Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Cartoons by Josh

The cartoons are my copyright [see footer for terms] but feel free to post them on blogs or link to this page.
I will add more cartoons to this page as I do them.

Monday, February 22, 2010

Climate scientists withdraw journal claims of rising sea levels

Climate scientists withdraw journal claims of rising sea levels

Study claimed in 2009 that sea levels would rise by up to 82cm by the end of century – but the report's author now says true estimate is still unknown.

The paper – entitled "Constraints on future sea-level rise from past sea-level change" – used fossil coral data and temperature records derived from ice-core measurements to reconstruct how sea level has fluctuated with temperature since the peak of the last ice age, and to project how it would rise with warming over the next few decades.

In a statement the authors of the paper said: "Since publication of our paper we have become aware of two mistakes which impact the detailed estimation of future sea level rise. This means that we can no longer draw firm conclusions regarding 21st century sea level rise from this study without further work.

and all the scientists and uneducated stupid ignorant common sense people who dared point out the mistakes were called "Deniers" and shill for the oil industry.

Saturday, February 20, 2010


by Joseph D’Aleo and Anthony Watts.

Five organizations publish global temperature data. Two – Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) and the University of Alabama at Huntsville (UAH) – are satellite datasets. The three terrestrial institutions – NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), and the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) – all depend on data supplied by ground stations via NOAA.
Around 1990, NOAA began weeding out more than three-quarters of the climate measuring stations around the world. They may have been working under the auspices of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). It can be shown that they systematically and purposefully, country by country, removed higher-latitude, higher-altitude and rural locations, all of which had a tendency to be cooler.

Hitler Learns of Global Warming Collapse

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Union of concern Scientists

UCS apparently hasn’t learned from its many, many mistakes. But if at first you don’t succeed, scare, scare again.

The UCS is not a science organization, but a left-wing lobbying group like Greenpeace or the Club Sierra.
Because they have the word Scientists in the title does not make it a scientific organization...You and I can be members if we want ...just pay $35.00 and your in. They are anti capitalist and are from the far left of the political arena. They support the US Democratic party and are very involved in the US elections. Political motivation? “ Free Enterprise really means rich people get richer. They have the freedom to exploit and psychologically rape their fellow human beings in the process…. Capitalism is destroying the earth...Helen Caldicott, Union of Concerned Scientists.
Kevin Knobloch, President of the Union of Concerned Scientists is an expert on many environmental and arms control issues they claim. He is not a scientist and "issues" is what they are really about. His bio is as follows: Executive Director, Union of Concerned Scientists; director, CERES; former Director of Conservation Programs, Boston Appalachian Mountain Club; former Leg. Dir., U.S. Sen. Timothy Wirth (D-CO)” What we’ve got to do in energy conservation is try to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, to have approached global warming as if it is real means energy conservation, so we will be doing the right thing anyway in terms of economic policy and environmental policy...Timothy Wirth, former U.S. Senator (D-Colorado)
“Every time you turn on an electric light, you are making another brainless baby. Helen Caldicott, Union of Concerned Scientists.” Those kind of statements are not made by Scientists.
The Union of Concerned Scientists should be able to win any argument on global warming based on the merits of available data - but instead they seek to use smear tactics and compare Exxon-Mobil to Big Tobacco. We all know Big Tobacco is evil, right? So if you disagree with them on global warming, you must be evil too.

UCS has received funding from the Beldon Fund, the Compton Foundation, the Educational Foundation of America, the J.M. Kaplan Fund, the Scherman Foundation, the Blue Moon Fund, the Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Energy Foundation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Joyce Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Turner Foundation, and Pew Charitable Trusts.

Saturday, February 6, 2010

The great global warming collapse

In 2007, the most comprehensive report to date on global warming, issued by the respected United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, made a shocking claim: The Himalayan glaciers could melt away as soon as 2035.

These glaciers provide the headwaters for Asia's nine largest rivers and lifelines for the more than one billion people who live downstream. Melting ice and snow would create mass flooding, followed by mass drought. The glacier story was reported around the world. Last December, a spokesman for the World Wildlife Fund, an environmental pressure group, warned, “The deal reached at Copenhagen will have huge ramifications for the lives of hundreds of millions of people who are already highly vulnerable due to widespread poverty.” To dramatize their country's plight, Nepal's top politicians strapped on oxygen tanks and held a cabinet meeting on Mount Everest.

But the claim was rubbish, and the world's top glaciologists knew it. It was based not on rigorously peer-reviewed science but on an anecdotal report by the WWF itself. When its background came to light on the eve of Copenhagen, Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the IPCC, shrugged it off. But now, even leading scientists and environmental groups admit the IPCC is facing a crisis of credibility that makes the Climategate affair look like small change.

Friday, February 5, 2010

Hide the Decline


The United Nations would be the shell in which this new power structure would live. As for the uber-wealthy who had constructed this entity, they would hold privileged positions, as well as hold on to theirwealth . The rest of us would be compelled by our national governments to shell out money to implement whatever programs and controls deemed worthy by the new transnationalgovernment (expect the first 100 or so years to be dominated by "reparation payments" to every group that had been oppressed by anyone, ever). Our local governments would be given limited latitude to act independently, always subject to oversight by the transnational (unelected)government.

Sounds paranoid? What do you call what the global alarmists want to do? They want to compel countries to transfer billions, flowing from industrialized Western nations (primarily the United States) to developing nations, under the pretext of preparing for the effects ofglobal warming . They want to remove national sovereign control of energy resources. Extra-national entities would use mechanisms like global carbon taxes (and likely more direct means in due course) to control what means for generating energy are allowed, and how much energy is consumed. National governments would to do the dirty work. Having ceded sovereignty, neither individuals nor nations would have means of recourse or appeal.