Who is up for a rousing game of doublespeak?

George Orwell is alive and well and working in the Obama Administration where he is simply as "John". Nice Deb:

Granted, people were already using “climate change” to describe changes in the earth’s climate, (otherwise known as weather). But that wasn’t scary-sounding enough, I guess. “Change” is generally thought of in neutral to positive terms. Sometimes the climate changes, and we say, “Good, it’s been too cold lately, I’m glad it’s warming up.” “Disruption”, however, sounds rude and undesirable. Who wants a weather disruption – like a hurricane, or hail storm? Nobody.

Seems to be a whole lot of doublespeak going on the last couple of years. You know, "man made disasters" and the like. Since it is all about perception rather than reality I would like to propose that we quit using the term "illegal aliens" which implies that our friends have done something wrong by invading our country and instead we should refer to them as "unexpected company". Isn't that much nicer? I'm sure if we all try we can find a better way to say almost anything. Anyone want to take a stab at Crap & Tax Cap & Trade?

The Poodle Pontificates

The Sex Crazed Poodle formerly known as Al Gore sees the scam work of a life time slipping away and he’s not going down without a fight (no pun intended):

The need to solve the climate crisis and transition to clean energy has never been more clear. The oil is still washing up on the shores of the Gulf Coast and we've just experienced the hottest six months on record. Our troops are fighting and dying in the Middle East and our economy is still struggling to produce jobs. I continue to urge the president to provide leadership on this issue and urge the Senate to make this issue a priority for the remainder of this Congress. Ultimately — and sooner rather than later — these issues simply must be dealt with. Our national security, our economic recovery and the future of the United States of America — and indeed the future of human civilization on this Earth — depends on our country taking leadership. And that, in turn, depends on the United States Senate acting. The truth about the climate crisis — inconvenient as ever — must be faced.

Seems poor Al is just predestined to come up short. Al’s fellow travelers are in deep trouble and they are well aware that even the slightest breeze blowing from the wrong direction is all that is necessary to send them tumbling off a very steep cliff. They are not interested in risking their already tenuous careers to line Al’s pockets:

Supposedly it’s merely a scheduling move, aimed at pushing the C&T debate into the fall when the Senate calendar is less crowded.

Really, though? Democrats, who are already terrified of losing Congress, are going to surf into the midterms with an eleventh-hour push for a hugely expensive new bill related to … global warming? With the GOP already armed with ad-ready video of Obama talking about how it’ll make energy prices “skyrocket”? Radical prediction: Reid’s going to end up deciding in September that the schedule’s still a little too “crowded” to take this up.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will bring a limited package of oil spill response and energy measures to the floor next week, delaying action until at least this fall on a broader proposal that would impose greenhouse gas limits on power plants, senior Senate Democratic aides said.

Aides insisted Reid’s decision is a nod to the packed floor schedule the Senate faces before it leaves in two weeks for the August recess, and that he has not abandoned plans to try and bring up a broader climate and energy plan later in the year…

For now, the limited package expected on the floor this month will likely allow Democrats to push through a response to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill — such as tougher rig safety requirements — and perhaps some energy provisions that members of both parties could support.

The old “scheduling move” ploy, eh? More likely, Reid & Co. have finally figured out that the American public is not having one more bite of the Democratic crap sandwich. In any case, Al’s personal inconvenient truth is that his Global Warming shtick has played itself out. Time to move on.

The New McCarthyism

McCarthyism is the term used to describe demagogic, reckless, and unsubstantiated accusations, as well as public attacks on the character or patriotism of political opponents.  During the McCarthy period "blacklists" ruled the day and careers were ruined.  It's back.  Frank J. Tipler:

The National Academy of Sciences, in its official journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, has just published a list of scientists whom it claims should not be believed on the subject of global warming. I am number 38 on the list. The list of 496 is in descending order of scientific credentials.

Professor Freeman Dyson of the Institute for Advanced Study, a member of the National Academy of Sciences and a fellow of the Royal Society, is number 3 on the list. Dyson is a friend of mine and is one of the creators of relativistic quantum field theory; most physicists think he should have shared the Nobel Prize in Physics with Richard Feynman. MIT professor Richard Lindzen, a meteorologist who is also a member of the National Academy, is number 4. Princeton physics professor William Happer, once again a member of the National Academy of Sciences, is number 6.

I’m in good company.

The proponents of Global Warming are running scared.  Honest debate on the merits of global warming have failed so now they are shooting and smearing the messenger.  This list was not created for you or I.  The list is for scientists.  Now forgive my lack of knowledge of the scientific process but I've always assumed that science was based on data.  The more, the better.  I assumed that scientists looked at everything.  And then they draw conclusions based on information gleaned from all the evidence.  Naive, I'm sure.

Global warming proponents have turned the process on its head.  First they come to a conclusion and then they cherry pick and manipulate the data to suit their conclusion.  Finally, they blacklist any scientist who dares to question their methodology or results. 

Tipler:

Notice that I am not saying that there has been no warming, just that the available raw data that I’ve personally been able to check do not show it. Until all the raw temperature data are placed online, so the data can be checked by anybody, a rational person has to suspend belief in global warming, to say nothing of AGW.

The official government adjusted data for these sites do show a warming trend. All the warming is in the “corrections.” Sorry, I don’t buy it. Especially from “scientists” who are known to “correct’ their raw data to “hide the decline.”

There have been calls to silence the 496 scientists on the list. Besides “climate deniers,’ we have been called “traitors.” We all know the penalty for treason.

Silence scientists?  Sounds like an admission that their global warming theory won't stand up to a closer look.

Save the Planet, Move into a Cave

The invention of air conditioning was all part of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.  No, really:

. . .as science writer Stan Cox argues in his new book, “Losing Our Cool: Uncomfortable Truths About Our Air-Conditioned World (and Finding New Ways to Get Through the Summer),” the dizzying rise of air conditioning comes at a steep personal and societal price.

We stay inside longer,
exercise less, and
get sick more often — and
the electricity used to power all that A.C. is helping push the fast-forward button on global warming.

The invention has also changed American politics: Love it or hate it, refrigerated cooling has been a major boon to the Republican Party. The advent of A.C. helped launch the massive Southern and Western population growth that’s transformed our electoral map in the last half century. Cox navigates all of these scientific and social angles with relative ease, providing a clear explanation of how A.C. made the leap from luxury to necessity in the United States and examining how we can learn to manage the addiction before we refrigerate ourselves into the apocalypse.

Thankfully Smitty at The Other McCain tackled this idiocy so I don't have to but I do have some thoughts.

As I have mentioned before, my house was built in 1923 and has neither heat nor air conditioning.  In the winter I sleep under an electric blanket and in the summer I sleep with a floor fan blowing on me.  I hate air conditioning and am absolutely miserable at work or any place else that is air conditioned.  Believe it or not, air conditioning is not a necessity.  Neither are cell phones, microwave ovens, television, WiFi, XBox, or indoor plumbing.  We could do without.  But why should we?  Innovation has improved all of our lives.  Good old American ingenuity and exceptionalism should be a source of pride for all of us.

I am always amused at how progressives pick and chose which aspect of modern life to disparage.  Bottom line-progressives are busybodies.  They always want to tell the other guy how to live.  So Stan Cox writes a book, and in doing so kills a bunch of trees, to tell the rest of us that we are killing the planet.  No doubt he will further increase his "carbon footprint" during his book tour, while telling us to turn off our air, bicycle to work and use recycled hemp bags to tote our organically grown groceries. 

Unfortunately there is no end to the silliness that progressives are willing to engage in ostensibly to "save the planet".  Newsflash:  the planet is just fine, butt out.

Read Smitty's take.

Kerry, Lieberman and Graham, Oh, My!

Despite the fact that every day the false prophets of Global Warming are confronted with the evidence of their duplicity, they still have a friend in John Kerry:

"Senators Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman will unveil their proposal later this month," Kerry spokeswoman Whitney Smith said, adding Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was "committed to making this Congress the one that finally passes comprehensive energy and climate legislation."

… Electric utilities would be the first sector to have pollution controls imposed -- starting in 2012 -- through a "cap and trade" system to bring down carbon emissions with required permits that would be traded in a regulated market.

Factories would join the pollution-reduction system in 2016, industry and environmental sources have been told.

A third sector, transportation, would see a tax levied on refined oil products, a Senate source told Reuters last week, with the expectation it would be passed on to consumers when they buy gasoline and other fuel products.

Well, this must mean that by 2012 all of our economic woes will have been solved. Why else would Kerry, Graham and Lieberman be working on legislation that will by design increase to energy costs to every single American? Think about it, not only would it cost more to heat and cool our homes, and drive our cars, but every good and service that we consume would cost more as well. This comes at the same time that our government is kicking around the idea of instituting a VAT. Perhaps, Sen. Kerry should ask his chauffer what a gallon of gas costs these days, though, I doubt the skyrocketing cost of fuel has the same impact on Kerry as it does the rest of us.

Unlike the politicians who enact legislation based on nothing more than their personal, often skewed vision, any increase in the cost of fuel, electricity, food, etc., has an enormous impact on American families. We simply cannot afford to continue funding Washington’s pet projects.

Congress has just gone through one bruising fight. Are they ready for another one?

Sen. Lindsey Graham doesn't like all the name calling coming from the Right

I had no intention of posting twice on Sen. Lindsey Graham (the other post is at Potluck) but this takes the cake:

I have been to enough college campuses to know if you are 30 or younger this climate issue is not a debate. It’s a value. These young people grew up with recycling and a sensitivity to the environment — and the world will be better off for it. They are not brainwashed. … From a Republican point of view, we should buy into it and embrace it and not belittle them. You can have a genuine debate about the science of climate change, but when you say that those who believe it are buying a hoax and are wacky people you are putting at risk your party’s future with younger people.

So, on one hand you have the Global Warming cultists calling we skeptics Nazis and on other, we skeptics are calling Global Warming cultists "wacky" and suggesting that they just might be gullible.  Yeah, I can see how that equates in Graham's world. 

Depending on who we are talking about in the Global Warming crowd I might call them wacky, gullible and victims.  I might call them scammers, con men or lying sacks of ....  Well, you get the idea.  But, I don't call people with whom I disagree "Nazis".  Fascists, yes.  Nazis, no.

That said, Graham doesn't do young people any favors by pandering to them.  His suggestion that the Republican Party, as a matter of policy, should take advantage of young people because of their youthful but misplaced idealism, is stomach churning.  Instead, how about if we are honest with young people.  The science is not settled and it is becoming less settled every day. 

Give young people the facts.  Talk to them about the myriad of ways that we can protect the environment while we increase our energy independence but don't pander for political gain.

"You can't wish it away" VS "We can't control nature"

Al Gore took the New York Times in an effort to save his income stream and the perfect answer to his foolishness came from an unlikely source:



“We can’t control nature.”

Unintentionable pearls of widsom-you've got to love it.  Does this mean that our President, who has pushed Global Warming, on a gut level knows that the theory is hooey?

Jules Crittenden has a much better answer to Gore than I could ever compose.  A brief excerpt:

Personally, once they’re done failing to accomplish the health care thing, I have to say that if they fail to accomplish nothing else, I’d like to see them fail to accomplish the warming thing. That will really croak them in the 2010 midterms, and if it drags out anything like health care, still could be a real problem for Obama when he has to start gearing up for 2012.

Gore spends the next few graphs yapping on about the cap-and-trade thing, making excuses for why a bad idea has gone nowhere. Then, he gives a big shout out to Kerry, Graham and Lieberman, who plan to pushing this thing next week. I’m looking forward to the minority grilling … if Dems still hold the Senate … when Al gets called in to testify. I’m also looking forward to those hearings on which warmal scientist lied about what, and who was grinding what axe, putting the fix in to spike which scientific papers. Maybe they can talk about research funding while they’re at it. But that will have to wait till the Dems lose the Senate, at which point Al can still be called in to explain himself.

Personally, I look forward to the day when like con artists before him, we see pictures of Gore led to jail in handcuffs.

Read Crittenden's takedown.

So what's left?

Prof. Jacobson at Legal Insurrection caught my eye with this:

Does This Mean My House Never Will Be Waterfront?

 I really didn't care when they revoked the claim that the glaciers would disappear. I don't live near glaciers.

But now the seas are not going to rise? My dream of a waterfront home is melting away faster than the glaciers:

Scientists have been forced to withdraw a study on projected sea level rise due to global warming after finding mistakes that undermined the findings.The study, published in 2009 in Nature Geoscience, one of the top journals in its field, confirmed the conclusions of the 2007 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It used data over the last 22,000 years to predict that sea level would rise by between 7cm and 82cm by the end of the century....

Not to worry Professor, I've got a prime piece of waterfront property I'll sell you cheap.

Seriously, what's left?  The seas aren't rising, the glaciers aren't melting, the rainforests aren't disappearing and it hasn't warmed in fifteen years.  The scammers powers that be are either going to need to come up with something new to blame on Global Warming Climate Change or admit that the jig is up they were "mistaken" all along.

Is the writing (finally) on the wall for the Global Warmists?

Via Doug Ross I came across an article on Global Warming that gives me hope that this nonsense is finally on its last legs.

Here's a small excerpt from American Thinker's article Time to Turn Up the Heat on the Warmists:

But the creature called man has the capacity to worry, and worry he does. He worried about global cooling in the 1970s and then later about global warming. Then it became "climate change." He worried about causing rising seas, even though we know that the ocean around Florida was once 300 feet lower and at another time 100 feet higher. He worried that CO2 -- a naturally occurring gas necessary for life and conducive to plant growth (which is why botanists pump it into greenhouses) -- would spell our end. Never mind how it's said that C02-level changes follow temperature changes, not the reverse. A hypothesis needed its data.

Then, oh, boy, did we hear about that data. First there was Climategate, with emails showing that "scientists" had schemed to suppress inconvenient truths and had refused to comply with the Freedom of Information Act. Then came the admission that the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was dead wrong about Himalayan ice melt. And other shoes have dropped as well. Remember the IPCC warning that climate change could cause the loss of 40 percent of the Amazon Rainforest? It was based on a report by an advocacy group, the World Wildlife Fund, that misrepresented a study. Then we learned of other notable IPCC sources as well, such as a student's Master's dissertation and a sporting magazine.

Next, notorious University of East Anglia head and central Climategate figure Phil Jones may not yet be starting to sing, but he is singing a different tune. He now admits that the Medieval Warm Period might have been toastier than today, meaning that current temperatures "would not be unprecedented." To those of us who vaguely remember stories about dinosaurs and Mesozoic CO2 levels 5 to 10 times today's and temperatures 11 to 22 degrees greater, this isn't exactly earth-shattering. Jones also admits that there has been no "statistically significant" warming since 1995, something that, when asserted mere months ago, got one branded a flat-earther. In addition, he now says that the Gorelesque view that "The debate is over" is "not my view." Interestingly, though, he never made this known until he was caught green-handed.

The Global Warming scam is falling apart faster than an under cooked soufflé.  The first hint that all was not well should have been when warmists felt the need to change their moniker to "Climate Change".  Switching to an all encompassing descriptor allowed the warmists to take an "everything including the kitchen sink" approach that they hoped would fuzzy up the facts.  Mainly they just succeeded in looking foolish. And desperate.

Back to American Thinker:

Yet, amidst this exposition of fact and exposure of fiction, one point never changes: We have been had. And one question remains: Will justice be done?

Let us be clear on the gravity of the Climateers' crime: They have used billions of our tax money to fund fraudulent science. And why?

For the purposes of promoting policies that would steal billions more.

Forgive me if  don't take being screwed over lightly  I do believe that there are a number of Global Warmists who have been innocently sucked in and duped.  I'm willing to give the run of the mill Chicken Little a pass.  But not the IPCC, not the scientists who racked in the grants under false pretenses and certainly not the truly insufferable Al Gore, the failed divinity student who took a bogus belief system and peddled it with the religious fervor of a PT Barnum.  Come comeuppance is a bitch and it is time that Gore learn the true meaning of the words "Hell hath no fury..."

Global warming: the only thing melting is the fake facade

A round up of the most recent Global Warming news:


The glaciers aren’t melting
The Earth isn’t heating
The rain forests aren’t disappearing
The Dutch and the poley bears aren’t drowning.

Did I leave anything out? Oh yeah, storms aren’t increasing in either frequency or strength.

In the blink of an eye we’ve gone from “the science is settled” to “I dunno”. Which leads us to one very important question-where the Hell is Al Gore? Has anybody seen or heard from him since the postponement of the end of the world?

I’d imagine that Big Al is hunkered down with his broker. He has a lot of divesting to do and moving millions and millions of dollars can’t be rushed. But I’m sure that sooner or later he’ll emerge teary eyed to proclaim that he too was a victim of the Global Warming scam. He’ll remind us, perhaps for the first time, that he is not a scientist, just a failed divinity student, and he trusted others because, well, he’s a humanitarian.

Don’t cry for Al. There’s a sucker born every minute and scams are a dime a dozen. Al will be back on his game in no time.
 
 
Image from FAPO.org

Dueling headlines

Back on January 19th there was this:

2000s warmest decade on record, government reports

But that was almost a month ago and in the rapidly evolving world of Global Warming anything can happen.  For instance, from today's Daily Mail:

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

Well, fancy that.  Bullet points from the article:

*  Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing

*  There has been no global warming since 1995

*  Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes

This coming from Professor Phillip Jones who recently stepped down as director of the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit whose work was heavily relied on by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.  The problem with relying on Phillip's work is that he can't seem to remember where he put any of that darned data that backed up the claims that the Earth is in the midst of a man caused fever.  Seems Phillips keeps one very messy office and he just can't figure out where he put any of the data:

The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.

Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.

Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.

Jones housekeeping skills aside, if the lost date ever existed in the first place then scientist should be able to return to the original sources and duplicate the results, right?  But an admission by Jones casts doubt:

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

Let's face it, Global warming is unraveling quicker than a cheap sweater.  Investigations by academic panels are all well and good but it is time for a criminal investigation.  Proponents manufactured "evidence" out of thin air for the purpose of enriching themselves either professionally, monetarily or both.  It is handcuff time.

Geez, have they looked out their window?

How do you explain such humongous inanity?

Wall Street Journal

As D.C. continued to dig out from Snowmageddon and is keeping an eye on another storm system, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration was busy making a climate change announcement.


NOAA, part of the Department of Commerce, is going to be providing information to individuals and decision-makers through a new NOAA Climate Service office. “More and more, Americans are witnessing the impacts of climate change in their own backyards, including sea-level rise, longer growing seasons, changes in river flows, increases in heavy downpours, earlier snowmelt and extended ice-free seasons in our waters. People are searching for relevant and timely information about these changes to inform decision-making about virtually all aspects of their lives,” the release says.

Earlier snowmelt? That would be nice.

When I read stuff like I wonder if my personal Hell isn't to be stuck in some eternal comedy club where none of the comedians are funny.  Climate change has turned out to be one very bad joke yet we continue to pay for the comedians at the NOAA and others to keep yucking it up. 

What? Were you expecting groupies?

Carol at No Sheeples Here thinks that Obama seems bored:

Quote of the Day

"POTUS delivered a vague and cheerful pep talk to the Organizing For America team these last days, and he again used the old campaign rhetoric of how the hard stuff was hard, and that changing Washington was hard, and that it was hard not to give up but it was the right thing to do…and so forth. The cheers were prefab. POTUS appears distracted, and, if he were not POTUS, there would be the suspicion of boredom."

Well yes, life is a bitch when you have to work for a living.  Constituents just aren't as much fun as groupies and there are days when you are surrounded by people who don't want to be buried wearing your tee shirt.You have to deal with people who have no flippin' clue what the hell arugula is and couldn't afford to buy it anyway.  You have to deal with people would rather eat plaster than apply for food stamps but they haven't worked for months and their kids are hungry.  You have to deal with people who don't give two shits whether a bunch of honor killing, genital mutilating terrorists like us-they just want to get on a plane without worrying about some inbred thug blowing up his nasty bits and taking the entire plane out in the process.  You have to deal with people who don't give a rat's ass about Global Warming because (a) they don't believe it exists, (b) they think it is a scam and (c) they don't want to pay more for their electricity just because you and your buddies stand to make a killing off selling carbon credits.  You have to deal with people you are happy with their medical care and aren't going to stand for the government seizing one sixth of our economy for themselves.  You have deal with people who think that you are a self-serving arrogant schmuck.  Don't like it?  Look on the bright side-only three years to go.

If you throw a rock at a pack of wild dogs, the one that yelps...

People are throwing stones at Rajendra Pachauri, head of the IPCC (which according to Doug Ross stands for International Panel on Climate Crime), is starting to get a might testy.  Note this from the Ace of Spades:

"Dr." Pachauri: Hey, Those Who Claim I Profited From IPCC Decisions Should Rub Asbestos on Their Faces (And Die of Cancer)

Rajendra Pachauri, the besieged head of the U.N.'s International Panel on Climate Change, told the Financial Times on Wednesday that he is the victim of a "carefully orchestrated" campaign to block climate change legislation.

"I would say [there are] nefarious designs behind people trying to attack me with lies, falsehoods," he told the paper, swatting away allegations that his India-based climate institute, TERI, has benefited from decisions made by the IPCC, which he also chairs.

Climate change skeptics "are people who deny the link between smoking and cancer; they are people who say that asbestos is as good as talcum powder," he said.

"I hope that they apply it (asbestos) to their faces every day."

Well, that is kinda mean.

Look, I barely made it through physics in college.  Science is not my thing.  However, I did manage to stay awake through a couple of my classes and I seem to remember that skepticism is crucial to good science.  Beyond that, when people start making ridiculous statements such as comparing Global Warming skeptics to Holocaust deniers or that skeptics believe that asbestos is as good as talcum powder then I know that the speaker is on shaky ground. 

The truth is, Global warming adherents don't want to talk about facts.  If you ask a disciple about previous warming periods they are likely to change the subject altogether.  A week ago I actually had someone respond to my question by launching into a weird ramble about our "illegal" invasion of Iraq.  Global warming/Iraq???  Um, wouldn't it have been just as easy to admit that he didn't have the answer rather than making an ass of himself by going off the deep end over something totally unrelated?

People have a perfect right to know what relationship exists between Pachauri's enormous wealth and his position as head of the IPCC.  Methinks that his answer belies a man with something to hide.

Gee, did it all have to end so soon?

Walter Russell Mead:

The Death of Global Warming

The global warming movement as we have known it is dead. Its health had been in steady decline during the last year as the once robust hopes for a strong and legally binding treaty to be agreed upon at the Copenhagen Summit faded away. By the time that summit opened, campaigners were reduced to hoping for a ‘politically binding’ agreement to be agreed that would set the stage for the rapid adoption of the legally binding treaty. After the failure of the summit to agree to even that much, the movement went into a rapid decline.

The movement died from two causes: bad science and bad politics.

After years in which global warming activists had lectured everyone about the overwhelming nature of the scientific evidence, it turned out that the most prestigious agencies in the global warming movement were breaking laws, hiding data, and making inflated, bogus claims resting on, in some cases, no scientific basis at all. This latest story in the London Times is yet another shocker; the IPCC’s claims that the rainforests were going to disappear as a result of global warming are as bogus and fraudulent as its claims that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035. It seems as if a scare story could grab a headline, the IPCC simply didn’t care about whether it was reality-based.

Don't cry for fat Al Gore.  There really is a sucker born every minute and he'll be off the is next scam in the twinkle of an eye.  He'll proclaim his innocence in the Global Warming fraud-after all, he's not a scientist.  He only relied on what they told him.  He's the real victim here.  Sigh.

Anywho, all scams have a shelf life and this one's has expired.  Question is, what will the next one be?

Have you kicked a "greenie" today?

Tim Blair:

“There is no point in denying it,” wrote warmenist George Monbiot. “We’re losing.” And that was back in early November, before Climategate, before Copenhagen and before the IPCC catastrophe. The situation for our warmy pals is now even more hilarious:

A global deal to tackle climate change is all but impossible in 2010, leaving the scale and pace of action to slow global warming in coming decades uncertain, according to senior figures across the world involved in the negotiations.

So much for having only 50 days to save the world. It gets better:

“The forces trying to tackle climate change are in disarray, wandering in small groups around the battlefield like a beaten army,” said a senior British diplomat.

I say we keep fighting them. Just for the fun of it.

Oh, I don't know.  Usually I would be all for kicking the bastards while they're down but they are such a bunch of sissy losers it just doesn't sporting.  On the other hand, they're smug sissy losers so I say go for it.

Is "global warming" based on scientific fact or stories told around the bonfire?

It is based on anecdotes, though, told by the same people who tell stories of the Abominable Snowman.

That is a spot quote from Don Surber, who wrote:

The credibility of Church of Manmade Global Warming — which calls its priests “scientists” — is disappearing faster than the mountain glaciers its adherents claim are melting as a penance for the sins of mankind.

“The United Nations’ expert panel on climate change based claims about ice disappearing from the world’s mountaintops on a student’s dissertation and an article in a mountaineering magazine,” Richard Gray of the London Telegraph reported.

Ah yes, the claim that the Himalayans will be ice free in 25 years is based on a few stories from sherpas.

And it was that contention that helped win Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change the Nobel Peace Prize.

Only now are IPCC officials owning up to the lies and cover-ups they have had over the years.

This revelation is only the latest in a string of discoveries that show the “science” purported by Al Gore and the Climatologists is nothing but distortions. The IPCC is a pack of bureaucrats who are using Chicken Little tactics to expand government’s control of industry.

This one is particularly lame.

The IPCC claims that the melting of mountaintops and that the Himalayans will be ice free by 2035 is based on science.

It is based on anecdotes, though, told by the same people who tell stories of the Abominable Snowman.

Yet no matter how much evidence comes out that shows that global warming is a scam of epic proportions, the powers that be continue to hang their hats on it.  Follow the money.  Which brings me to the President's SOTU address in which he mocked global warming skeptics-I wonder what is in his stock portfolio.

Read the rest of Surber's post.

Could GlacierGate lead to criminal charges?

Lets certainly hope so.

IPCC Head in Glaciergate Crime?

 The London Times continues to follow the glaciergate story–and it keeps getting worse.

The latest disclosure: Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the UN’s (formerly) prestigious Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (known as the IPCC), may have raised millions of dollars for his New Delhi institute on the basis of the totally bogus ‘glaciergate’ claim by the IPCC that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035.

According the the London Times, Pachauri’s institute got money from the European Union and the US-based Carnegie Corporation to investigate a prediction that never had any scientific backing whatever, and one which all serious glacier scientists instantly recognized as impossible. The bogus claim was frequently repeated in the fundraising efforts — and reiterated as recently as January 15 when the IPCC was already under intense pressure to admit it had blundered.

This is now more than an example of eye-popping incompetence and gross neglect of elementary scientific standards by a body on whose authority the world is expected to make multi-trillion dollar decisions affecting every business and every person on the planet.

It is now, potentially, a criminal issue. If Pachauri knew the claim was bogus and allowed these grant applications to go forward, he could find himself facing criminal charges. (emphasis added)

Global Warming is the scam of the century and scammers belong in prison.  Pachauri should not be an exception.  The scam has cost untold billions to governments, and by extension taxpayers, all over the world.  Given the corrupt nature of the UN it is no surprise that it has played a central role in promoting the con game. 

It is past time to apply the brakes.  No more taxpayer money should line the pockets of Global Warming corruptocrats and Pachauri, Gore, et al., should suffer the same fate as Bernie Madoff.  In this country we should insist that our Congressmen permanently shelve Cap & Trade. 

I anything good comes out of this we can hope that in the future people will not be so gullible and will be more skeptical when "scientists" make fantastic and nonsensical pronouncements.  Follow the money.

h/t Instapundit

Its the end of the world! Oh, what? Never mind.

The TimesOnline:

World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown

A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it.

Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world's glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.

In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC's 2007 report.

It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was itself based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.

Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was "speculation" and was not supported by any formal research. If confirmed it would be one of the most serious failures yet seen in climate research. The IPCC was set up precisely to ensure that world leaders had the best possible scientific advice on climate change.

Professor Murari Lal, who oversaw the chapter on glaciers in the IPCC report, said he would recommend that the claim about glaciers be dropped: "If Hasnain says officially that he never asserted this, or that it is a wrong presumption, than I will recommend that the assertion about Himalayan glaciers be removed from future IPCC assessments."

So, in order for something, anything, to be accepted as scientific evidence it merely has to support the conclusions that scientists want to reach.  Gee, that seems about like a pretty low standard to me. 

We have long held that scientist are a breed of altruistic detectives following the evidence to wherever it leads.  We are learning that instead they follow whatever folly leads to the next grant  "Skeptic" has become a dirty word in the climate scientists and their supporters but science, good science, needs skepticism.  Nothing is more damaging to true scientific research than certainty.  Skepticism allows the inclusion of dissenting evidence while certainty leads to excluding evidence that is contrary to expected conclusion. 

If the Global Warming scam has taught us anything, it is that good science needs skeptics.

When morons speak

Generally speaking, actors really should stick to reading their lines-without a script they often come off sounding pretty darn moronic:

Actor Danny Glover believes that the Haitian earthquake was caused by climate change and global warming:

Says Glover: “When we see what we did at the climate summit in Copenhagen, this is the response, this is what happens, you know what I’m sayin’?”

Yeah, I know what Danny is sayin', but does he?

Stick to regurgitating, Danny.  The off the cuff stuff isn't working for you.