An Interview You Don't Want To Miss

John Hawkins of Right Wing News interviews with Dennis Avery, the co-author of Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years. Here are some of the Questions and answers:

...The very mild warming that the earth experienced over the last century: does that have more to do with mankind's activities or the sun?

It seems like it must be the sun. The reason we say that is because 70% of the warming we've had since 1850, when the Little Ice Age ended -- 70% of that warming came before 1940. 85% of the human emitted greenhouse gasses came after 1940. In fact, the net warming of the earth since 1940 is a miniscule 2/10 of 1 degree celsius....

Many global warming alarmists say there is a scientific consensus on global warming, that almost everyone agrees with them, almost unanimously among scientists. Is that true?

...With the temperatures scheduled for a 25 year cooling, I think the consensus just went out the window. I think the consensus people have just run off a cliff like Wile E. Coyote in the Roadrunner cartoons and they're in mid-air with their feet spinning madly while they wait for the earth to smash them to the ground far below.

Another thing I have noticed is that even the global warming alarmists were right: the solutions that they're suggesting don't come close to fixing the problems. Kyoto, these cap and trade schemes, they are really expensive and actually do very little to reduce greenhouse gasses. Any thoughts on that?

They're really talking about going back to the Great Depression. Nobody has a car, nobody could afford the fuel if they had a car. They're talking about living a hundred yards from the factory, except there isn't going to be a factory because there is not going to be any coal burning to power it. No nuclear power, no drilling for oil, no hope.

I just want to remind you that there are millions of people in the Third World, women and children, heating and cooking with cow manure, firewood that they gather off the mountainside. The air pollution in some of those areas is equal to a 2 pack a day cigarette habit. ...If there's no kerosene, no propane, no nuclear electricity, are we all going to be in that situation?

Read the whole thing at the link. It is worth it.

Al Gore is about to lose his latest cash cow. I can't wait to see what he comes up with next. Any guesses?

For more on Dennis Avery go here.

Open Debate, Liberal Style

The libs are always throwing up the term "free and open debate". I am not against that as long as that is what it is. Unfortunately, libs have a different definition of it:

James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.

I do not think the oil execs are "blurring the lines" on Climate Change. I think the lines were pretty damn blurry to begin with. They are just bringing it to people's attention.

OK, I will admit that 30 or 40 billion in profits does sound high. But their profit margin is only around 8% and that is lower than many businesses that provide essential products. Over 70% of that money is re-invested in exploration and advanced technologies.

Back to the subject of the post. The liberal perception that an open debate is only allowed if the participants agree with them. Here this guy (Al Gore's science advisor) is accusing the execs of "high crimes against humanity and nature" for expressing opinions that he does not agree with. The reason the execs are doing it may be for personal reasons. But could it not be said that Al Gore is doing the same thing? Somebody has to pay the energy bill at Al's house you know.

If this were the only subject that the libs were doing this on it would be different. If you don't agree with entitlements, these people are not interesting in finding out why. You hate the poor and should be shot. If you do not agree with abortion, then you hate the poor women that have them and you should be shot. If you do not agree with affirmative action, then you are a racist and should be shot. If you believe in the second amendment, then you are a murdering criminal and you should be sh.. oh I mean stabbed. I could go on and on, but you get the picture.

People like this are not interested in hearing different opinions. They are not even interested in the truth. They are interested in their own agendas, period. If your beliefs are different than theirs, you are either stupid, ignorant, or just plain evil.

The scariest thing about the way liberals use this tactic is that it seems to be working out great for them. We have two presidential contenders now. One is the most liberal Senator in Washington. The other is a RINO that seems to be more comfortable when he is in line with the liberal agenda.

If you don't believe me, the next time you run into a liberal friend that wants to engage in an "honest and open debate", give him one. Go ahead, see what happens.

Well, He Deals With "Vibrations"

Remember Dr. Thomas Chalko? He's the scientist that provided us with the scientific report claiming that earthquakes are increasing due to, you guessed it Global Warming. Get a load of this:

Chalko is best described as a pseudo-scientist--at least when it comes to the fields of global warming and earthquakes about which he was quoted by CBS and MSNBC as an authority. He is not a meteorologist. Nor is he a geophysicist or seismologist. His website reveals that he is into "self healing," "vibrations," and alien visitations...

You would think that CBS and MSNBC might want to check into his background a little, right? Wrong:

...I decided to perform Google and Yahoo searches of the "scientist" who had issued the finding, one Thomas Chalko, MSc, Ph.D. In less than five minutes I found that Chalko was perhaps the last person who should be quoted on the purported impact of allegedly man-caused global warming.

It is amazing how the MSM reacts when given any story about Global Warming/Climate Change.
No research involved. Given this guy's credentials, you may as well have asked the local palm reader to give you a detailed explanation of Global Warming.

White House Ignoring "Global Warming" Debate

A few days ago I wrote this post. It was in response of this story. When asked about it the White House spokeswoman Dana Perino responded with this:

The spokeswoman for President Bush says the thousands of scientists from across the United States that reject the theory of "global warming" about human-caused greenhouse gases posing a major threat to future life can have their "opinion."

But no further comment came from Dana Perino, the White House spokeswoman, when asked about the issue by Les Kinsolving, WND's correspondent at the White House.

At today's White House news briefing, he asked, "WorldNetDaily reports that more than 31,000 U.S. scientists, including 9,000 Ph.D.s, now [have] signed a petition rejecting global warming, the assumption that human production of greenhouse gases is damaging the Earth's climate. My question: What is the White House reaction to these 31,000 U.S. scientists?"

"I would say that everyone is entitled to their opinion," Perino responded. "What's your next question?"

"That's all?" Kinsolving asked.

"That's all I'm going to say," she said.

What I want to know is why? Why can we not debate this issue. I speak out against "Global Warming/Climate Change" every chance I get, and I never get an honest debate. I get treated as if I have lost my mind.

Until we reach a point on this issue where we can hear both sides of the argument, this country is going to continue to throw our money, and corn down the "ethanol" drain. All while not doing a thing to help the environment, or stop Global Climate Change.

We have listened to Al Gore and his bunch, let's listen to some people on the other side.

Disputing Global Warming/Climate Change

You know I dispute it, and have since the beginning. Now it looks like a few scientists are disputing it too. That is, if you think over 30,000 is a few:

...the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) will announce that more than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition rejecting claims of human-caused global warming. The purpose of OISM's Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of "settled science" and an overwhelming "consensus" in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climate damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.

It is evident that 31,072 Americans with university degrees in science - including 9,021 PhDs, are not "a few." Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,072 American scientists are not "skeptics."

All we hear from politicians is: We need to have an honest debate about... Why can't we have an honest debate about this subject? People have swallowed Al Gore's argument hook line and sinker, all while old Al gets richer and richer from it.

H/T: Michelle Malkin

It Looks Like ANWAR Is Out Of The Question

Thanks to the Department of Interior:

The U.S. government has decided to list polar bears as a threatened species under its Endangered Species Act because of the effects of global warming — a decision that could deal a severe blow to the lucrative sport hunt in Canada's North.

U.S. Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne, who made the announcement in Washington Wednesday, said the decision was based on findings that the polar bears' sea ice habitat, vital to its survival, has dramatically melted in recent decades.

Read the rest of it.

This decision is just another example of how the "Global Warming" crowd is effecting this country.

The earth has not cooled in a decade. The "experts" are now telling us that it will probably get cooler over the next 15 to 20 years. But that does nothing to prove global warming is not real. They claim that it is a cycle the earth is in. Where is the proof that the warming that occurred in the decades before then was not just a cycle the earth was in. There isn't any.

Oh yes, Al Gore said so. I forgot

McCain On Global Warming

He is basically saying that we need to destroy our way of life in order to save the planet from a HOAX!:

"For all of the last century, the profit motive basically led in one direction — toward machines, methods and industries that used oil and gas," said McCain.

"Enormous good came from that industrial growth, and we are all the beneficiaries of the national prosperity it built. But there were costs we weren't counting, and often hardly noticed. And these terrible costs have added up now, in the atmosphere, in the oceans and all across the natural world."

So how does he want to solve "Global Warming", I mean "Climate Change"?:

Industries would be given emission targets, and those coming in under their limit could sell their surplus polluting capacity to companies unable to meet their target.

McCain wants the country to return to 2005 emission levels by 2012; 1990 levels by 2020; and to a level sixty percent below that by 2050.

"As never before, the market would reward any person or company that seeks to invent, improve, or acquire alternatives to carbon-based energy," he said. "More likely, however, there will be some companies that need extra emissions rights, and they will be able to buy them. The system to meet these targets and timetables will give these companies extra time to adapt — and that is good economic policy."

Oh, I see. Create a tax increase disguised as "extra emissions rights". This would require businesses to charge more for their products. That is right, an increased tax on the consumer. Great plan McCain, spoken like a true liberal.

The President Wants A Bill To Combat Global Warming

We may starve to death, but at least we will be cooler:

President Bush is poised to change course and announce as early as this week that he wants Congress to pass a bill to combat global warming, and will lay out principles for what that should include.

Specifics of the policy are still being fiercely debated, but Bush administration officials have told Republicans in Congress that they feel pressure to act now because they fear a coming regulatory nightmare. It would be the first time Mr. Bush has called for statutory authority on the subject.

"This is an attempt to move the administration and the party closer to the center on global warming. With these steps, it is hoped that the debate over this is over, and it is time to do something," said an administration source close to the White House who is familiar with the planning and who said to expect an announcement this week.

Like we need for this administration to move closer to the center.

With the price of food going through the roof and gas strangling this country, the President wants to go ahead and create a bill that would push the prices up more. All for a hoax. That is right I said it. They are pushing this stuff down our throats whether it is true or not.

H/T: Hillbilly White Trash

The Picture Of The Month

This is a great picture:



Record snow and cold temperatures all over the place. The Gore worshipers are having to change Global Warming to Climate Change. When are we going to wake up and see this as what it really is? I scheme to make lots of money.

Go here to read lots more:

H/T: Gateway Pundit

There Are Two Sides To Every Story

The only exception has been the issue of Global Warming, till now:

Despite the one-sided treatment of global warming and climate change in the media there is another perspective. Hundreds of scientists and policy professionals will be in New York City March 2-4 for the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change calling attention to dissent in the scientific community over assumptions that modern warming is man-made or that it is a crisis.

The conference is being run by the Heartland Institute. The Business & Media Institute is one of several co-sponsors and will be reporting from the event. BMI will also be hosting a panel discussion on the media’s involvement in advancing alarmism.

The article even states one of the top reasons for the Global Warming fear mongering:

The Heartland Institute conference will address the “one-sided” debate that is “dominated by government scientists and government organizations agenda-driven to find data that suggest a human impact on climate and to call for immediate government action, if only to fund their own continued research.”

You mean scientists would bend the facts in order to continue to get funded? Say it ain't so. That is what this whole thing is about. They have inconclusive evidence, at best, that Global Warming is caused by man. Or that it is going to continue. But so many people have swallowed it hook, line and sinker that there is a fortune to be made.

Maybe this will be the start of something good. I can't hurt anything.

Is It "Global Warming" Or "Climate Change"?

We all know about Global Warming, right? Here is some news you won't see in the MSM:

Satellite images are showing that the cold spell is helping the sea ice expand in coverage by about 2 million square kilometres, compared to the average winter coverage in the previous three years.

"It's nice to know that the ice is recovering," Josefino Comiso, a senior research scientist with the Cryospheric Sciences Branch of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Centre in Maryland, told CBC News on Thursday.

"That means that maybe the perennial ice would not go down as low as last year."

...

"The ice is about 10 to 20 centimeters thicker than last year, so that's a significant increase," he said.

If temperatures remain cold this winter, Langis said winter sea ice coverage will continue to expand.

Don't worry though, the fear mongers have already started to work this into there argument. You don't hear the term "Global Warming" anymore. Now it is " Climate Change". So let's see, if the temperature goes up, it is our fault. If the temperature goes down, it is our fault. So the experts have no idea what is going on. The only thing they can tell us is it is our fault.

I was listening to Dennis Miller last week and he said something along these lines: The same people that are predicting warmer weather in the year 2050 is the same people who told you it was not going to rain today. Before you start looking 50 years ahead, figure out how to get tomorrow right.

Indeed.

John Coleman, Founder Of The Weather Channel, On Global Warming

From IceCap:

It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM. Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create in allusion of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environmental whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the “research” to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon they claimed to be a consensus.

Environmental extremists, notable politicians among them, then teamed up with movie, media and other liberal, environmentalist journalists to create this wild "scientific” scenario of the civilization threatening environmental consequences from Global Warming unless we adhere to their radical agenda. Now their ridiculous manipulated science has been accepted as fact and become a cornerstone issue for CNN, CBS, NBC, the Democratic Political Party, the Governor of California, school teachers and, in many cases, well informed but very gullible environmental conscientious citizens. Only one reporter at ABC has been allowed to counter the Global Warming frenzy with one 15 minutes documentary segment.

...

have read dozens of scientific papers. I have talked with numerous scientists. I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct. There is no run away climate change. The impact of humans on climate is not catastrophic. Our planet is not in peril. I am incensed by the incredible media glamour, the politically correct silliness and rude dismissal of counter arguments by the high priest of Global Warming.

In time, a decade or two, the outrageous scam will be obvious. As the temperature rises, polar ice cap melting, coastal flooding and super storm pattern all fail to occur as predicted everyone will come to realize we have been duped. The sky is not falling. And, natural cycles and drifts in climate are as much if not more responsible for any climate changes underway. I strongly believe that the next twenty years are equally as likely to see a cooling trend as they are to see a warming trend.

I see a scary trend going on with republicans. A lot of the republicans are starting to go with the myth of man made global warming. It has got so you cannot watch a football game without having to hear them preaching this crap to you.

More and more scientist are speaking out against man made global warming.

What Has Happened To The Hurricanes?

The Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies:

Unless a dramatic and perhaps historical flurry of activity occurs in the next 9 weeks, 2007 will rank as a historically inactive TC year for the Northern Hemisphere as a whole. During the past 30 years, only 1977, 1981, and 1983 have had less activity to date (January-TODAY, Accumulated Cyclone Energy). However, the year is not over...

2007 lowest September activity on record since 1977

For the period of June 1 - TODAY, only 1977 has experienced LESS tropical cyclone activity than 2007. There are currently two worldwide tropical cyclones: Tropical Storm Noel and Unnamed Arabian Sea TS...

On average to date (1970-2006), the Eastern Pacific season is 97% completed, Western Pacific 82%, North Atlantic 93% and overall Northern Hemisphere 87%.

Remember how global warming was the cause of Katrina, and it would only get worse. How can this report be true?

The fact is, the change that takes place in the climate is still a mystery. Al Gore does not have it figured out any more than the average Joe on the street. Scientist don't know what is going to occur either.

Reid Blames California Fires On Global Warming

An inconvenient remark:

Is there a political angle to the wildfires raging through Southern California?

You betcha – at least according to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who said global warming is at least partly responsible for the blazes.

"One reason why we have the fires in California is global warming," the Nevada Democrat told reporters, emphasizing the need to pass the Democrats' comprehensive energy package.

Pressed by astonished reporters on whether he really believed global warming caused the fires, he appeared to back away from his comments, saying there are many factors that contributed to the disaster.

Is there any disaster or bad thing, for that matter, that is not brought about by global warming?

A Question For Al Gore

Now will you debate Global Warming?:

Al Gore has finally won his Nobel Prize, reminiscent of the proverbial little nut that stood his ground, evolving into a giant Oak. Now we can only hope that he runs for President, an office that, given recent history, surely deserves him.

Where else -- except perhaps via the Kyoto Protocol on global warming, which Gore negotiated -- can someone accomplish so little while spending so much? But, to get there, or at least to the Demo nomination, Gore's going to have to do something he has assiduously avoided: debate

Gore's standard rule on live TV has been there will be no live challenge. The last time he ran for President (2000), he succeeded de facto, with George "Carbon Bonoixde" Bush as the token global warming flyweight. This time, debates happen.

That's because Gore represents a party gone global warming ga-ga, with some of the world's goofiest environmental legislation in history awaiting a Bush veto and a Gore signature.

...

The fact is that Al has ducked, feinted, dived away from, or fluffed each and every opportunity for a reasoned debate with any global warming scientist not of his choice, a choice he no longer enjoys. Heartland Institute, a Chicago think tank, spent over a million dollars filing ads in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and their ilk, begging Al to debate. No dice. In a less public venue, my own Gato Institute sent kind and courteous letters asking him to share our pretty auditorium on Washington's Massachusetts Avenue, for a civil discussion with our scholars. Again, no dice.

Here's the rub: if any opposition were so easy to vanquish, Gore would relish the opportunity. Obviously there's a substantive and cogent argument he can't kill.

...

Gore only has one scientist, James Hansen of NASA, whispering the sweet nothings into his ear that sea-level could rise this much or more in the next 92 years, as Greenland's ice sheets are destabilized by climate change.

No other scientist is willing to climb out on this limb, because it is simply not supported by the observed climatic history of Greenland since the end of the last ice age. For much of six millennia, ending 3,000 years ago, it had to be warmer, and yet the ice stuck like glue. Hansen's amazing response, which you can read on his blog, documented at www.realclimate.org (not exactly a peer-reviewed scientific journal!) is that other scientists don't agree with him because they suffer from what he calls "scientific reticence." In other words, all his colleagues are chicken-bleeps because they don't agree with him.

How about the other pole? Every computer model mentioned by the United Nations shows Antarctica gaining ice this century because a slight warming will result in more precipitation which must fall as snow. Would Gore like that out in public? Or how about the fact that Antarctica just set its record maximum for sea-ice extent, as measured by satellite.

The world can only hope that Gore's Nobel propels him into another run for the Presidency. He received it for his climate lunacy. Now he can defend it and the Nobel Prize by merely debating those who must be so easy to defeat.

First of all, was there any doubt he would win? I had no doubt. I would like to see him attend a debate on global warming, but I am not holding my breathe.

If you can prove global warming exists you can win an easy $125,000, here.

CNN Weatherman: Considers 'An Inconvenient Truth' Fiction

From CNN, of all places:

CNN reported on Thursday that a British judge has called Al Gore's Oscar-winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth unfit for schools "because it is politically biased and contains scientific inaccuracies and sentimental mush." British schools may now have to preface any showing of the film with a warning.

CNN meteorologist Rob Marciano responded to this story by applauding and saying,"Finally, finally," before commenting sarcastically that "the Oscars, they give out awards for fictional films as well."

Marciano said he objected in particular to the film's claim that global warming causes stronger hurricanes, noting that the current hurricane season has only been average.

I didn't think CNN would allow one of their employees to go after Gore. He may need a job soon.

Go to the link above to watch the video.

Why Al Gore Will Not Debate The Global Warming Issue

It might have something to do with this this:

Gore's reluctance to go toe-to-toe with global warming skeptics may have something to do with the - from the standpoint of climate change alarmists - unfortunate outcome of a global warming debate in New York last March. In the debate, a team of global warming skeptics composed of MIT scientist Richard Lindzen, University of London emeritus professor of biogeology Philip Stott, and physician-turned novelist/filmmaker Michael Crichton handily defeated a team of climate alarmists headed by NASA scientist Gavin Schmidt. Before the start of the nearly two-hour debate, the audience of several thousand polled 57.3 percent to 29.9 percent in favor of the proposition that global warming is a "crisis." At the end of the debate, the numbers had changed dramatically, with 46.2 percent favoring the skeptical point of view and 42.2 percent siding with the alarmists.

So after two hours of debate the numbers went from 57.3 to 29.9 for Global warming being a crisis to 46.2 to 42.2 against. No wonder they will not debate the issue.

By the way, Hillbilly White Trash has a good post up about the rest of the article, here.

Challenging Man Made Global Warming

We have heard for several years now that we are the cause of Global Warming. I disagree and so do a lot of Climate Scientists:

A new analysis of peer-reviewed literature reveals that more than 500 scientists have published evidence refuting at least one element of current man-made global warming scares. More than 300 of the scientists found evidence that 1) a natural moderate 1,500-year climate cycle has produced more than a dozen global warmings similar to ours since the last Ice Age and/or that 2) our Modern Warming is linked strongly to variations in the sun's irradiance. "This data and the list of scientists make a mockery of recent claims that a scientific consensus blames humans as the primary cause of global temperature increases since 1850," said Hudson Institute Senior Fellow Dennis Avery.

Other researchers found evidence that 3) sea levels are failing to rise importantly; 4) that our storms and droughts are becoming fewer and milder with this warming as they did during previous global warmings; 5) that human deaths will be reduced with warming because cold kills twice as many people as heat; and 6) that corals, trees, birds, mammals, and butterflies are adapting well to the routine reality of changing climate.

Despite being published in such journals such as Science, Nature and Geophysical Review Letters, these scientists have gotten little media attention. "Not all of these researchers would describe themselves as global warming skeptics," said Avery, "but the evidence in their studies is there for all to see."

Read the rest at the link above.