Climate Change: I have seen the future

Just as a public service announcement, I thought you might want to take note that scientists now agree climate change is “not as threatening to planet as previously thought, new research suggests”.

Climate change poses less of an immediate threat to the planet than previously thought because scientists got their modelling wrong, a new study has found. New research by British scientists reveals the world is being polluted and warming up less quickly than 10-year-old forecasts predicted, giving countries more time to get a grip on their carbon output.

Hm – what does that mean really?
It means

  • Continue to give us money as it’s not too late, but it will be
  • Continue to increase “clean” energy as that has contributed to our hope
  • There is still time to right this ship! So money, money, money.
  • And finally it means we need to thank God for Al Gore and his 10 year warning that didn’t come true, as without the warning we would probably be dead.
  • Sorry dudes, the gig is up. The models have always been inaccurate and built on faulty science AND renewables have NOT increased enough to make a difference (though cleaner forms of traditional power has).
    We see where you’re going here with this new science though.

    Stories of the IPCC

    I know these are just news stories about the actual report and no one has actually seen the report yet, but does this make sense?

    The IPCC said the evidence of climate change has grown thanks to more and better observations, a clearer understanding of the climate system and improved models to analyze the impact of rising temperatures.

    So, after a period with no warming, the IPCC is MORE sure of human caused global warming because:
    1) of more and better observations? Of what? There wouldn’t be more and better observations of the past, only of the present which means more and better observations of no global warming.
    2) a clearer understanding of the climate system? A clearer understanding would bring better models that would then predict the lack of warming during this time.
    3) improved models to analyze the impact of rising temperatures. So somehow by analyzing the impact of rising temperatures, you are led to more evidence of the reason for the rising temperatures. That makes no sense. The impact of my illness on my person, does not in any way lead to why I am sick.

    Read this too. Regarding knowing unknowns.

    Climate cannot be predicted for the same reason we have no idea what the global economy will look like 100 years hence. In both cases, the researchers simply don’t know what they don’t know — which swamps what they do know.

    Scientism is afflicted with a bad case of WTSIATI: what they see is all there is. How sad!

    If we could predict surprise — a contradiction in terms — then we could organize and plan for it. Nevertheless, despite the intrinsic contradiction, this is precisely what leftists presume to do, i.e., control the uncontrollable and predict the unpredictable. In short, socialism would work beautifully if only creativity didn’t exist.

    Taking Science With a Grain of Salt

    Taking science with a grain of salt is pretty easy to do when every day some other scientist gets outed as a lying lyerface. [ht Maggie’s Farm. Again]

    CLAIMS that some of Australia’s leading climate change scientists were subjected to death threats as part of a vicious and unrelenting email campaign have been debunked by the Privacy Commissioner.

    Oh did I say lying lyerface?

    Looks like a good time to thank the Washington Post for addressing this, what they call, whopper from our President.  Essentially he stood under a bridge and insisted we needed another stimulus but those evil Republicans keep saying “no”.

    The Facts

    An administration official said the president was referring to the Sherman Milton Bridge, which actually connects Indiana and Kentucky, near Louisville. Back in September, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) had to shut down the bridge because a 2 ½ inch crack had been discovered.

    The bridge carries Interstate 64, so the bridge’s closure forced drivers to make major changes in their driving routes. Shortly after the shutdown, a Transportation Department blog declared that this bridge was “another example of why this [the president’s jobs bill] is so crucial.”

    But here’s the rub: While Obama claimed “these bridges don’t work,” the Sherman Milton Bridge has already been repaired, ahead of schedule, and motorists are driving over it again.

    It turned out that, rather than being an example of an aging bridge, the crack that had been discovered actually had been there ever since the bridge was constructed in 1962, because of the type of steel used at the time. Other repairs were ordered, and the bridge reopened nearly three months ago — without needing any of Obama’s jobs-bill funds.

    Another nearby bridge, the Kennedy Bridge, will soon undergo redecking, but officials said the work will not lead to a shutdown. Again, the work is being done without Obama’s jobs-bill money.

    I have no curiosity about my skepticism. And I LOVE science.

    All Over the Map Today

    Let’s start in Texas where apparently some judge thinks it’s “Unconstitutional” to defund Planned Parenthood. huh?

    A federal judge on Monday stopped Texas from removing Planned Parenthood clinics from a state women’s health program because the organization provides abortions.

    In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel in Austin cited evidence that the state rule banning Planned Parenthood from the program was unconstitutional. He imposed an injunction against enforcing the law until he can hear arguments in the case.

    After seeing the reaction to the Komen funding and Planned Parenthood situation we know there is an incredibly loud demographic out there but sheesh how about some sense. Planned Parenthood provides for abortions. Texas taxpayers do not want to aid in that situation why is Texas required to fund them? Is it because they started funding them ala Komen and now can’t quit due to the Federal (not the state) constitution?

    Moving to India where we find that the UK gave funds to provide for forced sterilizations to reduce populations and thus reduce climate change. [ht Coyote Blog who appropriately entitles his post “And We Climate Change Skeptics Get Called Evil”]

    The UK agreed to give India £166m to fund the programme, despite allegations that the money would be used to sterilise the poor in an attempt to curb the country’s burgeoning population of 1.2 billion people.

    Sterilisation has been mired in controversy for years. With officials and doctors paid a bonus for every operation, poor and little-educated men and women in rural areas are routinely rounded up and sterilised without having a chance to object. Activists say some are told they are going to health camps for operations that will improve their general wellbeing and only discover the truth after going under the knife…………..Yet a working paper published by the UK’s Department for International Development in 2010 cited the need to fight climate change as one of the key reasons for pressing ahead with such programmes. The document argued that reducing population numbers would cut greenhouse gases, although it warned that there were “complex human rights and ethical issues” involved in forced population control.

    Don’t you love it when massive government bureaucrats take things into their own hands for your betterment?

    And as long as we’re on forced sterilizations, let’s go to China.

    Have you noticed as Mollie Hemingway has that Chen Guangcheng’s reason for imprisonment was because he opposed forced sterilizations and used his legal skills to do so? Maybe not, because it’s not in most of the news stories about him. Doesn’t fit the narrative. [ht Maggie’s Farm]

    And finally Chile where Mary O’Grady has noticed that the lack of positive voices for freedom and free markets is what has created a danger in Chile of moving leftward. It isn’t that things aren’t going well, or that the people haven’t seen improvements…it’s that the ideals need to be spoken about and not hidden in a back room and taken out every time the left gains too much ground. [ht Three Sources]

    Then there is his education reform which tries to placate Ms. Vallejo’s aficionados without giving in to the demand for a free university system. It guarantees scholarships for the bottom 60% of the population and 2% real interest rate loans for all but the richest 10%.

    The technocrats might be congratulated for holding free university education at bay considering the political pressures. But the reason Ms. Vallejo has them on the run in the first place is the more fundamental problem. If Mr. Piñera wants to solve it he will have to become an advocate for freedom.

    The left – note the stories above – is loud and powerful and can make well meaning people feel bad about themselves. Someone – no, all of us – need to speak out in defense of freedom at every opportunity. Every opportunity and more.

    ps – On a side track but a fun one; thank you Navy Seals for using your freedom to share your thoughts on how Obama has used you.

    National Review’s Morning Jolt had this great quote on the subject:

    It’s the first of May, and already Obama is playing the I-killed-bin-Laden card. Yes, there was political and diplomatic risk in authorizing the mission, and yes, President Obama was entitled to take a victory lap. And it’s wildly unrealistic to expect the Obama campaign not to mention it frequently; the only truly popular thing President Obama has ever done is to authorize a unilateral military strike in an unsuspecting country without U.N. approval.

    Climate stuff

    The 2nd round of leaked emails have been fun.

    Humphrey’, said to work at Defra, writes: ‘I cannot overstate the HUGE amount of political interest in the project as a message that the government can give on climate change to help them tell their story.
    ‘They want their story to be a very strong one and don’t want to be made to look foolish.’
    ……….Yet one of the newly released emails, written by Prof. Jones – who is working with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – said: ‘Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden.
    ‘I’ve discussed this with the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.’
    Climategate scientists DID collude with government officials to hide research that didn’t fit their apocalyptic global warming
    5,000 leaked emails reveal scientists deleted evidence that cast doubt on claims climate change was man-made
    Experts were under orders from US and UK officials to come up with a ‘strong message’
    Critics claim: ‘The stink of intellectual corruption is overpowering’
    Scientist asks, ‘What if they find that climate change is a natural fluctuation? They’ll kill us all’
    In another of his emails, he wrote: ‘I’ve been told that Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is above national Freedom of Information Acts.
    ‘One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process.’

    But this is hilarious….lost herd of 200,000 (200,000!) elk due to climate change have been found. Just where they’ve been.


    Since it’s currently -12 degrees fahrenheit outside let’s do a global warming post.

    Prince Charles is back on his high horse condemning skeptics of human caused global warming of having a “corrosive” impact on public opinion.

    This is a huge quote, but it just really bugged me.

    ”I cannot see how we can possibly maintain the growth of GDP in the long term if we continue to consume our planet as voraciously as we are doing,” he told MEPs and business leaders.
    ”We have to see that there is a direct relationship between the resilience of Nature’s ecosystems and the resilience of our national economies.
    ”If the fabric of the Earth’s life-support system fragments, as it appears it may be starting to do; if those systems become weak or even collapse – essentially, if Nature’s capital loses its innate resilience – then how long does it take for our economic capital and economic systems to lose their resilience too?”
    The Prince highlighted the fate of the world’s rainforests as a ”graphic example” of the problem.
    A third of the world’s tropical rainforests have been felled in the last 50 years and six million hectares more disappear annually – the equivalent area of nearly 24,000 football pitches every day.
    ”With them go tens of thousands of species of plant and animal – gone forever, into extinction, together with who knows how many vital cures and medicines.”
    The Prince of Wales was asked to address the Low Carbon Prosperity Summit in recognition of decades spent promoting environmental awareness – particularly the last four years focusing on saving tropical rainforests from further destruction.
    He went on: ”Stopping deforestation is not a lifestyle choice, it is an absolutely critical part of any low-carbon growth plan.
    ”If we fail to address this problem, despite everything else we might do, there is no answer to climate change.”

    His answer? Get people to stop using so much stuff. Presumably he means first world people. Somehow if you do without X, then those 3rd world people who actually live with the rain forests will quit cutting them down for profit.
    Sorry Prince, but that’s not how it works.

    Those people near the rain forest want stuff too. Even if only 2nd world stuff. Why do you get to live in a castle and tell those people that they deserve nothing so that in the end you can choose less and hence keep the GDP going strong?

    You don’t. So get off your high horse and figure out how to get those folks to 1st world without cutting down their rain forests. Then and only then will I believe you are really worried and not just yakking about a popular viewpoint. “The world is going to end and it’s your fault!!”

    Affects of Climate Change

    The NYTimes editorial board apparently finds just “trivial” errors in all the retractions going around lately. (sea levels rising being just the latest)

    Concerning Mr. de Boer’s resignation:

    His resignation comes at a fragile moment in the campaign to combat climate change. The Senate is stalemated over a climate change bill. The disclosure of apparently trivial errors in the U.N.’s 2007 climate report has given Senate critics fresh ammunition. And without Mr. de Boer, the slim chances of forging a binding agreement at the next round of talks in December in Cancún, Mexico, seem slimmer still.