Global warming conspiracy theory is a collection of allegations that, through worldwide acts of professional and criminal misconduct, the science behind anthropogenic global warming has been invented and is being perpetuated for financial or ideological reasons. With all of the hysteria, all of the fear, all of the phony science, could it be that man-made global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people,Global warming activists are as misguided as they are alarmist
Subscribe to this blog
Follow by Email
Some Cold Facts on AL Gore Global Warming.
On the last day of February, the high temperature hit 64 degrees here in Washington. Yet the snow drifts from January’s massive East Coast blizzard were still melting. So what are we to make of the weather and the climate-change controversy? Is it getting warmer or colder?
It’s not even a question worth asking, as far as the analysts at NASA are concerned. Before the blizzard hit, they had already announced that 2015 was the hottest year on record. Not that this is anything new for most Americans. We hear dire global-warming proclamations on a near-daily basis, and it’s always just been the hottest day, week, month or year -- no matter what the weather’s like outside.
Yet, as climate expert David Kreutzer recently pointed out, NASA is fairly selective about which information you’re supposed to believe. The agency’s own satellite data shows that while last year was indeed warm, it wasn’t as warm as 2010 or 1998.
But wait, some may say. You can chalk up this discrepancy to the difference between what the satellite data says and what the surface temperatures are (which NASA gathers from thousands of sites worldwide, with a few “adjustments” thrown in). But it doesn’t matter. Neither data set supports the wild predictions being bandied about by global-warming alarmists.
Search all the data for evidence of the accelerated warming projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change, and you come up empty-handed. Sometimes temps go up, but not always. There’s no constant warming. Indeed, the data show a significant moderation of the warming trend. At times it appears to have leveled off or even cooled a bit.
Should we be surprised? Not really. When you throw in variables such as measurement errors, as well as El Niño and La Niña, it makes sense that the average temperature for some years will be higher even if the overall trend is flat.
“Will the trend stay flat? Probably not,” Kreutzer writes. “The Earth has been recovering from the Little Ice Age for a couple of centuries and recovering from a real ice age for thousands of years. So there is a reasonable chance that we will revert to an overall warming trend, but there is no guarantee. Who knows? We might even be headed into another ice age (as was predicted in the 1970s).”
None of this is to say that human-caused CO2 emissions haven’t contributed to some warming. They likely have. But the bottom line is that, one way or the other, there’s no reason to believe that the sky is falling. Or, to be more exact, that the earth beneath it is warming up to levels that should frighten us.
No data points to catastrophic warming, hysterical predications aside. And, it should be noted, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that there have been no upward trends in hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, or droughts.
Small wonder then, that liberal groups who are vested in global-warming alarmism often ignore data that contradict their agenda. They tell us repeatedly that the debate is over, as if there is an expiration date on free speech. Unfortunately, too many in the media comply. Some outlets, such as the Los Angeles Times, won’t even accept letters to the editor that question the gospel of man-made climate change.
Hence we get very selective reporting. “For example, the national media hyped NASA’s finding that 2014 was the hottest year on record,” writes Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas. “Ignored was the footnote that revealed that NASA was only 38 percent certain this was accurate. Less than fifty-fifty. Americans would have been better served by a coin toss.”
There’s a lot of hot air circulating, all right. Fortunately, it’s more political than scientific. Leonardo DeCaprio may have been taken in, but the rest of us can ignore the overheated rhetoric.
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) – the miracle technology which
will supposedly allow us to burn more coal while saving the planet from
global warming – is a complete waste of time and energy.
It’s so expensive that it makes even renewables and nuclear look cheap.
These findings – from a report
by Professor Gordon Hughes, Professor of Economics at the University of
Edinburgh and a former adviser to the World Bank – vindicate a recent
call by President Trump to cut the 2018 budget for CCS research by 77
They also make a mockery of the grandiose schemes proposed by the
International Energy Agency and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change to decarbonize the global economy in line with the Paris
Agreement. Both organizations have made heroic assumptions about the
value of CCS technology in helping to meet their CO2 reductions targets.
Here, for example, is the ex-head of the IPCC Rajendra Pachauri touting it at the time of the last IPCC Assessment Report in 2…
The Associated Press reports: SYDNEY — The ruling Labor Party's probable collapse in Australia's next election is largely the consequence of its qualified success in the last one three years ago. To form the coalition she needed to stay in power, then-Prime Minister Julia Gillard reneged on a promise and agreed to place a carbon tax on major polluters.
On Saturday, the bill for that bargain comes due. Voters have never stopped hating the tax and its effect on their electric bills. Longtime Labor Party supporters — even people who have helped cut pollution by installing solar panels at home — have flocked to the opposition.
"Whoever gets rid of it will get my vote," said Mark Keene, a 54-year-old maintenance worker from Sydney who, for the first time in his life, won't be voting for Labor.
Opposition leader Tony Abbott has declared the election a "referendum on the carbon tax" — a sure sign of confidence that most voters remain staunchly against it, with…
Hurricane Jose is still churning several hundred miles away in the
Atlantic Ocean, but already reports indicate that the fifth named storm
of the 2017 hurricane season will have negative impact on the east coast
of the United States.
What you need to knowDespite being a Category 4 hurricane at the height of its intensity, Jose has weakened to a Category 1.Weather Underground meteorologist Jeff Masters has reported
that it’s unlikely that Jose will make a U.S. landfall, as most
computer models indicate that the hurricane will continue to travel in a
tight loop and remain hundreds of miles away.If the hurricane continues its odd, spiraled path, impacts along the east coast could include rip currents, beach erosion and rough surf, according to AccuWeather.
What you can doHave a plan. Regardless of whether or not Jose
impacts the east coast, a plan for inclement weather should always be in
place and be ready to go at a moment’s notice.
Keep aware of the risks that might be posed …