News that doesn't receive the necessary attention.

Friday, February 28, 2014

Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore says no proof exists that humans cause 'climate change,' 'extremely likely' isn't a scientific term-UK Independent

2/28/14, "Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore tells US Senate there is "no proof" humans cause climate change," UK Independent, Maria Tadeo.

"The Canadian ecologist told US lawmakers there is "little correlation" to support a "direct causal relationship" between CO2 emissions and rising global temperatures.

"There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth's atmosphere over the past 100 years," he told a US Senate Committee. 

"If there were such a proof, it would be written down for all to see. No actual proof, as it is understood in science, exists."

He also criticised the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for claiming "it is extremely likely" that human activity is the "dominant cause" for global warning, noting that "extremely likely" is not a scientific term. 

Moore warned the statistics presented by the IPCC are not the result of mathematical calculations or statistical analysis, and may have been "invented" to support the IPCC's "expert judgement".

The Greenpeace co-founder argued the increase in atmospheric temperature on the earth's surface goes back [to] the Ice Age when C02 was "10 times higher than today, yet human life flourished" at this time.

He added: "I realise that my comments are contrary to much of the speculation about our climate that is bandied about today.

"However, I am confident that history will bear me out, both in terms of the futility of relying on computer models to predict the future, and the fact that warmer temperatures are better than colder temperatures for most species."

Moore co-founded the environmental activist group as a PhD student in ecology in 1971. He left Greenpeace in 1986 after the group became more interested in "politics" than science.

"After 15 years in the top committee I had to leave as Greenpeace took a sharp turn to the political left, and began to adopt policies that I could not accept from my scientific perspective," he said.

"Climate change was not an issue when I abandoned Greenpeace, but it certainly is now.""


 Links via



Latest National Academy of Sciences temperature data show they've warmed 1965-1975 global temperatures by about 0.3C

2/27/14, "Rewriting Their Own Past At The National Academy Of Sciences," by  
"The National Academy of Sciences just released a new temperature graph (black and brown) which has been massively altered since their 1975 report (red.) Note that they have eliminated most of the 1940-1970 cooling.

Here is why they have to eliminate the the 1940-1970 cooling
and the 1940 spike. The next graph appends the post 1970 2014 data to the 1975 data, normalized to 1968. If they didn’t tamper with the data, there is no global warming since 1940.

In 1978, NOAA reported 0.5C global cooling from 1960-1965
. NAS has almost completely erased that. (p. 761)

ScreenHunter_559 Feb. 27 08.49


This graph (below) shows the 1978 NOAA data in red, and the 2014 NAS data in black/brown. NAS has warmed 1965-1975 temperatures by about 0.3C."


Among comments:


"Hugh K says: February 27, 2014 at 3:32 pm
I wouldn’t expect anything better from an organization that would hire admitted fraudster Peter Gleick as their climate ethicist. National Academy of Seance."


"jst1 says: February 27, 2014 at 4:18 pm

What is the official reason for the changes?"


"stevengoddard says: February 27, 2014 at 4:26 pm
They don’t even acknowledge that the changes have occurred, much less give a reason for them."


"ccglea says: February 27, 2014 at 4:28 pm

Interesting, has anyone besides you pointed this out?"


"stevengoddard says: February 27, 2014 at 7:27 pm


Comment: Isn't there one politician who wants to get elected in a landslide or a tv news reporter who wants to give Americans the information they need? This issue has been around for 40 years because politicians from both parties like it. Trillions of no-strings US taxpayer dollars have been diverted from real problems and transferred to 'climate' endeavors. In 2012 $1 billion a day was "invested" in the notion of global warming. Pretty good for something that doesn't exist.


Thursday, February 27, 2014

Christians in Sharia controlled Syrian city must pay a tax in pure gold or face death, 20 Christian leaders have accepted Islamist Sharia demands-BBC

2/27/14, "Syria crisis: ISIS imposes rules on Christians in Raqqa," BBC

"A jihadist group in Syria has demanded that Christians in the northern city of Raqqa pay a levy in gold and accept curbs on their faith, or face death.
The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) said it would give Christian residents "protection" if they agreed to the list of conditions. The announcement came in a statement posted online.

Correspondents say ISIS is trying to implement an extreme interpretation of Islamic law in areas it controls. Raqqa, seized by ISIS last year, was the first provincial capital to be completely in the hands of rebels.

The directive from ISIS, citing the Islamic concept of "dhimma", requires Christians in the city to pay tax of around half an ounce (14g) of pure gold in exchange for their safety.

It says Christians must not make renovations to churches, display crosses or other religious symbols outside churches, ring church bells or pray in public. 

Christians must not carry arms, and must follow other rules imposed by ISIS (also known as ISIL) on their daily lives.

The statement said the group had met Christian representatives and offered them three choices - they could convert to Islam, accept ISIS' conditions, or reject their control and risk being killed.

"If they reject, they are subject to being legitimate targets, and nothing will remain between them and ISIS other than the sword," the statement said.

A group of 20 Christian leaders chose to accept the new set of rules, ISIS said.

Raqqa was once home to about 300,000 people, with less than 1% Christian, according to AFP news agency.

Many Christians fled after ISIS started attacking and burning churches." from BBC


Symbol of Allah has been scrubbed from Katy Perry You Tube video after Perry was accused of blasphemy-BBC

"It is unclear whether YouTube made the change or if it was instructed to by Perry's record company. The parties have yet to respond to BBC requests for a comment on the move."

2/27/14, "Katy Perry Dark Horse video edited," BBC

"The video for Katy Perry's track Dark Horse has been edited following claims from some Muslims it was blasphemous.

More than 65,000 people signed a petition which stated the clip - featuring a pendant with the Arabic word for God on it being reduced to sand - was offensive.

The music video has not been cut, but the pendant has now been digitally "scrubbed" out of the scene. Petition instigator Shazad Iqbal, said he was "thrilled" with the outcome.

"The name of Allah has been removed from the Dark Horse video - we couldn't have done it without everyone's support so I thank each and every one of you deeply, our voices have been heard," he wrote on

"I feel that the impact we have made and the total number of signatures obtained does convey just how worthy a cause this is, it is a significant step towards the right direction."

It is unclear whether YouTube made the change or if it was instructed to by Perry's record company. The parties have yet to respond to BBC requests for a comment on the move.

Perry's video features the pop star as an Egyptian queen who transforms suitors into sand by disintegrating them. Mr Iqbal, from Bradford, began the petition after he spotted one of the suitors wearing the pendant.

Explaining his reasons for starting the petition, Mr Iqbal wrote: "Blasphemy is clearly conveyed in the video, since Katy Perry - who appears to be representing an opposition of God - engulfs the believer and the word God in flames.

"Using the name of God in an irrelevant and distasteful manner would be considered inappropriate by any religion," he added.

The Dark Horse video has attracted more than 37 million views since it premiered on YouTube on 20 February."


*The Independent Katy Perry causes offence by burning 'Allah' pendant in 'Dark Horse' video 1 hr ago

Heavy, soaking rain douses Santa Cruz County with more on the way-Santa Cruz Sentinel

2/26/14, "Rain douses Santa Cruz County with more on way," Santa Cruz Sentinel, staff

7th Ave., Santa Cruz
"Santa Cruz County received a pretty heavy soaking of rain Thursday -- and it's only the beginning, with another storm expected to hit Friday.

The high pressure ridge that has been parked over the Pacific Ocean, blocking stormy weather from hitting the West Coast has retreated a bit. More wet weather is expected through the weekend with up to 4 inches falling by Sunday, according to National Weather Service meteorologist Diana Henderson. Conditions should be dry again on Monday, Henderson said.

Santa Cruz got soaked with .71 inches on Thursday, according to the National Weather Service. The most rain in the county was seen in Ben Lomond with 1.17 inches, and in Scotts Valley with 1.10 inches, according to Sentinel weather reporters. Watsonville received .53 inches and Soquel .80 inches.

More than an inch of rain fell Thursday in some areas of the region, creating slippery roads and prompting a warning from the California Highway Patrol urging motorists to slow down and use caution.

Friday's storm off the California coast could bring several more inches of rain to the region, according to the weather service. The two storms are expected to double the amount of rainfall that the region has seen all season.

Forecasters say Friday's system could dump as much as 6 inches of rain on Bay Area mountains and up to 2 feet of snow in the Sierra over the weekend.

According to the weather service, Santa Rosa saw a total rainfall Thursday of .84 inches, the highest of any other Bay Area city by 4 p.m. when the service totals its rainfall for the day.

In Contra Costa County, .70 inches fell in Concord. San Jose and Oakland were both soaked with .62 inches. San Francisco received .74 inches, while Moffett Field received .54 inches.

While the overdue wet weather is welcome, forecasters say California needs much more rain and snow to make up for one of the driest rainy seasons.

"I won't say the storm door is open, but maybe we'll get into more of a routine storm pattern now," National Weather Service forecaster Bob Benjamin said....

Air travel was also affected. San Francisco Internationl Airport spokesman Doug Yakel said 47 arriving and department flights had to be canceled by 1 p.m., most of them flights up and down the West Coast. Other flights were leaving an average of 60 minutes late.

"The storm isn't that bad, but it's creating those visibility issues we sometimes have when we get these conditions out there," Yakel said.

Benjamin said the steady pace of the showers, coming on fairly dry land, will allow vegetation to absorb the rain without concerns of landslides or flash flooding."...

"Bay Area News Group contributed to this report." image above from Santa Cruz Sentinel, Coyro

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

China's huge fuel conversion plants in remote areas have double carbon footprint of conventional coal and oil, could doom global climate, US media silent, one plant larger than Connecticut-Inside Climate News

2/13/14, "China's Plan to Clean Up Air in Cities Will Doom the Climate, Scientists Say," William J. Kelly,

Plant larger than Ct.
"China is erecting huge industrial complexes in remote areas to convert coal to synthetic fuel that could make the air in its megacities cleaner. But the complexes use so much energy that the carbon footprint of the fuel is almost double that of conventional coal and oil, spelling disaster for earth's climate, a growing chorus of scientists is warning.

Efforts by China to develop so-called "coal bases" in its far-flung regions have received scant attention beyond the trade press, but scientists watching the effort say it could cause climate damage that eclipses worldwide climate protection efforts.

The facilities, which resemble oil refineries, use coal to make liquid fuels, chemicals, power and "syngas," which is like natural gas but extracted from coal. The fuels and electricity are then transported to China's big cities to be burned in power plants, factories and cars.

Currently 16 coal base sites are being built and many are operational. One being constructed in Inner Mongolia will eventually occupy nearly 400 square milesalmost the size of the sprawling city of Los Angeles."...

images via Above graph from 2013 UN IPCC. Caption for first image:
"A factory in Shaanxi province. The Shaanbei coal base under construction in Shaanxi is larger than the state of Connecticut, spanning 5,575 square miles. It's one of many planned coal bases that together could bring China's yearly emissions to 10 gigatons a year and push the world's climate past safe thresholds.Credit: Lorenzo Shiavi, flickr/" This article via Tom Nelson


Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Smog blanketing northern China like 'living near a forest fire.' Chinese gov. long denied problem existed, will require 'wholesale structural change...confronting entrenched vested interests...and the Communist Party itself'-BBC

2/25/14, "Understanding the politics of Chinese smog," BBC, Jo Floto

"The pollution currently blanketing northern China is an extraordinary and unnatural phenomenon. 

The air quality is so bad it's comparable to living near a forest fire. The scale of the consequences to human health are only beginning to be understood. Air pollution is thought to cut life expectancy in northern China by five years compared to the south of the country. One study estimated pollution caused 1.2 million premature deaths a year in the country - and the real impact may be even worse than those figures suggest.

This is certainly an environmental disaster and a public health crisis. But it also has the potential to become a huge political problem.

After years of denying the issue really existed, the central government has recently accepted that pollution is of genuine concern. It now publishes figures for the air quality in China's major cities (the accuracy of some is still contested), and in 2013 promised $275bn (£165bn) to tackle the issue in the next five years, setting targets for air quality improvements....

China has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty; it's also shifted their priorities. The government has now pledged to reduce pollution, and in so doing has raised expectations.

The political risk for the Communist Party comes if those expectations are not met. Unlike other government promises, people will be able to judge success and failure on pollution simply by looking out of their window.

And the scale of the problem is enormous. China's pollution crisis has been a long time coming. The reliance on coal, the rise of the car, along with the soaring energy demand of an ever-growing economy, have all meant more dirty air. Predictably so. Reducing pollution will require wholesale structural change, not just in how and where energy is produced, but how it is priced.

It will probably mean sacrificing some economic growth in favour of quality of life. To do all of that will mean confronting some of the most entrenched vested interests in China's economy, and inside the Communist Party itself. 

How the pollution issue is handled in the next few years will tell us a lot about China's government, its changing relationship to its people, and its ability to make difficult decisions."


Saturday, February 22, 2014

Michael Mann lawsuit v Canadian climatologist hasn't been canceled by court contrary to 2/21/14 article. Discovery requests are outstanding, but it hasn't been officially canceled. It remains true that Mark Steyn has countersued Mann for $10 million

Update, 2/22/14, Correction: Michael Mann lawsuit v Canadian climatologist hasn't ended, contrary to 2/21/14 O'Sullivan article: "Steve McIntyre (Comment #124923) February 21st, 2014 at 3:46 pm 

"I checked with Tim Ball and the Ball lawsuit has not been dismissed. They have outstanding discovery requests, but to go from mere delay to succeed in a motion for dismissal is a large step and one that has not been taken."

It is true as stated by O'Sullivan that Mark Steyn has countersued Mann for 10 millon dollars. Legal document,, via WUWT.

Mann's "inactive lawsuit against Ball was rendered dormant for failure to prosecute."... 

2/21/14, "Michael Mann Faces Bankruptcy as his Courtroom Climate Capers Collapse," John O'Sullivan,

"Massive counterclaims, in excess of $10 million, have just been filed against climate scientist Michael Mann after lawyers affirmed that the former golden boy of global warming alarmism had sensationally failed in his exasperating three-year bid to sue skeptic Canadian climatologist, Tim Ball. Door now wide open for criminal investigation into Climategate conspiracy.

Buoyed by Dr Ball's successes, journalist and free-speech defender, Mark Steyn has promptly decided to likewise countersue Michael Mann for $10 million in response to a similar SLAPP suit filed by the litigious professor from Penn. State University against not just Steyn, but also the National Review, the Competitive Enterprise Institute and Rand Simberg. Ball's countersuit against Mann seeks "exemplary and punitive damages." Bishop Hill blog is running extracts of Steyn's counterclaim, plus link.

Mann’s chief undoing in all such lawsuits is highlighted in a quote in Steyn’s latest counterclaim:

Plaintiff continues to evade the one action that might definitively establish its [his science’s] respectability - by objecting, in the courts of Virginia, British Columbia and elsewhere, to the release of his research in this field. See Cuccinelli vs Rectors and Visitors of the University of Virginia...”

At last, after 3 years of legal wrangling, it is made clear why I was so bold as to formally undertake an indemnity to fully compensate Dr Ball for my own actions in the event Mann won the case.  Respected Aussie climate commentator, Jo Nova was one of the few to commend my unparalled commitment to Ball's cause.

Steyn’s legal team, aware of the latest developments from Vancouver, have correctly adduced that Ball has effectively defeated Mann after the Penn. State pretender’s preposterous and inactive lawsuit against Ball was rendered dormant for failure to prosecute. Under law, Mann’s prevarications, all his countless fudging and evasiveness in the matter, establishes compelling evidence that his motive was not to prove Ball had defamed him, but more likely a cynical attempt to silence fair and honest public criticism on a pressing and contentious government policy issue.

The fact Mann refused to disclose his ‘hockey stick’ graph metadata in the British Columbia Supreme Court, as he is required to do under Canadian civil rules of procedure, constituted a fatal omission to comply, rendering his lawsuit unwinnable. As such, Dr Ball, by default, has substantiated his now famous assertion that Mann belongs "in the state pen, not Penn. State." In short, Mann failed to show he did not fake his tree ring proxy data for the past 1,000 years, so Ball’s assessment stands as fair comment.

Moreover, many hundreds of papers in the field of paleoclimate temperature reconstructions that cite Mann’s work are likewise tainted, heaping more misery on the discredited UN’s Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) which has a knack of relying on such sub prime science.

Where Do We Go From Here?

It will likely be open season on Mann. Anyone may now freely dismiss him in the harshest terms as a junk scientist who shilled for a failed global warming cabal. Without fear of his civil legal redress, we may now refer to Mann for what he is: a climate criminal, a fraudster.

Being that Mann's suit in the BC court was filed 3 years ago before he filed against Steyn, it appears Dr Ball will be first in line with his counterclaims and pipping Steyn for the well-deserved $10 million compensation prize. That’s if Mann's financial backers (most notably, the David Suzuki Foundation) aren't bankrupted first.

Woe for Weaver, too

But the more savvy climate analysts will note something here that is far more important scientifically than just Ball’s sensational legal victory over Mann. That is Ball’s more telling concurrent court triumph over Professor Andrew Weaver, “climate scientist” at the University of Victoria, BC, Deputy Leader of the Green Party of British Columbia, and a member of the British Columbia Legislative Assembly. Weaver has also established himself as the IPCC’s lead climate modeler.

Long-time readers may recall that Weaver also sued Ball for libel in February 2011, some months before Mann took a punt at it.  David Suzuki's mouthpiece, made huge fanfare of it at the time. Both Ball and I suffered the ignominy of having all our online articles removed from the Canada Free Press website after CFP caved into the bully boy tactics masterminded behind the scenes by the deep-pocketed David Suzuki and his Desmogblog cronies, who thereafter smeared my name, too).

Weaver’s libel suit against Ball has also now been rendered dormant due to failure to prosecute because Weaver, like Mann, won’t disclose his (similarly dubious) metadata. Both these prominent men have been expensively represented by one of Canada’s top libel experts, Roger McConchie, who claims he “literally wrote the book on “Canadian Libel and Slander Actions.””

This is an epic double whammy for Ball. As an inadvertent courtroom martyr for climate skeptics Dr Ball has destroyed the credibility of both the IPPC paleoclimate record (Mann’s ‘hockey stick’ graph ‘science’)  and all those IPCC  computer model ‘projections’ of a dangerously warming climate (Weaver’s ‘science’). And all achieved in the most important ‘peer reviewed’ venue possible – a government court of law. The threat of the cold light of truth being shone on their "secret science" was a step too far for Mann and Weaver. As such,  the alarmist (false) claims of a cooler past climate presented by Mann, and doomsaying computer model projections of a dangerously warming future climate, presented by the still hugely influential Weaver, would not stand up in court.

So, forget Steyn’s case – the court victories that count, in terms of the scientific (and political) consequences, are entirely due to Tim Ball. By tenaciously and bravely defending his actions for three long years the mild-mannered septaugenarian has single-handedly proved that the very core of government climate science is junk. Thereby, this instance of 'science on trial' is no less significant, in the broadest sociatal context, as the infamous Scope's Monkey Trial of 1925.

But was the "evidence" for global warming intentionally and illegally concocted? By their persistence in hiding their data we may think so, as far as Mann and Weaver are concerned; while Dr Ball's latest sensational book,''The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science;' detailing the Climategate shenanigans, is a 'must read' as to culpability. But only a full criminal investigation will be determinative of all that. The question now is, will the U.S. and Canadian governmental authorities have the stomach to delve deeper?"
via Free Republic


Added: In his libel suit v Mark Steyn, climate scientist Michael Mann says his work has been investigated and exonerated multiple times. Steve McIntyre looks at activities of the Oxburgh Panel, one of the groups Dr. Mann says exonerated him. The 'panel' was commissioned by the ClimateGate unit's parent, University of East Anglia. Even though the panel only looked at 11 articles all of which were selected by the ClimateGate unit's parent, UEA, it can't be said there was no criticism of Dr. Mann's methods. Here's an image of the Hockey Stick with correction overlaid.

Steve McIntyre correction overlaid in green, graph via

12/4/2009, "Looking Back at the Hockey Stick Thesis: The JoNova Account,"


2/17/14, "Mann and the Oxburgh Panel," Steve McIntyre, Climate Audit.


Comment: Congratulations to Dr. Tim Ball and John O'Sullivan for their perseverance. As to the US government ever 'delving deeper,' not likely. US politicians after all created the CO2 terror industry decades ago and they like it. Before most people ever heard of climate scientists US pols. began confiscating trillions of US taxpayer dollars for redistribution to cronies, academic institutions, European interests, or anyone who mentioned the word 'climate.' They even sent millions of tax dollars to Phil Jones at the ClimateGate unit beginning in 1995 if not earlier for work attempting to prove humans (meaning Americans) were responsible for climate terror. The US Dept. of Energy and US EPA are listed by CRU (ClimateGate Unit) in "Acknowledgements" for supporting them from their early days (scroll down). The pols. gave themselves a generation to entwine CO2 terror into the culture. They have no intention of letting go of their $1 billion a day racket.


One ClimateGate figure, Phil Jones, received over $1.5 million US taxpayer dollars from one US agency through mid 2008:
5/7/2008, ClimateGate 2.0 email #3338

"5/7/2008, subject: RE: Request for Cost date for DOE Grant to: "Jones Philip Prof \(ENV\)

"Dear Phil, I have reconciled the account to date and propose to send the following figures - all in US$ 
Received to date 1,589,632.00...

4/30/2008, Subject: Fwd: Request for Cost date for DOE Grant  
"In accordance with the President's Management Agenda, there has been and continues to be a Government-wide movement to ensure that the American people receive better results for their money. Thus, all government entities are striving to improve the quality, accuracy, and timeliness of financial information regarding the results of operations and overall performance. As we seek to accomplish this goal, we are requesting cost data from our Grant recipients that have received significant financial
  • assistance monies from the


Friday, February 21, 2014

The anti-war movement doesn't exist-Rush Limbaugh

2/21/14, "There is No Resistance to the Regime," Rush Limbaugh

Bush effigy 2004
"There's nobody marching on Washington like there was during the Iraq war-- and, by the way, about that. Do you realize now that the body count in Afghanistan is way beyond the body count in Iraq, and where is the anti-war movement?  Where are the Cindy Sheehans? Where are all those people that were calling Bush a murderer? Where are all of those people demanding we get out of Iraq? 
Where are all of those people? 

Occupy Wall Street? Where are they They were so concerned about the loss of life in the military, so concerned about an endless war.  Where are they?  They're nowhere, are they?  The anti-war movement doesn't really exist.  What are we to conclude from that?  It's very simple: There is no anti-war movement.  If there were an anti-war movement, it would be alive and kicking and protesting and marching on Washington and demanding that Obama close Gitmo like he promised.

They'd be demanding to get out of Afghanistan, and they would be making sure that the news kept track of the body count from Afghanistan every week like we did in Iraq. None of that is happening, but that's all that happens.  I mean, that was daily, and during the Bush administration, while all that was going on there were books being written, and movies being produced on the assassination of George W. Bush, if you recall. 

The anti-war movement had newsworthy figures that were on television all the time.  Cindy Sheehan.  People out in San Francisco.  But now they're nowhere to be found.  So maybe they're not really part of an anti-war movement.  Maybe all they are is leftist activists who will take any occasion during a Republican presidency to protest it and feed the news media with reasons to portray a country that's dispirited, enraged, angry, not unified, a country torn apart, a country roiling. 

Now, look. We have big scandal after big scandal. 

We've got Benghazi and four Americans dead.


We have a body count dwarfing Iraq in Afghanistan.


We have one-sixth of the US economy that has literally been destroyed
in the process of moving it from the private sector to government, and we've got...

We've got Barack Obama today saying "the era of austerity is over."  I don't know if you've heard this, but he said, "Okay, we're through now with our budget cutbacks."  We've gone from a $10 trillion national debt to nearly $17 trillion in Obama's five years and he's saying (summarized), "This is the era of austerity, and it's over now.  We've cut back now.  We've got to really start spending." 


We have both parties willing to open the borders and allow a flood of illegal immigrants and there's...


There's nothing happening. 

We have people losing their jobs left and right and the government is saying, "That's good! You are liberated.  You're no longer a prisoner of 'job block.'" "....image above and many more from ZombieTime


Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Big unions outspend Koch Brothers 15 times over--where's the outrage? Joanne Nova

2/18/14, "Big unions outspend Koch Bros 15 times over – where is the outrage?"

"The Koch Brothers have “distorted democracy, held a “war on climate”, built a vast network of “climate disinformation think tanks”, and we can apparently blame them for congressional inaction“. "...
[Ed. note: "Climate action" has been mandated in US law since 1990 and taxpayer funded before that. The 1990 law tasked 13 federal agencies with climate action. The US taxpayer was ordered to finance climate endeavors around the world.

(continuing): "But now (oh No) Greenpeace, DeSmog, Think Progress, Naomi Oreskes and fan-followers must be in meltdown, for it turns out there are 58 more powerful forces in US politics! Donations to US political parties were tallied from 1989 – 2012 by Open Secrets and the most powerful donors by far are the unions.

Washington Examiner:  “Six of the top 10 are … wait for it … unions. They gave more than $278 million, with most of it going to Democrats.
These are familiar names: AFSCME ($60.6 million), NEA ($53.5 million), IBEW ($44.4 million), UAW ($41.6 million), Carpenters & Joiners ($39.2 million) and SEIU ($38.3 million).
In other words, the six biggest union donors in American politics gave 15 times more to mostly Democrats than the Evil Koch Bros.
Others in the top ten were AT&T, Goldman Sachs, and ActBlue.  Three quarters of the top 16 donors sent most of their money to the Democrats. The other quarter split it between both sides of politics.  All up, the unions dominated the donor table — there are 18 unions putting in more money to politics than the Koch Brothers.

But the Koch’s are doing a corporate takeover of government from position 59:
Greenpeace: “Today, the Kochs are being watched as a prime example of the corporate takeover of government. Their funding and co-opting of the Tea Party movement is now well documented.”
Presumably Greenpeace is now protesting about the union takeover of government? Or rather, since the Kochs achieved so much with so little, and from number 59, Greenpeace is telling the unions to stop giving money to the Democrats — it’s obviously a waste.

Strap yourself in, the Koch brothers are so influential, they are the excuse for why Obama “should” override congress. Who needs voting any more? (In fact, the US could skip the congress part, just make the Big O a throne and call him King.)
 Koch Brothers Pledge Helped Kill Climate Change Legislation: Report
When President Obama rolled out his climate strategy last week, he made a point to sidestep Congress and take executive action — and with good reason. A two-year study conducted by the Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University offers some insight into how Charles and David Koch have helped systematically derail climate legislation on Capitol Hill.   [Huff Post]
Meanwhile the Washington Post laments that there is no Democratic version of the Kochs.
But for the Democratic professionals who actually run campaigns, the thing that frustrates them most about the Koch brothers network is that there’s no real equivalent on their side.
That’s because big Democratic donors and big Republican donors are motivated by different types of issues, and therefore give differently, according to Democratic strategists who deal frequently with high-dollar donors.
Apparently the Republican donors only want to make profits, which means it’s easy to find donors.

It’s an “investment” for them. Democrats, we are told, care about social issues, and they pay tax too. It’s not like donors to the Democratic party make money off government handouts, or depend on subsidies and environmental laws for their very existence? Heck no.

On the Democratic side, the opposite is the case. Heavyweights in the Democratic donor community pay the same tax rates as their Republican counterparts, and cuts to the capital gains tax or the higher brackets of the income tax benefit them financially, too.
This reasoning is quite spectacular:
If fiscal issues were the only things driving their giving habits, Democratic donors would support the same politicians that Republican donors do.
So fiscal issues are the same for all businesses, whether they compete in the free market or feed off the handouts? An entire side of the economy is invisible here: the idea that one type of business might want to hobble competitors through environmental rules that favor their product is not even on the radar. Or how about financial houses that might want the government to invent a spurious market in an invisible product and then make participation compulsory. The brokerage on a $2 trillion dollar market is pretty neat. Neither could there be scientists whose careers and junkets depend upon solving a scare which might not be so scary.

Big-government loving commentators hate the Koch’s.

The collectivists need their enemies don’t they? Just as they need to invent messiahs."

h/t Marc Morano Climate Depot


1990 US climate law:

U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990.” 

"Sec. 2. Definitions....

3. "Global change" means changes in the global environment
(including alterations in climate, land productivity, oceans or other water resources, atmospheric chemistry, and ecological systems) that may alter the capacity of the Earth to sustain life;   

4. "Global change research" means study, monitoring, assessment, prediction, and information management activities to describe and understand-- 

A. the interactive physical, chemical, and biological processes that regulate the total Earth system;
B. the unique environment that the Earth provides for life;
C. changes that are occurring in the Earth system; and
D. the manner in which such system, environment, and changes are influenced by human actions;"....


Citation for 30+ years of US taxpayer financing of  "climate action:" 

12/14/2005,Climate Change: Federal Expenditures for Science and Technology, .
Climate Change: Federal Expenditures for Science and Technology,Michael M. Simpson,  Specialist in Life Sciences, Resources, Science, and Industry Division, John R. Justus, Specialist in Earth and Ocean Sciences Resources, Science, and Industry Division, Congressional Research Service, ˜ The Library of Congress

  “For over 25 years there have been federal programs directly or indirectly related to climate change. This report identifies and discusses direct climate-focused scientific and research programs of the federal government, as well as an array of energy programs that relate indirectly to climate change.”…


Comment: The US has Mob Rule today because it no longer has a two party system. The Republican Party merged with democrats sometime during George Bush. In third world toilets such as the US, the Ruling Class needs the masses to be in chaos.

12/15/13, "Breaking the UniParty," Angelo M. Codevilla


Plenty of California water for export, desert land growing hay for export to China gets water while prime Calif. farmland, cattle die, water going to China could supply million families a year-BBC

2/18/14, California drought: Why some farmers are ‘exporting water’ to China,” BBC, Alastair Leithead

While historic winter storms have battered much of the US, California is suffering its worst drought on record. So why is America’s most valuable farming state using billions of gallons of water to grow hay – specifically alfalfa – which is then shipped to China?

The drought-stricken Central Valley (left) contrasts with the lush Imperial Valley, which gets water through a canal from the Colorado river.” image BBC
The reservoirs of California are just a fraction of capacity amid the worst drought in the state’s history. “This should be like Eden right now,” farmer John Dofflemyer says, looking out over a brutally dry, brown valley as his remaining cows feed on the hay he’s had to buy in to keep them healthy.

In the dried-up fields of California’s Central Valley, farmers like Dofflemyer are selling their cattle. Others have to choose which crops get the scarce irrigation water and which will wither.

“These dry times, this drought, has a far-reaching impact well beyond California,” he said as the cattle fell in line behind his small tractor following the single hay bail on the back. “We have never seen anything like this before – it’s new ground for everybody.”

California is the biggest agricultural state in the US – half the nation’s fruit and vegetables are grown here.

Farmers are calling for urgent help, people in cities are being told to conserve water and the governor is warning of record drought.

But at the other end of the state the water is flowing as the sprinklers are making it rain in at least one part of southern California.

The farmers are making hay while the year-round sun shines, and they are exporting cattle-feed to China.

The southern Imperial Valley, which borders Mexico, draws its water from the Colorado river along the blue liquid lifeline of the All American Canal.

It brings the desert alive with hundreds of hectares of lush green fields – much of it alfalfa hay, a water-hungry but nutritious animal feed which once propped up the dairy industry here, and is now doing a similar job in China.

“A hundred billion gallons of water per year is being exported in the form of alfalfa from California,” argues Professor Robert Glennon from Arizona College of Law.

“It’s a huge amount. It’s enough for a year’s supply for a million families - it’s a lot of water, particularly when you’re looking at the dreadful drought throughout the south-west.”

Manuel Ramirez from K&M Press is an exporter in the Imperial Valley, and his barns are full of hay to be compressed, plastic-wrapped, packed directly into containers and driven straight to port where they are shipped to Asia and the Middle East.

“The last few years there has been an increase in exports to China. We started five years back and the demand for alfalfa hay has increased,” he says.

“It’s cost effective. We have abundance of water here which allows us to grow hay for the foreign market.”

Cheap water rights and America’s trade imbalance with China make this not just viable, but profitable.

“We have more imports than exports so a lot of the steamship lines are looking to take something back,” Glennon says. “And hay is one of the products which they take back.”

It’s now cheaper to send alfalfa from LA to Beijing than it is to send it from the Imperial Valley to the Central Valley....

Alfalfa farmer Ronnie Langrueber believes he’s doing his bit to help the American economy out of recession.

“In my opinion it’s part of the global economy,” he says, adding that only a fraction of the hay goes to China.

“We have to do something to balance that trade imbalance, and alfalfa is a small part we can do in the Imperial Valley to help that.”

He believes the whole “exporting water” argument is nonsense – that all agricultural exports contain water – and that there are few better uses for it.

“Is it more efficient to use water for a golf course for the movie stars?” Langrueber said. “Or is it more efficient for farmers to use it to grow a crop and export it and create this mass economic engine that drives the country?”

Japan, Korea and the United Arab Emirates all buy Californian hay. The price is now so high that many local dairy farmers and cattle ranchers can’t afford the cost when the rains fail and their usual supplies are insufficient. But they have to buy what they can.

Cattle rancher John Dofflemyer certainly sees it as exporting water abroad – he resents the fact hay is sent overseas.

Hay trucks are a common sight heading north up the road from the Imperial Valley – despite the high prices, the cattle farmers have to buy what they can.

Even with recent rains in northern California there’s still a critical shortage of water.

Drought is often an excuse for politicians to build dams or reduce environmental controls, but it’s no long-term fix.

In those places awash with water – where global trade distorts the local market - decisions need to be made by those without something to gain.

That’s where it gets even more complicated.” images from BBC


Sunday, February 16, 2014

Latest UN IPCC report considered and rejected notion that global warming was effecting the jet stream-per UN IPCC author and climate science professor

Latest UN IPCC report considered and rejected the idea of global warming effecting the jet stream. It wasn't even mentioned in the report (parag. 7):

2/15/14, "No, global warming did NOT cause the storms, says one of the Met Office's most senior experts," UK Daily Mail, Daivd Rose

"One of the Met Office’s most senior experts yesterday made a dramatic intervention in the climate change debate by insisting there is no link between the storms that have battered Britain and global warming.

Mat Collins, a Professor in climate systems at Exeter University, said the storms have been driven by the jet stream – the high-speed current of air that girdles the globe – which has been ‘stuck’ further south than usual. 

Professor Collins told The Mail on Sunday: ‘There is no evidence that global warming can cause the jet stream to get stuck in the way it has this winter. If this is due to climate change, it is outside our knowledge.

His statement carries particular significance because he is an internationally acknowledged expert on climate computer models and forecasts, and his university post is jointly funded by the Met Office

Prof Collins is also a senior adviser – a ‘co-ordinating lead author’ for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). His statement appears to contradict Met Office chief scientist Dame Julia Slingo. Last weekend, she said ‘all  the evidence suggests that climate change has a role to  play’ in the storms.

Prof Collins made clear that he believes it is likely global warming could lead to higher rainfall totals, because a warmer atmosphere can hold more water. But he said this has nothing to do with the storm conveyor belt.

He said that when the IPCC was compiling its Fifth Assessment Report on climate change last year, it discussed whether warming might affect the jet stream. But, he went on, ‘there was very low confidence that climate change has any effect on the jet stream getting stuck’. In the end, the possibility was not even mentioned in the report.

Prof Collins declined to comment on his difference of opinion with Dame Julia. Five months ago, in a briefing on the IPCC report to Ministers, Dame Julia conceded the consequence of warming for rainfall ‘is not simulated well’ by climate models – though they are the basis for most of what she and other scientists say about the effects of climate change.

Last April, after the temperature fell to -11C in Aberdeenshire, the coldest April temperature for more than 100 years, Dame Julia said the cold winter and spring might also be due to global warming, because of ice melting in the Arctic. 

Meanwhile, the Met Office has continued to issue questionable long-term forecasts. In mid-November, two weeks before the first of the storms, it predicted persistent high pressure for the winter, which was ‘likely to lead to drier-than-normal conditions across the country’. 

It added that its models showed the probability of the winter being in the driest of five official categories was 25 per cent. The chances of it being in the wettest category was 15 per cent. 

Infamously, in April 2009, the Met Office promised a ‘barbecue summer’ – which then turned out to be a washout. It forecast the winter of 2010 to 2011 would be mild: it was the coldest for 120 years.

In 2007, the Met Office said that globally, the decade 2004-2014 would see warming of 0.3C. In fact, the world has not got any warmer at all in this period. 

At the beginning of 13 of the past 14 years, the Met Office has predicted the following 12 months would be significantly warmer than they have been. This, says the sceptic think-tank the Global Warming Policy Foundation, indicates ‘systemic’ bias."


The $1 billion a day global warming industry is sold with headlines saying some alleged proof of it "may" be happening. Now they're trying the "jet stream" which a Met Office scientist refutes in article above.:

2/15/14, "Wavier jet stream 'may drive weather shift'," BBC


Dame Julia Slingo is UK Met Office Chief Scientist:

2/16/14, "Deliberately or otherwise, Slingo has misled the public," Bishop Hill blog

"Almost every scientist who has said anything about the floods has said that there is no way to link them to global warming - Brian Hoskins was fairly clear about this on the Today programme. The latest is Matt Collins from the University of Exeter, quoted in the Mail on Sunday:

Professor Collins told The Mail on Sunday: ‘There is no evidence that global warming can cause the jet stream to get stuck in the way it has this winter. If this is due to climate change, it is outside our knowledge.’
Only Julia Slingo has tried the opposite tack. When asked about a possible link she said

...all the evidence suggests that climate change has a role to play’
This was sneaky. She was asked whether the floods - the ones we are seeing now - are related to climate change. Her answer related to hypothetical future climates.
In the circumstances, her words were very misleading and have been the cause of a considerable media frenzy. To avoid giving the impression that that this was deliberate, she should now make a clear statement of agreement with Prof Collins and explain that her words only related to computer model predictions of future climates. To do otherwise would look very bad." 



Blog Archive

About Me

My photo
I'm the daughter of an Eagle Scout (fan of the Brooklyn Dodgers and Mets) and a Beauty Queen.