It's not just Hillary who avoided the legal requirement to conduct business on government emails.

So were "Climate" officials...
http://eelegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Collusion-report-appendix-.pdf

Do we REALLY need all those little red dots???

Comments on a CNN Post on "Climate Change" goes terribly, horribly, wrong...

But don't wait with anticipation from a retraction...

University of Toronto Goes Full Mystic

Do Not... I repeat. Do Not...
Send your child to U of T Medical School or ever receive treatment from a U of T trained Physician.

He may well rely on Quantum Physics to cure you...

https://drjengunter.wordpress.com/2015/07/06/andrew-wakefield-is-apparently-a-legimite-source-of-vaccine-info-at-university-of-toronto/

Another Phoney Baloney Nobel Prize Winner - but not with IPCC...

"Global warming, or climate change, has become one of the polarizing issues of our time. Many consider it the most serious threat to mankind, while others dismiss it as a natural fluctuation in our planet’s climate cycles that requires no corrective action.

What the debate means for ordinary folks is often confusion over what to believe. This confusion is entirely understandable, says Eric Chivian, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and former Harvard professor."

"Chivian was among a group of physicians who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1985 for their efforts to prevent nuclear war. But as he noted at a New Jersey land conservation conference in March, it’s much harder to convince people to take action against climate change than to persuade them to stop nuclear war."
http://www.thedailyjournal.com/story/opinion/2015/07/29/byers-climate-change-debate-confuses-public/30831877/

But guess what... like Michael Mann he is not being truthful or at the very least not correcting an incorrect article. I wonder if he has a fake paper Nobel ,too...


The Nobel Peace Prize 1985 was awarded to International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War.

Looks Like Peter Gleick Has a New Gig

Back when he was a serious scientist fraudulently

obtained confidential information from Heartland Institute

Hotel.com

Example from Climategate Emails of How Climate Alarmists Change Data to Fit Hypothesis

HT Tom Nelson

http://di2.nu/foia/1254108338.txt

From: Tom Wigley 
To: Phil Jones 

Subject: 1940s
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:25:38 -0600
Cc: Ben Santer 


Phil,

Here are some speculations on correcting SSTs to partly
explain the 1940s warming blip.

If you look at the attached plot you will see that the
land also shows the 1940s blip (as I'm sure you know).

So, if we could reduce the ocean blip by, say, 0.15 degC,
then this would be significant for the global mean -- but
we'd still have to explain the land blip.

I've chosen 0.15 here deliberately. This still leaves an
ocean blip, and i think one needs to have some form of
ocean blip to explain the land blip (via either some common
forcing, or ocean forcing land, or vice versa, or all of
these). When you look at other blips, the land blips are
1.5 to 2 times (roughly) the ocean blips -- higher sensitivity
plus thermal inertia effects. My 0.15 adjustment leaves things
consistent with this, so you can see where I am coming from.

Removing ENSO does not affect this.

It would be good to remove at least part of the 1940s blip,
but we are still left with "why the blip".

Let me go further. If you look at NH vs SH and the aerosol
effect (qualitatively or with MAGICC) then with a reduced
ocean blip we get continuous warming in the SH, and a cooling
in the NH -- just as one would expect with mainly NH aerosols.

The other interesting thing is (as Foukal et al. note -- from
MAGICC) that the 1910-40 warming cannot be solar. The Sun can
get at most 10% of this with Wang et al solar, less with Foukal
solar. So this may well be NADW, as Sarah and I noted in 1987
(and also Schlesinger later). A reduced SST blip in the 1940s
makes the 1910-40 warming larger than the SH (which it
currently is not) -- but not really enough.

So ... why was the SH so cold around 1910? Another SST problem?
(SH/NH data also attached.)

This stuff is in a report I am writing for EPRI, so I'd
appreciate any comments you (and Ben) might have.

Tom.



Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\TTHEMIS.xls"

Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\TTLVSO.XLS"

The Fallacy of Light Rail Transit - the Basic Economics Fail

A few years ago I did a policy study on how Toronto compared to other major cities as far as rapid transit meeting our population's needs and the level of improvement needed to bring us up to snuff.

As a Canuck, I spend much of my time comparing us and them (with "them" most often being the USA); it's a pastime only surpassed by comparing how many missing teeth our hockey team has compared to our opponents. I probably spend more time looking at the USA than I do looking at us. In fact, I probably spend more time looking at the USA than many Americans do.

One thing I notice about Americans, when they look at themselves, is that many are even more self-critical than Canucks are. They look at how badly they are doing, and how poorly they are succeeding, when (arguably) they are doing pretty darn well at almost everything. At least comparatively and historically.

One area for which the USA is commonly most often self-critical is rapid transit. Critics always point to other places (usually European cities and sometimes Toronto) as doing such a better job of providing public transportation to their populace.

Now I have learned over the years that often critics have one foot on the truth and one foot solidly on their self interests. So people looking at criticism of public issues always need to look behind the curtain. But that being said, "How well is the USA doing in public transportation?"

This morning I ran across a web-page that listed the 125 largest cities in the world by area and my curiosity was aroused enough to look closer.(http://www.citymayors.com)

And I thought it might be interesting to compare these data to my previous subway study. So I did and what did I find?

That a comparison relative to rapid transit for USA cities to cities in other countries, especially in Europe,  is mostly invalid largely because of geography.

When rapid transit was being initiated in about AD 1900, countries in the European Union had a population of about 400 million people (on 4.2 sq Kilometers of land), while the USA had about 76 million people (on 9.8 million sq Kilometers). There were 5 times as many Europeans as Americans on 40% of the area.

In Europe land was precious and expensive while in the USA it was (and is) as cheap as borscht. So Europe condensed its population while the USA spread it out.

Rapid transit, to be viable from an infrastructure cost/benefit perspective, has to connect areas of critical mass of population. Otherwise the cost recovery price of a transit fare becomes unrealistic for consumers, or the system becomes a sinkhole for tax dollars.

Now, of course, one should probably compare the cost of building roads and their maintenance and the cost to the environment by not providing transit and requiring travelers to buy and operate their own rolling stock (i.e. vehicles). But I'm not being paid to write this, so I will be lazy and leave this evaluation to others.

But the point is, in the USA, the spreading out of the population made - and still probably makes - sense. Which by definition probably makes a large expenditure on public rapid transit, in the vast majority of US metropolitan areas, not viable; especially since commuters travel wildly off in all directions in the USA.

Now there are some exceptions. American cities with large populations and high densities actually have fairly decent rapid transit. Residents in New York City, Chicago, DC, and San Fran all are relatively well served. But expecting to bring this infrastructure to all urban centres is, well, optimistic.

I encourage anyone to do a very simple analysis; divide the capital cost of a system by the number of rides over the course of the first ten years of operation.

Typically a billion dollars in investment will provide ten kilometers of surface Light Rail Transit (people cycle to work further than that every day in Toronto). Capacity of a LRT unit is about 220 riders. Multiply that by about 24 LRT trips / day results in 5,000 riders / day or 12.5 million over the course of a decade.

This translates to a cost of $80 / rider just on today's capital costs and not operations or repair and maintenance or depreciation over a decade. Then ask yourself whether people would pay this amount to give up their Escalades. To quote a famous American, "That dog don't hunt".

Only in Newfoundland. . .

"Lord Tunderin', I used to buy my cadfish from 'im, biy"

From the We'll Squeeze Every Ounce of Anything Approaching Positivity File

Nova Scotia Achieves "Renewable Energy Milestone"

"Nova Scotia Power says a new record has been set for wind power generation in the province. For one hour early Wednesday morning, the utility says 50 per cent of the province's electricity came from wind.

The company acknowledges the new record was achieved during a period when demand for electricity is low — between 3 and 4 a.m. — and that there were high winds at the time."

So, Buddy, so longs we all stay home in bed and don't go outside or work or nothin', and don't keep our Schooner beer cold, and cook with our little Canadian Tire BBQs, and don't watch Corry Street or the hockey, we'll do just fine wit dem big windmills...

This Is Just So... Typically Environmentalist

Farley Mowat’s final act of defiance: Eco-activists’ former flagship goes down leaking oil in N.S. harbour

Sea / Oil Shepherd

1976 - "Deadly Harvest" - a film of Global Cooling

Deadly Harvest You Tube Video

Review: http://www.canuxploitation.com/review/deadlyharvest.html

"To most of us, it came as a surprise. Not many understood. Too few cared enough to stop it. Then it no longer mattered how many understood or cared--it was too late!"

One of Canada's first eco-thrillers, Deadly Harvest deals with the greatest environmental catastrophe facing the 21st Century--global cooling. A long voiceover segment blames overpopulation, urban sprawl, the energy crisis, pollution, the high cost of transporting grain, the CN Tower...even "a lack of government support for research programs."

We have been here before...

The Correct Way to Deal with Eco-Terrorists...

"Sea Shepherd Conservation Society has agreed to pay US$2.55 million to two Japanese organizations that kill whales.

The payment comes after Sea Shepherd and founder Paul Watson were found in civil contempt last December of a temporary injunction for its vessels to stay 500 yards away from Japanese whaling vessels in the Southern Ocean."
National Post

Why couldn't this precedent be applied to all cases of environmentalists disrupting private business?

We all saw this coming...

Corn diversion from cattle food stream to ethanol responsible for 44% increase in price of beef.

So creating an artificial energy material to cut down on ground sourced fossil fuels makes steaks unaffordable for average folks.

Saving the world is a tough business. They have to starve the people to rescue the planet.

Link

Pollen Tsunami a Natural Biosphere Event? Of course blamed on "Climate Change"

From NBC News:
"A ferocious winter, delayed spring and even the beginnings of climate change have created a "pollen tsunami" that is slamming allergy sufferers in the Northeast, says one expert.Oak and birch trees — the "big bad" pollen makers — are coming out at the same time as the seasonal ones like poplar, alder and ash. And soon the grass pollens arrive."

Link

My view...
Now I'm not a tree or plant expert - don't mind looking at 'em, don't care if I ever own one.

But does this pollen explosion have something to do with the biosphere self correcting? I encourage commentary from better informed people than me.

But is it possible that the increase in CO2 levels results in more pollen which results in more plants and trees being created which absorb the increased level of CO2? 

Just askin..

Scientists "adjusting" test results with a "statistical algorithm" to get a result they desperately want? "Really you might as well stick a finger in the air."

"Richard died in 1485, but the two carbon dating tests on his bones gave a date range between 1430-1460 and 1412-1449. These were then adjusted with a “statistical algorithm” because he ate a lot of fish, resulting in a new range of 1475-1530. Really, you might as well stick a finger in the air."

Richard 3rd??

The Planet Earth: Intelligent Design or Sh!tass Lucky?

My answer to the title question is simply, sh!tass lucky. Billions and billions of totally unrelated and directly connected events conspired to result in one place among billions and billions that was able to sustain life and billions of random chemical events resulted in life actually being created and adapting and getting more and more complex until we ended up with beings ordering "quad venti half caf breve no foam with whip two splenda stirred skinny three pump peppermint mochas" at Starbucks.

Who reading this wasn't affected by Carl Sagan's TV series Cosmos (I even have a copy of the book) and his stories of "Billions and Billions" of stars with "Billions and Billions" of planets... We humans got the big door prize. If we weren't created, then there would be no one around to notice we're not here...

But what does this have to do with the politics of global warming? Not much.

Back to the regular programming.

Now that Trenberth's theory of all the heat caused by human greed being cooled off by the oceans is disproven (although the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics was a hint that it would be) what do we know about anthropogenic catastrophic global warming climate change?

Everyone - every climate skeptic and every alarmist - agrees that Greenhouse Gases warm the climate. Indeed, without GHGs we would be living (actually wouldn't be living) on a very cold marble indeed.

And some percentage of  people who look at the climate (pretty much 100% of whom make their living writing reports that prove the evil than men doeth) insist that increases in CO2 causes extreme global temperatures and even acts as an accelerant. (I won't bother arguing against the fact that CO2 is benign and far more is produced naturally than by humans. Everyone knows that...)

But suppose that O2 IS poison and DOES result in runaway temperatures. Why have temperatures levelled off for almost two decades?

You guessed it.... Sh!tass luck.

It seems that there is some natural process that allows CO2 levels to increase - even double - and somehow not have any significant effect on global temperatures.

We're saved by billions and billions of sh!tty little lucky events

More Proof of Extreme Weather Caused by Catastrophic Global Warming Climate Change

In 1869
there was quite a debate when it was predicted...

The Saxby Gale was the name given to a tropical cyclone which struck eastern Canada's Bay of Fundy region on the night of October 4–5, 1869. The storm was named for Lieutenant Stephen Martin Saxby, a naval instructor who, based on his astronomical studies, had predicted extremely high tides in the North Atlantic Ocean on October 1, 1869, which would produce storm surges in the event of a storm.^[1]

M. Mann (unbelievably) Still Has Nobel Prize Reference on PSU Website

The 2013 Boston Globe Version of Willie Soon's Public Flogging

HT to R. Pielke Jr. Here's story in 2013
Boston Globe

Meanwhile, the line I like best from Science Mag is:
"The New York Times and other outlets reported that Soon has received extensive financial support over the past decade from fossil fuel companies and others opposed to government regulation of greenhouse gas emissions."

Is it a crime against humanity to oppose a government policy - especially one that will have a huge effect on our economic sustainability - global catastrophe or not?

Meanwhile, if I understand it properly, the Smithsonian's position is that they hired Willie Soon to do a study that proved that the Sun had no effect on climate. And they were shocked, I tell, you, shocked that he falsely reported something else!

Sounds like pure science to me.

NASA Believes in Human Caused Death of Earth and Alien Life in Jupiter

Death by Humanity

Life on Jupiter

The Pedophile Who Travelled the World Counselling on Educating Children

Ontario Deputy Education Minister Benjamin Levin

I have to wonder.. in all these travels in places such as China and Norway... did he pursue his perversion? A Google Search and Country name might reveal his speaking locations...

There is a climate angle to this....

This same government contracted with Samsung and paid them $9 Billion to build windmills. Which will never provide 3% of Ontario's energy, but which we will be each paying $250/year until we die.

The Death of "Experts"...

The Niagara Non-Falls

We are going through a period in the media that may well - happily - bring to an end the age of "Experts".

For the last decade or so, in desperation to gain eyeballs, news outlets have resorted to publishing and broadcasting "climate porn", translating it into the scariest story possible - that humans were causing it - backed up by those whose livelihood depends on commenting on (a) the climate catastrophe and (b) human guilt as a result of using fossil fuels (even though the use of these is the largest difference between developed and undeveloped populations).

But natural events tend to not watch CNN. While the alarmist "experts" were predicting "global warming" the globe started cooling off, or at least not warming any more. Been almost 20 years with only one blip in 1998.

So they tried to change the story; that the frigid temperatures are caused by ... wait now.... global warming (which hasn't taken place).

So the "experts" shifted their tall tales to "climate change". And heads along Fifth Avenue and Penn Ave in DC and Toronto's Annex, started nodding up and down.

But this is a ridiculous conclusion. Climates have always changed this is not either the hottest or coldest period on earth that has sustained mammalian life.

So anyone who backs these experts has been deluded by them and should never listen to them again. Beware of false prophets.

Man Causes Blizzards, Floods and Droughts and Vaccines Cause Autism

"Q: Are there broader lessons here about how bad information can become so pervasive?

S.M.: There was a University of Michigan study a couple years ago where subjects were given a list of 20 statements about the flu vaccine, 10 of which they were told [were] true, 10 of which they were told were false. Ten minutes later they could identify which were true with a high degree of accuracy, but that went down precipitously with time. So the results would seem to indicate that merely hearing something, even in the context of hearing it isn't true, that concept gets introduced into your mental framework in a way that lends you to give that idea more credence. You can see this with all sorts of urban myths."

Science Magazine

Another Weatherbomb Snowpocalypse Snowmaggeden... not

East Coast SAVED by Global Warming Reducing Effect of Deadly Weather Caused by Global Warming.

In a previous weatherbomb in 2013 we played golf...

I thought it particularly funny to see everyone running around blaming "Global Warming Climate Change Crisis" when (a) the weather event was not significant even in recent times and (b) there were far worse storms during the 70s Global Cooling Crisis and (c) there were worse storms when weather patterns were ambient.

You Can't Make This Up: Cause of Moose Deaths is Global Warming RESEARCHERS...

In response to the dramatic decline of moose in northeastern Minnesota, over 100 moose were equipped with radio-collars that could alert biologists to the moose’s impending death, allowing biologists to account for the deaths of 35 calves and 19 adults.

- 16 calves (46%) were killed by wolves
- 13 calves (37%) calves died due to mother abandonment.

+++ Eleven were caused when the mothers abandoned the calves during the act of attaching the collars, 2 were abandoned later.

- 4 calves (11%) were eaten by bears

- One calf drowned and 1 calf died of unknown causes.

- Of the 19 adults, 10 (53%) were killed directly or indirectly by wolves.

The biologists received a new $750,000 grant to study the effects of “global warming” on declining moose. I suspect it is politically more convenient to blame declining moose on global warming rather than to blame natural boom and busts, rebounding wolf populations, or researcher induced casualties. (or attaching collars to wild animals and having moms abandon them - blemon).

 H/T Tony Watts

Back When it was tres chic to claim to have won a Nobel PEACE prize.... (Turns out - one still does - check comments)

I did this a few years ago and never followed through...
It was to be a database of all the faux-bel prize winners.
I suspect the links are all dead - but - it is worth a little tickle.

 Fauxbel Prize Winners

Checking out Michael Mann’s facebook page today, he seems quite miffed that EVERYONE is calling themselves a Nobel Prize winner, but they only attack ME!!!!

Well, I think it’s about time that the love was shared….

Henry Pollack

http://travel.usatoday.com/cruises/post/2012/08/antarctica-cruise-nobel-prize/822879/1

Richard Conant

http://www.qut.edu.au/about/news/news?news-id=32089

Daniel Kammen

http://www.facebook.com/events/468445386519602/

Grace Akumu

http://www2.webster.edu/depts/artsci/Global_Thinking/vol5_issue1/akumu_nobel.htm

Mohan Munasinghe

https://www.britsafe.org/news/british-safety-council-shares-platform-nobel-prize-winner

Rolph Payet

http://www.londoninternational.ac.uk/global-community

CU-Boulder Research Faculty

http://www.colorado.edu/news/series/cu-boulder-nobel-laureates
NOTE - this one is STILL Active...

Kevin Trenberth

David Karoly

 Bryson Bates

Neville Nichols

http://www.quadrant.org.au/magazine/issue/2012/4/nobel-rot

John Houghton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_T._Houghton

Andrew Weaver

http://www.uleth.ca/notice/display.html?b=14&s=11052

Why Corrupt Governments LOVE Wind and Solar Farm Ponzi Schemes

Western economies have been devastated by overspending, under-taxation, growing energy costs and competition from cheap non-union producers (notably China).
"We" don't make anything anymore.
The Liberal Governed Province of Ontario, from whence I write, is about as corrupt as a "democratic" government can get. Prior to the last election, they wasted $1 Billion to relocate 2 gas plants because there was a risk of losing the ridings. Then they hired an outsider to delete all the emails between top officials.  This, a few years after their Minister of Energy, without authorization, signed a $9 Billion contract with Samsung to build windfarms forever in Ontario.
Ontario can't afford to make autoparts anymore. Energy costs and union wages are too expensive. Food processing is closing down and moving because it isn't feasible to process our own tomatoes here.
So what do the "Lieberals" do? The same as other bankrupt governments.
They cling to the life raft of  "renewables" which not only saves the planet, but also on the surface generates jobs. But, of course, they don't generate jobs because the energy it produces is too expensive - it is not, and never will be, a viable product.
The job "creation" is in fact a transfer of wealth - from taxes of people who pay taxes, to people employed in making "renewables". It's very similar to hiring one guy to dig a hole, and then hire another guy to fill it in. Both of them working long enough that when their jobs are over, they can draw unemployment insurance, which is a transfer of funds from ALL Canadian taxpayers.
Now, with their successfully fooling Ontario residents with this scheme, they can move on to "carbon taxes". Which sucks money out of everyone's pocket, so the Liberals can give it to their friends.
And as evidenced by the last election, which saw the Liberals give huge wage increases to teachers and other union workers, there are enough people on the government dole and in government jobs, to win the election.
Time for the torches and pitchforks.

The G77... There's a "G77"?

I expect that they are 11 times more noisy than the G7....
And collectively have an economy 1/11th of the G7.
And every member is 11 times more corrupt than any member of the G7, which is really saying something.
I suspect that all 77 members have 1/11th  number of patents and books published of any member of the G7.
And I suspect the chatter among themselves is fascinating.
Link

Newsweek: Really Says $1B UN Enviro Bucks Used to Build Coal Plants

So Japan used a pile of UN money designated to save the planet from hated CO2, to finance Japanese companies building efficient, cheap coal generators in Indonesia...

It is not about saving the planet, it's about taking money from one place - successful economies - and giving it to basket-case corrupt economies.

A Billion UN Enviro Bucks Spent on Indo Coal Plants

When Environmental Activists Get Their Way... Towns Die....

Protestors Force Plant to Close / Town's Largest Employer & Taxpayer

Richard Brooks, forest campaign co-ordinator with Greenpeace Canada, responded to the Resolute's criticism by saying the company can only blame itself.

"A forest products company like Resolute needs to demonstrate the commitment to sustainability," he said in an e-mail.

"This is where Resolute's leadership urgently needs to re-focus their efforts for the sake of the long-term health of the forest and viability of their operations and the communities that depend on them.”

Remembering Michael Crichton

Michael Crichton was a brilliant and enormously successful writer. He was the prototype of Hollywood heroes; handsome, a doctor, rich. Sort of the exact opposite of Michael Moore; except for the rich part. He would have been expected to be a member of the in-crowd which can be loosely described as liberal, pro-government, pro-wealth transfer, and pro-everything to do with humans wearing hair shirts for driving SUVs etc. But he wasn't.

He is what has been referred to as a "denier"; because he refuses to accept the "consensus" that mankind is causing the global warming that is resulting is us all freezing in our woolies... (note: of course the truth as Crichton knows it, "deniers" are actually the truth tellers and the real consensus does not agree that the settled science is that man is causing "climate change").

From Michael in reference to his book,  "State of Fear".

Imagine that there is a new scientific theory that warns of an impending crisis, and points to a way out. 
This theory quickly draws support from leading scientists, politicians and celebrities around the world. Research is funded by distinguished philanthropies, and carried out at prestigious universities. The crisis is reported frequently in the media. The science is taught in college and high school classrooms. 
I don't mean global warming. I'm talking about another theory, which rose to prominence a century ago.

Full Text 

Occams Razor and Household Waste

Illegal dumping of waste is replacing drugs as organized crime money maker...
More evidence of the stupidity of modern government.
J. Delingpole of the Daily Mail

Link Here

My comments...

The principle of Occam's Razor is: “Of several acceptable explanations for a phenomenon, the simplest is preferable, provided that it takes all circumstances into account.”

So what would be the application of this theory to garbage pickup and disposal?

The simplest way to deal with garbage in a city is for everyone to simply put out his or her garbage in a bag (or bags) and someone comes along and picks it up. No muss no fuss.

Our current approach to garbage pickup includes centralizing it as much as possible in one entity with municipal employees making substantially more money and getting considerably sweeter

fringe benefits than equivalent employees in the private sector enjoy. It requires residents to carefully sort their garbage into various piles and store it for a week. It is picked up and put on a

truck, taken off the truck and put on a much bigger truck which then drives it about 100 miles, dumps it and then turns around and drives back a hundred miles empty. Certain types of trash:

paper, plastic and organic waste (mixed with nonorganic waste) are treated differently; theoretically it would be sold to be reused.

Problem is that most - almost all -  of these sorted waste products have no buyers or are contaminated so they are stored in warehouses.

Much of the world has taken advantage of new technologies by making a gas from the rubbish or burning it to create additional energy from waste.

This utopian solution works almost everywhere, but not in Canada.

Why? Because this would somehow violate our shepherding of the planet and eliminate a large number of government jobs. This without taking into account the environmental costs of treating

garbage like a VIP limo patron and driving it a hundred miles and then burying it which then results in previously appointed farm land spewing methane.

Is there a prospect that the simplest, least expensive and most environmentally sound method of disposing of our detritus will ever be seen in Toronto?

With the gang now running city hall not any more chance than a householder not having at least one maggot attack during the course of a warm summer.

In a postmodern world garbage removal is like everything else that government does these days: form wins out over function.

Toronto Globe & Mail Publishes Tides Canada Propaganda as News

How lazy can a newspaper be and what is its credibility worth?


Tides Canada Division Called "Think Tank"

Tallbloke et al Release Compendium of Cancelled Journal Articles

PRP Special Issue of Canceled "Pattern Recognition" Journal...

What some people don't want other people to know...

The Sickness of Wind Turbines

Larry Solomon reveals the other downside (after killing birds and bats) of Wind Turbines

Financial Post - Lawrence Solomon

Comments on a Scary WaPo Climate Article Go Very, Very Bad...

Wapo - Game Over for The Climate

The Ugly Faces of Eco-Terrorism

Just When you thought Eco-Terrorists Couldn't do anything Stupider...

Spree Cop Killer Murders 3 RCMP Officers to "Harm Oil Industry"

CBC Report (Which Doesn't Mention Anti-Oil Motivation)

Terrifying Costume ... The Resemblance is Amazing...

Movie: Voyage to the Bottom of Sanity: Climate Change from 1961

Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea
The new, state of the art nuclear submarine Seaview is on diving trials in the Arctic Ocean. The Seaview is designed and built by scientist and engineering genius Admiral Harriman Nelson (USN-Ret) (Walter Pidgeon). Captain Lee Crane (Robert Sterling) is the Seaview'sCommanding Officer. One of the on-board observers is Dr. Susan Hiller (Joan Fontaine), studying crew-related stress. The mission includes being out of radio contact for 96 hours while under the Arctic ice cap, but the ice begins to crack and melt, with boulder-size pieces crashing into the ocean around the submarine. Surfacing, they discover fire burning in the sky resulting in a world-threatening increase in heat all across the Earth. Bergan informs Nelson that the President wants him at a UN Emergency Scientific Meeting as soon as possible.

Turns out I was Right (as in Correct)

http://canadianbluelemons.blogspot.ca/2009/07/one-more-time-there-is-no-average.html

CBC uses old Polish coal plant pic when talking about Canada's greenhouse gas emissions.

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/cbc-propaganda/3828406492001

Media as political propaganda outlets....

In a study a few years back of CBC reporters not one.... zero.... voted Conservative.

From "The Prussian": The Climate Research Unit at The UEA Breaks the Hockey Stick

The following report from the University of East Anglia, about the Climate Research Unit, says:

"CRU publications repeatedly emphasize the discrepancy between instrumental and tree-based proxy reconstructions of temperature during the late 20th century, but presentations of this work by the IPCC and others have sometimes neglected to highlight this issue. 

"Got that?  CRU scientists have been pointing out, repeatedly, that proxy reconstructions (the hockeystick) are not as solid as all that, but the IPCC has been known to ‘neglect to highlight’ this point."

See more at: http://www.skepticink.com/prussian/2014/09/30/a-proxy-on-all-your houses/#sthash.HdySX92e.dpuf

Anti-Fossilistas are Pro-Poverty

The biggest difference between impoverished nations and wealthy ones is access to inexpensive energy. Rich nations have become that way by using fossil fuels, hydro power and nuclear plants. People in the poorest countries burn dung for heat and to cook food. The people in these poorest countries have no means of freezing food to preserve it; they rely on spices to both preserve meats and to hide the taste of pre-rotting flesh.

Inexpensive, reliable energy - provided mostly (and realistically ONLY) by fossil fuels - allow factories to be built, which provide jobs for ordinary people and create wealth in a town or country. (Note: Hydro and Nuke are reliable and cheap over time, but with huge initial costs.) With this wealth schools, universities and hospitals can be built and entire societies changed from hand-to-mouth existence to generative ones that allow for invention and artistic, leisure and cultural pursuits.

The reason I write this is because our power bill this month was $500, in a small house with 2 people. Last year for this month it was about $250. Why? Because the provincial government, the licensor of the energy monopoly in Ontario, made a multi-billion commitment to windmills that are incredibly unproductive and more incredibly expensive. Companies that make these contraptions or try and sell energy produced by them only exist because of the government subsidy. Our extra $3000 / year (times 4 million households) allows these companies to, among other things, support some politicians and campaign against others.

Those people who protest use of fossil fuels are either disingenuous, in someone's pocket, Bolsheviks who despise anyone but themselves having wealth, uneducated or unable to understand science and economics, or refugees from the 60s looking for meaning.

They need to be ignored or they will be creating a destiny of impoverishment for our (and their) society's future generations.

The AGW PR Strategy from Hoggan Associates / Desmog Blog in 2007

From Ranting Stan

From DeSmog Blog Propaganda Manual...

What will really make people act? We also live in a culture in which celebrity rules supreme, and in which 44 per cent of the population is ‘outer-directed’. That is, they have esteem-driven needs, seeking success, recognition and status through acquiring and displaying the ‘right’ brands, fashionable lifestyles and other goods, services and experiences (Rose et al 2005). Cultural Dynamics’ work indicates that the outer-directed section of the UK population offers a ripe opportunity for climate-related behaviour change. People like this want to feel special, and are accustomed to achieving this feeling through what they do and what they buy, rather than what they do not do or do not buy.

Thought I'd Catch Up on Cateret Island in Papua NG to see if Al Gore was correct...

Nope. Not under water yet... But it's still 3 months until 2015

A Weekend of Defiance

This was the weekend of the greatest march in history that will surely save Mother Earth from her murder by evil mankind. I expect like most of these events that the march will be full of sound and fury and ultimately signify nothing.
Meanwhile, I was defying age and gravity by playing in a Masters basketball tournament, in a small city an hour from Toronto on the shores of one of the world's largest fresh water lakes. Now my age is a state secret and to be honest my defiance of gravity would be measured in inches not feet. But these defiances pale when compared to the defiance against science and reality when I arrived at the new and shiny field-house in which the tournament was staged.
It is truly a marvelous facility, bright and new with hardwood slats never before suffering the pounding of the big feet of large males.
Then I went to fill up my water bottle.
Now in a modern world, where decisions were based on theory and proof, not political considerations, this activity would take about 15 seconds. But nooooo. Not now, not here. It took about 5 minutes to capture enough water to prevent my dehydration and death. I have seen a stronger trickle from a faucet with a leaky washer.
And the showers? I had to move around and do a shimmy dance to make my hair just a little bit wet.
Did I mention that my drive to the place was conducted in rain so strong that it pooled on the highway and caused at least one accident? And that it is raining similarly as I write this?
The facility is perhaps one mile from one of the largest fresh water lakes in the world. It probably increased in volume by a foot or so from the rain today.
But the politicians who would have had to sign off on this project needed to have insisted that the facility be 100% earth friendly. Which means, it doesn't matter if people can get enough water to drink or in which to wash their sweaty bodies.
This is not Arizona. Nor is it California, although clearly the stupidities from there have made it up here.
This is Ontario. We have LOTS of water. And we don't need to conserve it. Especially since any water we drink and piss away makes it back into the eco-system.
As a smart guy once said, the biggest different between stupidity and genius, is that there is a limit to genius.

The Wikipedia Slander of Dr. Timothy Ball

Wikipedia Edit encouraged...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Ball

The Earth Has a Fever Blister

Vancouver Sun

l

A Whole TV Series Devoted to Humans Surviving Devastating Climate Change

None of them caused by humans...

Tony Robinson

It Ain't Just Climate Scientists Who Fudge

Link

In what may be a Canadian record, a celebrated and prolific doctor has retracted nine University of Calgary studies that contained bogus data.

In the latest in a string of retractions, Dr. Cory Toth has pulled two reports from the medical literature because data and figures were “manipulated” in his laboratory at the University of Calgary medical school.

“I can’t say whether it’s an official record, but we haven’t seen anyone else in Canada retract that many papers since we launched in 2010,” said Dr. Ivan Oransky, co-founder of Retraction Watch, a U.S.-based group that shines light in some of academia’s darker corners. The group alerted the University of Calgary to problems with several of Toth’s studies.

Vicious Beaver Attack May Not be Caused by Global Warming Climate Change

While observers say that such a vicious attack by beavers is known only against trees, it does not mean that its carniforacious appetite isn't caused by Global Warming. "We don't know for sure, but Carbon emitted by humans does seem to be the only possible cause, except for hunger. He might just be extra hungry because so many trees have died because of carbon pollution.

Link to Horrible Story Here

Greener Means Bigger Babies?

 The following study seems to indicate that children born, I surmise, to mothers that live in green, leafy neighbourhoods come in at about an ounce and a half bigger than babies born in less green and leafy neighbourhoods.

Bigger, Greener Babies

The study was done in Vancouver.

This would seem to make some sense, but we have to be careful to distinguish cause from correlation.
Are families in leafy neighbourhoods more wealthy and therefore have better diets? Is there an ethnic bias; are we comparing Anglo-Saxon babies to Asian babies? What about cities that are entirely green (say Abbotsford) compared to cities with very little foliage?

And does size matter?

Snow in Kenya - September 5, 2014 - Limuru Golf Course

Source: Facebook page of a friend of a friend in Nairobi

Canada's "Have Not" Provinces Deny Fracking Benefits

The provinces that can't shoot straight, and seem to enjoy impoverishment and being economic basket cases appear set to ban shale gas recovery.
New Brunswick and Nova Scotia people have faced a propaganda tsunami against shale gas for almost a decade from the usual noises: Tides, WWF, Green Pee, etc. More effort needs to take place to refute the lies told by these lying liars.

Toronto Sun

Lord Monckton Demolishes Global Warming Alarmist

Part One

Part Two

I'm coming back...

After 2000 blog posts, 490,000 words, over 3000 comments, I thought I was Lemoning out. Forever.
But forever never comes.
I had some really good Global Warming Disruptive Climate Change Content... And I'll repost. Soon as I figure out how...

Scientists are Wrong on Global Warming

Thousands of scientists are on the record as concluding that AGW / Climate Change is caused by the actions of humans.

Thousands of other scientists are on the record as saying that this is horsefeathers - mostly that CO2 has never caused the climate to change and that variations are caused by the Sun.

One of these groups is wrong - they are not arguing semantics or minor items.

So scientists are wrong. Period.

In consideration of this, the scientific principal of "null hypothesis" needs to be brought to the table. Under this approach every theory is always considered unproven.
A theory can be "proven" a thousand times, but when a single tests proves wrong, then the theory needs to be discarded.

Since Man-created Co2 has risen faster than ever in history in the last 10 years, yet temperatures have slightly decreased or stayed the same (note there is no such thing as an average temperature) then the original theory is proven wrong.

Even commentators who support the man made Co2 theory have admitted as much by changing the whole theme to "Climate Change" from AGW.

One of the top IPCC experts is wavering, almost (Lorne Gunter):

But as Prof. Latif pointed out, the Atlantic, and particularly the North Atlantic, has been cooling instead. And it looks set to continue a cooling phase for 10 to 20 more years. "How much?" he wondered before the assembled delegates. "The jury is still out." (...)

While they deny it now, the facts to the contrary are staring them in the face: None of the alarmist drummers every predicted anything like a 30-year pause in their apocalyptic scenario.

Prof. Latif says he expects warming to resume in 2020 or 2030. "People will say this is global warming disappearing," he added. According to him, that is not the case. "I am not one of the skeptics," he insisted. "However, we have to ask the nasty questions ourselves or other people will do it."

This will save the world about as much as burying 150 pounds of raw meat...

Cobourg Union Cemetery has opened what is believed to be Ontario's first truly eco-friendly burial ground. Now people for whom environmental consciousness is a way of life can do their part to save the planet after death.

But I suppose if people don't want their descendants to find their gravestone and find out about the basketcase they're descended from, that's okay with me...

Link

Another Alarmist Predicting Catastrophes

Even Al Gore has toned down his severe weather / CO2 angle. Almost no one is saying that bad storms are tied to weather and almost no one is saying that anecdotes from today are related to Global Warming in the future.

We have not seen any weather affect from Global Warming because we have not experienced Global Warming - we're at about the same temps as a century ago - even the worst alarmists point to a very modest increase in temps. And they are careful to tell us that climate is not weather. So how can this commentator say with a straight face:
Link

While storms of such severity are rare, one expert predicted that we should expect more extreme storms in the future.
"If you keep pushing the climate the way we're pushing it, don't think about getting `average' weather any more," said Queen's climatologist McCaughey.

Later in the paper there was this:

The average water temperature worldwide was 17 Celsius, according to the National Climatic Data Center, the branch of the U.S. government that keeps world weather records. June was only slightly cooler, while August could set another record, scientists say. The previous record was set in July 1998 during a powerful El Nino in the Pacific.

Meteorologists said there is a combination of forces at work: A natural El Nino weather pattern just getting started on top of worsening manmade global warming, and a dash of random weather variations. Already the resulting ocean heat is harming threatened coral reefs. It also could hasten the melting of Arctic sea ice and help hurricanes strengthen.

What is an average water temperature? Did they measure ever cubic foot of water? Or did they cherry pick places where they knew they would get data they could use? The oceans have a big effect on weather and climate because the Earth is mostly water.

And, again, there is no global warming (and even Al Gore isn't using that phrase any more).

One more time - there is no average global temperature - Turns out I was right...

Turns out I was right...
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/10/16/a-simple-truth-computer-climate-models-cannot-work/

Batting average is simple - you take the total number of hits and divide it by the total number of at bats. You compare this years average with other years calculated in the same manner.
Global Climate average is not quite that simple to determine, in fact, it's impossible to find out, and its easy to fudge.
To have an accurate average global temperature, you would need to have the temperatures for every locality at exactly the same time using exactly the same measuring equipment in exactly the same way.
And to compare average temperatures, you would need to have studies for previous periods - preferrably over a long period of time.
Any other figure is imagined, or worse, more than likely taken from a selective sample of climate temperature record to "prove" a point.
I walk outside this summer, it is raining on 80% of the days, it is colder than I have ever seen it in my part of the world on this day. That's an observation. But that's about all we really got to go on.

And, one more time, the Climate Alarmists only have to be wrong once on the effect of CO2 in increasing temperatures. And they've been wrong for almost a decade - I encourage people to look back on my posts as far as their predictions and actuals. If the Alarmist predictors were paid according to their accuracy in predicting, they'd be a part of the starvation problem the world has, not a part of a Global Warming crisis that we don't.

Canaries in the Coal Mine or Bats in the Belfry?

Full Story Here
Researchers are pulling out all the stops to find whatever microscopic evidence they can to prove the world has a fever blister. Of course, they haven't discovered anything yet, and no they don't really have anything to compare their findings to, but that doesn't stop them from making the announcement:

So far, scientists haven't seen any plankton species go extinct, Nelson said from Barrow, Alaska, after a separate, two-week research voyage. But they are closely watching Pacific Ocean plankton found in the Arctic to see if they begin reproducing as sea temperatures rise.

"If a Pacific species was established in the Arctic, this would really be news," he says. "But we have not detected this yet. What could happen in this scenario is that, if the invader out-competes the native species, this could lead to fundamental changes in ecosystem function."

They're very creative, they've invented a net that traps the small beasties but lets the big ones go free. But the problem is, that we have had the same gradual change in climate that we have had for thousands of years. We haven't had any more global warming than normal. The Alarmists are talking about things maybe occuring over the NEXT 100 years.

If there isn't any warming, than what can they measure. Can they invent something else that can describe how these little monsters were affected with open waters in the arctic in the 50s?

Questions from A Climate Dummy - What if it IS about the Weather?

While I have read voluminously on Climate Change and AGW over the last 3 years or so, I remain a layman / dilettante.
I don't have a science education, nor the aptitude to really understand the science behind AGW, much less professional experience in the field.
I just have a BS detector the size of a funnel cloud, relatively good powers of observation and a more than middling level of curiosity.
So looking at the debate on "the biggest crisis in history" I mainly rely on whatever common sense my Mom gave me.
I believe in the power of anecdotes and observations, providing that they are put in context and considered for bias.
One observation that I have is that there are no valid temperature measurement data. Nothing is reliable over a longer term. Consistent technology to measure ice extension / contraction in the arctic is only 30 years old (although I know from pictures that the North Pole was liquid in the 50s and that Greenland was warm enough to raise sheep 1000 years ago and that the Thames was frozen a couple of centuries ago). I know that as many as 90% of surface temperature data are invalid thanks to Anthony Watts' research. And current sea temps are all based on new technology. And I think that surrogate data can be manipulated to prove any point. Furthermore, everyone insists on using "global average temperatures" which, of course, isn't a valid measurement (the entire earth cannot have an average temperature unless all temperatures in all places are taken all the time). Which is impossible and these data would still be skewed by time zones. And generally, the total amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere is also a global figure, not a local one.
So all data having anything to do with Climate Change are compromised and useless as far as making policy.
Basically, my Spidey Senses reveal the following:
1. Big cities and urban areas are suffering the coldest summers in my lifetime as well as the worst winters
2. Remote areas (Northern Canada and Equatorial areas) are enjoying very hot summers
Consistently, both sides of this debate concentrate on "climate" rather than "weather". The Alarmist side (at least) do this, I think, to rebut observations that it is colder. They do not want to have "exceptions" (local coolness) direct public opinion rather than their "rule" - that the world is burning to a crisp.
I have read, that climate effects are based on "feedbacks" involving calculations that I am unable to understand. But the basic concept from the Realist side, I think from what I've read, is that increased CO2 leads to increased water vapour which results in cooler temperatures.
So, my question to experts, based upon my layman observation is this:
Might "the Weather" actually be more important to study than "the Climate"?
Is it possible that human caused CO2 has a greater effect on local areas (urban centres) where it is created and is most concentrated, than in areas where industrial activity and the release of CO2 emissions are nominal?
If my observations as a dummy are accurate (and I have no idea if they are valid), then the whole debate would change. CO2 would indeed become a pollution like NO2 that caused acid rain. And by putting the equivalent to catalytic converters in cars and scrubbers in chimneys this pollution can be eliminated in a few years.
What sayeth the Climate Experts out there.