAR IN ADVANCE.

Now if we can't predict the weather, which is derived from the climate, exactly how can we predict climate change?

ANSWER: we have to make many assumptions, these assumptions can seriously influence the outcome of the computer model.

The bottom line is this, The REAL, ACTUAL data that we have collected in past couple of hundred years, is a mere nanosecond on planet earth's clock. To decide that that the end of the world in eminent because of an extrapolation of the miniscule data sample, is to say you should bet your life's savings on a stock's performance over the next year on the basis of 30 minutes of data from the stock market!

There are just as many scientists who are debunking this myth as there are those who are trying to promote it.

Wouldn't it be easier just to bring back the no emitting electric cars that they had in California? Oh right, then they can't waste all this money enforcing regulations and dictating what people can do with there own property or lives. Silly me. What's good for the state, and is bad for the people, if good for everybody. And if you don't like it, we'll fine or bomb you... Yeay!

Professor David Bellamy is a whack job when it comes to Global Warming.

From: Junk Science by George Monbiot
(To read the entire article, Google: Junk Science George Bonbiot)

Last week I telephoned the World Glacier Monitoring Service and read out Bellamy's letter. I don't think the response would have been published in Nature, but it had the scientific virtue of clarity: "This is complete B.S." A few hours later, they sent me an email: "Despite his scientific reputation, he makes all the mistakes that are possible." He had cited data that was simply false, he had failed to provide references, he had completely misunderstood the scientific context and neglected current scientific literature. The latest studies show unequivocally that most of the world's glaciers are retreating…

So it wasn't looking too good for Bellamy, or Singer, or any of the deniers who have cited these figures. But there was still one mystery to clear up. While Bellamy's source claimed that 55% of 625 glaciers are advancing, Bellamy claimed that 555 of them - or 89% - are advancing. This figure appears to exist nowhere else. But on the standard English keyboard, 5 and % occupy the same key. If you try to hit %, but fail to press shift, you get 555, instead of 55%. This is the only explanation I can produce for his figure. When I challenged him, he admitted that there had been "a glitch of the electronics".

So, in Bellamy's poor typing, we have the basis for a whole new front in the war against climate science. The 555 figure is now being cited as definitive evidence that global warming is a "fraud", a "scam", a "lie". I phoned New Scientist to ask if Bellamy had requested a correction. He had not.

More from Junk Science by George Monbiot
(Google: Junk Science Monbiot)

The figures that Bellamy cited must have come from somewhere. I emailed him to ask for his source. After several requests, he replied to me at the end of last week. The data, he said, came from a website called www.iceagenow.com. Iceagenow was constructed by a man called Robert W Felix to promote his self-published book about "the coming ice age". It claims that sea levels are falling, not rising; that the Asian tsunami was caused by the "ice age cycle"; and that "underwater volcanic activity - not human activity - is heating the seas".

Is Felix a climatologist, a volcanologist or an oceanographer? Er, none of the above. His biography describes him as a "former architect". His website is so bonkers that I thought at first it was a spoof. Sadly, he appears to believe what he says. But there, indeed, was all the material that Bellamy cited in his letter, including the figures - or something resembling the figures - he quoted. "Since 1980, there has been an advance of more than 55% of the 625 mountain glaciers under observation by the World Glacier Monitoring group in Zurich." The source, which Bellamy also cited in his email to me, was given as "the latest issue of 21st Century Science and Technology".

21st Century Science and Technology? It sounds impressive, until you discover that it is published by Lyndon LaRouche. Lyndon LaRouche is the American demagogue who in 1989 received a 15-year sentence for conspiracy, mail fraud and tax-code violations. He has claimed that the British royal family is running an international drugs syndicate, that Henry Kissinger is a communist agent, that the British government is controlled by Jewish bankers, and that modern science is a conspiracy against human potential.

Mike_C claimed “There are just as many scientists who are debunking this myth as there are those who are trying to promote it.”

Nothing could be further from the truth. There is a worldwide scientific consensus that Global Warming is real. Dozens upon dozens of scientific bodies, with thousands upon thousands of members, have issued statements regarding the problem of Global Warming.

There are only a tiny number of Global Warming deniers, many of whom are funded by big oil companies. Go to Wikipedia and search: list of scientists opposing.

Is she making up her own little cabinet?