Tipping Point In The Media

Bout time the world woke up to the lies of AGW and saw that the reality of cooling is real and a much bigger threat and NOT caused by CO2

It helps a little bit that this winter keeps dragging on into spring, here, in North America, but it’s more than that — it’s the science — it just keeps piling up like a snow drift.

Well, you would think that after no warming for 10 years, people would get the idea that maybe there isn’t any warming.
They can’t keep waiving their arms and creating warming through “adjustments” to observations forever. At some point people will realize … “hey, it isn’t getting warmer”.
The problem with the IPCC projections is that by now we should be so much warmer than the 20th century average that there should be almost no possibility of record low temperatures and record high temperatures should be happening every week. They aren’t.

The value of a piece of information is inversely proportional to its (perceived) probability. I think Claude Shannon said that; if he didn’t, he should have.
This is part of what drives the “hype/anti-hype” cycle in news media (and why bad news sells while good news doesn’t). The mainstream media chased collectively after horrifying news about AGW until coverage reached a saturation point — people started tuning out. So the only way keep reader interest was to start covering the skepticism, first with a skeptical-about-the-skeptics point of view (see the NYT article on Freeman Dyson this past week). But it will shift. Look for phrases such as “growing number of questions”, “skeptics even among respected scientists”, and so on.
If things continue to cool for a few more years, look for Time or Newsweek to run a cover story along the lines of, “IS HELL FREEZING? New questions about global warming.” That will open the floodgates for a re-evaluation of AGW. The Holocene Optimum, Roman Optimum, Medieval Warm Period, and Little Ice Age will be presented as previously uncertain or unsupportable climate variations that now have been somehow validated with fresh evidence. Hansen and Gore will be portrayed as well-meaning advocates for a cleaner environment, and they will not be held to account for their repeated extreme statements (cf. Paul Ehrlich, the Club of Rome, and their ilk). In the meantime, those who challenged AGW early on will be treated as being “accidentally correct” and largely ignored (cf. Julian Simon).
Anyone want to bet against me that this is what happens? ..bruce..

Over the last year, another thing I have noticed is a sharp increase in letters to the editor by informed citizens disputing politicized, scientifically-baseless pro-AGW news articles.
And I’m as guilty as anyone when it comes to leaving reader comments on a number of websites. I’ve been doing it for as long as those websites have allowed it.
Three years ago I was outnumbered 1,000 to 1 and everyone else would pile up on me. Not so anymore.
We’ve still got a fight on our hands, but we’re making progress.

Although i agree that more and more people are questioning global warming, i think the change in terminology from “Global Warming” to “climate change” might have a bit to do with it.

The cooling trend and the truth of it should be established in the public mind about the same time that General Motors produces their first cars with no heaters or defrosters, in line with government directives.

I looked closer at the top Google story, and discovered that Anthony is prominently mentioned in it for his surface stations work.

It`s the following I’d like to see change:
The Economist
New Scientist
Nature

I was going to ask in another thread if anyone noticed how shrill the true believers were getting lately, now I know why they are. The thing’s slipping away from them, and not too long ago it was so easy…

Getting your letter published:
I send letters to editors of large circulation newspapers and magazines with the expectation that they will NOT publish what I might write because I am not known. Thus, I write to nudge them to pay attention to something – such as the recent ICCC in NYC. I suggest they may want to have a staff writer do a report on something.
On the other hand, small city newspapers will frequently publish a letter from someone responding to a story or editorial they have printed. It is not hard to find a story using global warming either as the main theme or incidental to the story. Recently I responded to a story about “clean coal” and the problems with trying to get to that stage, but mention was made as to the CO2 that needed to be gotten rid of because of global warming issues. This was enough for a letter to say that AGW is not happening.
You don’t reach millions this way but you do have an audience and many are happy to hear they are not alone. I had an e-mail and a phone call from folks that know me – the phone call came before I was aware my letter had been printed.
You will be limited to a few words so you need to think and write clearly and you need to present your idea in proper spelling and grammar.
On a recent post some problems were:
your — for — you are
its — for — it is
to — for — too — or — two
There are others but you get the point. Find a reliable reader if you are not sure of such things. Words are the editor’s business. He or she will appreciate your well presented material.

Such as articles like this one
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25274973-12377,00.html
“Farmers unsure climate change is man made”
Great to see some good news for once.
Michael

The bursting of the Dot-com bubble.
The bursting of the real estate bubble.
The bursting of the AGW bubble in the pipeline…

oh, wonderful, wonderful, thanks Steve for that *cool* piece of work!
time for another plug, as one of the websites who has been encouraging better info: click on my name for an ever-improving Skeptics’ Climate Science Primer – written by a warmist in recovery! – and tell others!

Steve,
I wish I could agree with you but here in the UK, the usual culprits (BBC and Guardian), seem to be pumping out their “catastrophe agenda” louder than ever.
Either that or I’m paranoid. Could be the latter!

David Porter (00:34:44)
But here is something more encouraging from The Times in the UK:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/chris_ayres/article6011157.ece

There was a pithy and rueful comment in today’s London Times about ‘we were trying to wean Americans off Saudi oil’ and how ‘democratic debate is more honest, and if it takes an awkward Brit to point this out, well that’s better than one of our own’ or something of the like….
I’m sure that wasn’t me and my comments at this site they were referring to.
All I do as a non-expert is to try and gain personal understanding by challenging those far more expert than me to explain things I simply can’t understand, given my aging faculties, lack of access to scientific literature and bemusement at the raft of contradictory messages that my brain is assaulted with on a daily basis……..
But who cares, eh?

When enough of the public have swung over to the sceptical position the Politicians will show “Leadership” by jumping in front of the new demographic.
At the rate described – give it to the end of this year for the Politicians to start to waver.
Unfortunately – spending taxes and not having taxes, are mutually exclusive. The Politicians that have already committed to the scam of taxing carbon emissions may have to wait to the next election before they wake up as they are tossed out.

Efforts to mitigate continental drift could be hampered if nations do not agree on steps to prevent disaster, warned scientists today.
Scientists say it is vital for leaders attending a key UN summit in December to find a way to halt catastrophic continental drift. Anthropogenic Continental Drift (ACD) accounts for about 60% of all tectonic activity, UN data shows, and if measures are not taken to prevent human movement the Earth could cave in beneath our feet.
Anti-footstep activist group Greenpace will outline its concerns during a public lecture in Central London on Friday. Greenpace is at the forefront of protecting the Earth’s crust from human activities such as walking, running and driving. Representatives flew in to the lecture using jetpacks to highlight greener methods of transportation.
“This year is the crunch time for earthquakes, plate tectonics and continental drift,” Greenpace’s head of research Durner Webb told BBC 24 News.
“We are hoping for big things from the Copenhagen summit at the end of 2009,” he added.
“If we can’t develop enough footstep-free methods of transportation, we will need to put people in shackles and restrict movement as much as possible as mitigation method for ACD. If not we will really have lost the battle to prevent catastrophic earthquakes and fragmentation of the planet.”
Despite the measures introduced by the UN’s Tokyo Protocol on Continental Drift, the number of human footsteps has continued to rise as a result of increasing energy consumption and the loss of forest cover.
“This year is going to be critical and we feel we need to raise public awareness about this issue as much as possible,” Webb said.
Hara Shanawat Dortmund, the UN secretary general’s continental drift envoy, said that among solutions to mitigate catastrophe was a real way to spread the wealth around.
“We must seize the opportunities this crisis offers us,” she told delegates at a UN Committee meeting in Palermo earlier this month.
“There has been very strong pressure to use footsteps in an unsustainable way.”
In order to tackle continental drift effectively, Dortmund said it was necessary to develop a regime that creates the necessary incentives for developing countries and the poor to act in the broader interest of the planet.
“We know that developed nations contribute more to continental drift than developing countries. Before the Industrial Revolution we all lived on one continent. We must now pay for our sins. It is in our planet’s interest to pay developing countries not to develop any further.”
Also present at the Palermo meeting was Al Gore who said, “We know that productive nations and people move around more frequently than the unproductive. The creation of a global reserve currency, Footstep Credits, based on movement could reduce poverty and prevent the planet from falling apart.”
Gore proposes a system of footstep trading in which everyone will be issued the same amount of Footstep Credits, or footsies as he calls them.
Individuals then spend footsies to move about. A pedometer will count the number of steps people take and when in a car or train a GPS system will do the same. At the end of the day an international tracking system will then subtract one footsie for each mile covered.
Individuals wanting or needing to walk or drive beyond permitted by their initial allocation would be able to engage in footstep trading and purchase additional footsies. This could encourage people to conserve their movement or use green methods of transport such as gliding, climbing or using jetpacks.
Conversely, those individuals who move about below that permitted by their initial allocation have the opportunity to sell their surplus footsies.
“Imagine what this could do for the poor, the unemployed and developing nations. They will be able to earn an income from doing nothing. Governments will no longer need to support welfare systems or lend money to poor countries.” Gore said.
To that end Gore has already set up a London based company to handle billions of expected transactions, each of which will be charged a small commission. Across the pond in the United States the visionary President Obama has been working with the Chicago Footstep Exchange, which he helped set up years ago, to do the same.
Gore warned: “If these types of schemes do not get up and running shortly, then we will have really missed the boat. We have no more than four years to save the planet.”

Boudu (00:44:12) :
Thanks for the link to Nicholas Stern – His dulcet, pompous patronising tone serves particularly well as a soundtrack to pictures of Hollywood notables strutting their stuff with G20 protesters.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00jh5jm/Simon_Mayo_31_03_2009/
about 1:48 in

Perhaps this site offers an opportunity for real input from citizens to congress,
http://features.csmonitor.com/environment/2009/03/31/have-your-say-about-global-warming/
“Through April 17, everyone has the opportunity to provide input to the committee. Send questions and comments to to ACCInput-main@nas.edu. “You can suggest questions you hope the study will address or submit literature or opinion pieces you would like considered during the study process,” the invitation says.”
After feeling so powerless and hopeless about this global con, do I dare hope this is real?

Maybe there is hope after all!
This interesting report comes from St Andrews University Debating Society, written by Dr.Richard Courtney
http://www.grumpyoldsod.com/global%20garbage%2016.asp

This is good news indeed. Especially as it begins to dawn on people how much this swindle has cost society.
The billions paid out to propogate this ruse could have solved many of the problems that activists continuously cry about.
Still, science is not settled by a media majority.
But the media can provide a service by delivering facts, and not a bunch of hyped up alarmism, as the case has been for 2 decades now.
Thanks to people like Anthony, Steve McIntyre, Richard Lindzen, the Heartland Institute and the 1000s of other scientists who have demonstrated courage in standing up to a highly arrogant class of elitists.

I expect to see the global warming moderates jump ship soon. Once the exodus of scientists goes into full swing, the whole house of cards is going to fall on the holdouts left inside…like Nature, Gore, GISS, NYT, etc…

More media publishing for science, not hype:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5067351/Rise-of-sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html

I have also been using Google news searches daily for “global warming” also informally, and unscientifically. Not only are there more skeptical stories now but more importantly the pro AGW stories have become increasingly more alarmist, while the skeptical stories remain more fact based and restrained.
After watching a few hundred Sham Wow commercials the public has learned how to recognize overselling hype. Every time I see a story such as “Global Warming causes male pattern baldness” I see another nail in the AGW coffin.

We also have the new hype that replaced the old. The economy.

Reretably the BBC hasn’t yet got to the 1% accuracy stage. You yanks are lucky not to have your national agendas warped as the BBC do here (well ok not so badly warped & not on quite as wide a range of subjects).

I more excessive rejoicing in this thread than is warranted. We live in an Information-driven age, and the centers of information are firmly in the CO2-induced GW camp. These centers are Media-Entertainment, Academia, and Bureaucracy/NGO, and they do not seem to be interested in analyzing or examining scientific data.

I agree with vg here. I used to regularly read New Scientist and visit and watch BBC programmes. Recently (well I say recently, I mean over the last 3 years or so), I’ve stopped completely. New Scientist has become alarmist to an extreme, never publishing counter articles (of which there are many). The BBC is still creating alarmist programmes that tow along the party line and has been ever since the scare over the hole in the ozone layer (we had propaganda aimed at children and teens with programmes called `the O-Zone’ back then!). I feel the same way about the Guardian newspaper, which I also used to read regularly but no longer do.
It’s true that to an extent we pick media with similar philosophical dispensations to us. But it also works both ways. There are too many preachers in some of these organs and not enough fact. Editors seem to have gone AWOL judging by some of the dross that gets through as Scientific these days. No disclaimers on model results can be found anywhere (model != fact).
I can honestly say the media has never been lower in my eyes and Scientists are rapidly sinking in esteem as well. By all jumping on the bang-wagon of “consensus” they are or will end up destroying any trust the public has in them.

Surprisingly, alarmists are not entirely humor-challenged:
http://features.csmonitor.com/environment/2009/04/01/scientists-worldwide-admit-global-warming-is-a-hoax/

I suggest all Watts Up readers email a link to this post to their representatives. The politicians have not a clue about the science, but if they can see that support for Obama’s $900 Billion slush fund will be out of step with shifting public sentiment, maybe there is some hope.
I think there is still a chance the Senate can stop this. It needs a coalition of scientific skeptics, those outraged at the massive tax, and those worried about the economy (especially including some Democrats sympathetic to the loss of union manufacturing jobs that will be a byproduct of energy cost increases).
I recently looked at my own Representative’s and Senators’ web sites to see where they stood on the Cap and Trade issue. They were all rather vague or ignored it completely. It could be they are waiting till crunch time to see which way the wind of public sentiment is blowing.

Mark N (21:44:53) :
It`s the following I’d like to see change:
The Economist
New Scientist
Nature
And change they will as the public continues to awaken to the colossal foolery that is AGW. People of sound mind will demand those who knowingly supported the distortions of AGW – be fired. All that need happen to straighten these journals out is to clean their editorial house.
Except perhaps for New Scientist which should simply be shuttered. The post AGW challenge will be to finger the worst alarmists. Who chose to subvert scientific method in pursuit of an agenda? No matter how beneficial the agenda was wished to be. Next, will be rebuilding MSM and returning to the democratic principles *real* journalists practice. Criticism. Skepticism. Investigation. Exposure.
But the greatest lesson to be learned is that computer simulations of complex systems are deeply, perhaps endlessly flawed. Attempting to make policy based on artificial intelligence – is the real catastrophe. Expecting machines to replace in-person observation is destructive to good science. And finally, legislation to prevent recurrence – is the best defense.

The AGW crowd will simply shift from ‘saving the planet’ to ‘saving natural resources’. Most human produced CO2 comes from burning fossil fuels, which are finite, so we must save them for the future. To do that requires higher taxes, which will conveniently fund all the other good things we need to do.
It’s what they have been saying all along.
Was that Eastasia or Eurasia?

This is interesting and could make for an interesting debate
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7970921.stm
I lived in India for 18 months. Before that I believed in global warming hysteria and all that nonsense. By the time I left I no longer believed in it.
What caused that change? The change was that I realised that in the developed world we complain about such pathetic, irrelevant and even non-existent things. The slightest bit of discomfort to our comfortable lives causes us to lash out in anger and demand drastic action.
Yet in countries like India they don’t have it so easy and so their priorities are completely different. They are the same priorities we used to have when we had an entrepreneurial forward looking society – jobs, human rights, freedom, education, food. In the BBC article above we see a popular desire for an accountable, democratic capitalist system to make their priorities a reality.
Compare that to all these well fed protestors on the streets of London today, many of them who have never worked in their lives let alone worked on the pavements like those Indians do, who are complaining capitalism has failed and we need either anarchy or communism to save the planet from climate change.
It’s clear that some people are living in fantasy land and have lost sight of what the human priorities should be. The post-Berlin Wall generation has had it too too easy.

PHE
I see your point, however you are incorrect in your assertion that there were no chemical weapons found or indeed that their was no evidence of nuclear weapons programs found. According to documentation that was turned over to the allies after the golf war Saddam still had 6500 tonnes of chemical weapons, mostly nerve agents, at the time of the invasion that were not destroyed and not accounted for. However, just over 550 weapons had been found in the year following the invasion. As these are mostly large artillery shells the total is a few dozen tons; far less than expected. About 1 ton of the nerve gas material was recovered in a botched terrorist attack in Amman about that time. (Remember though “Saddam didn’t support terrorism”)
The claim that there were no weapons of mass distruction is a deliberate fabrication by the same media often the same people that promote AGW scare stories.

“Secret U.S. mission hauls uranium from Iraq ”
“Last major stockpile from Saddam’s nuclear efforts arrives in Canada”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334/

This could be a another contribution to the media “Tipping Point” too!
Although I am always cautious about publications that appear around April Fools Day
(like this posting: http://scienceblogs.com/eruptions/2009/04/eruption_at_yellowstone_lake.php, if true this is a real “WHOPPER”:
Obama intimately tied to carbon trading:
http://ilovecarbondioxide.com/2009/03/obama-intimately-tied-to-carbon-trading.html

M Ritenour (04:49:43) :
More media publishing for science, not hype:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5067351/Rise-of-sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html
The admirable Chris Booker has been reporting in this vein for a considerable time. I look in vain for anyone else doing so here in the UK.

According to BOM.gov’s moving SOI graph the SOI dropped significantly and now seems parked right on the neutral line, SST’s may have also remained fairly even or even dropped slightly over last month as well according to NOAA’s charts. Provided there’s evidence for temperatures largely following SST’s there should be no resumed upward trend for the next few months at least.
Other observations for March, the UAH graph website says global warming should cause cooling in the upper atmosphere, but at 56,000 feet to just below the ozone layer there’s been significant warming and considering those layers have been well below the 30 year norm for temperature to begin with.

Roger Sowell (11:58:31) :
So, let me get this straight: delaying action on climate change may cost Billions to deal with, but taking action will cost Trillions? I’m… at a loss for words regarding this logic.
From what I understand, CA actually has nearly an equal proportion of right and left leaning mindsets, correct? How does this much nonsense manage to get through? Are people just leaving? Aren’t they trying to vote this [snip] down? I know they elected the RINO to replace Davis, and I can’t blame them in the beginning because he seemed legit, but ultimately, he is a Kennedy. 😉
Mark

juan (11:12:03) :
Because I am paranoid I know they are out to get me. That’s why I’m paranoid. Cyclical, just like the climate.

E.M.Smith (13:04:13) :
Graeme Rodaughan (21:47:40) : Might as well call them “Federal Motors” they will be owned by the US Federal Government…
Um, you are too late by about 3 months:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/110597-buy-ford-short-gm
An interesting expansion on and “off the cuff” comment. Thanks.

Mark T,
The tax-and-spend voters outnumber the others by a large margin. The same is true in the two state houses, the Assembly and the Senate. Roughly 60/40 there.

Aron (02:28:26) :
Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk!
Also very beneficial for us, the just plain lazy and the couch potatoes.
Might stir up trouble with the “Reunite Gondwandaland” org. though.

OT.
Looks like the US Senate just got Cold Feet on CAP and Trade – perhaps another tipping point.
http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/the-thune-amendment-5096
No one (very few at least) is willing to be seen pushing up energy prices during a recession.

E.M.Smith, Mark T, and others interested,
To give an idea of the Sacramento mind-set: they have consultants who tell them that the green economy is going great, that investments are pouring in, and there are many green small businesses (like the dot com boomers did) sprouting all over the Bay Area.
All I can say, is, that is a darn good thing! Imagine what the unemployment rate would be otherwise! (California unemployment was 10.5 percent in Feb, data from March 20).
Also, the deficit is BAAAAACCCKKKK. We cancelled the $42 billion deficit with tax, spend, and borrow…and 3 weeks later the state is running an $8 billion deficit. The state treasury sounded surprised, naming the lack of economic activity (recession) as the reason. We should get another report on the budget deficit in about two weeks.
http://energyguysmusings.blogspot.com/2009/03/california-budget-crisis-again.html
As for people leaving, just check out the one-way rental rates for U-Haul or other hauling companies. I do that from time to time, and find that one can rent a large truck one-way from Dallas to Los Angeles for far less than the other way. (or pick any other non-California city). The cost differential has been that way for years. This is a clear indication that rental trucks are not piling up in California, just the opposite!
Does anyone remember Ahhnold (California governor for our foreign readers) offering to pay (from his own pocket!) for the moving van costs if people would begin moving to California? I think it was when he was running for governor.
California is rapidly on its way to being just the ports, the military bases, the government employees and their buildings, Disneyland, and hamburger joints. And I’m not so sure the hamburger joints will be able to pay all the taxes…
And this just in:
” SACRAMENTO – Senate Bill 14, which requires all energy providers to buy 33 percent of their energy from clean renewable energy sources by 2020 has been approved by the Senate 21-16. The bill, authored by State Senator Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto) now heads to the Assembly. :
http://www.californiachronicle.com/articles/view/96697
This bill will formalize Ahhnold’s executive order on the same matter. Once the Assembly passes it, Ahhnold will sign it. The current target (law) is 20 percent by 12/31/2010. This legislation is known as the Renewable Portfolio Standard.
What was that 60’s song?
“When will they ever learn, when will they ev-v-v-v-er learn….”

One thing we know with certainty about the future climate is that it will be different from Today. At some point, for natural reasons, the trend will swing back to warming, even if the effects of human activity count for little or nothing. Whether that time is next year, five years from now or fifty, it will happen. One other thing we know with certainty is that at that point, the AGWers will be out in force again. I can only hope that a good portion of the population is fully inoculated against that virus by that time.

E M Smith,
All you folks out there in California are mighty welcome here in Texas. We still have a surplus of cash. We have plenty of fossil fuels and we’re not afraid to use them. We’ve got low taxes, no state income tax and hardheaded people with common sense. We have good manners and an appreciation for visitors that are similarly inclined. You all will enjoy our southern hospitality and with the quiet sun and the turning of the PDO, it might even cool off a little down here. We aren’t getting rid of our air conditioners yet, though.
This also goes for those in Kansas, Wisconsin, Ohio and any other state that has been brought down low by their well-meaning governments.
With apologies to Emma Lazarus:
“Give me (Texas) your tired (of paying exorbitant taxes), your poor (also because of high taxes),
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free (our air is very clean, with just the right amount of CO2 and a surfeit of freedom),
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless (because without freedom, is it really a home?), tempest-tost (the storm of the AGW hoax) to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
You better get here before we put up the fence!
Mike
Brought to you by The Texas Chamber of Commerce

hehehe…
Gotta get some of that Luna de Noche action there…

“:Roger Sowell 17.36.47
What was that 60’s song?
“When will they ever learn, when will they ev-v-v-v-er learn….””
‘Where have all the warmers gone, long time passing, where have all the warmers gone, long time ago.
Where have all the warmers gone, gone to Gee Twenty every one.
When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn………..’
(with apologies to Joan Baez)

Check this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/apr/01/g20-policing-climate-protest-riot?commentpage=4
Monbiot, leading environmental campaigner and the one most responsible for attacking climate realists, is now defending the skinheads and anarchists who were out to start a fight with the police yesterday.
It’s quite a deliberate lie. Millions saw the protests on TV and saw the police being goaded by anarchists who had made themselves bleed before showing up.
It’s a perfect example of where Monbiot’s sympathies lie. He’s not interested in climate science. He uses environmentalism as a reason to attack our free society.
Another example. The other day Monbiot attacked the latest list of climate rationalists published by the Cato Institute. To mobilise leftwing support against Cato he labelled the thinktank as a ‘rightwing lobby group’.
An outrageous lie. Here is how Cato asked to be labelled on the About section of its website:
Today, those who subscribe to the principles of the American Revolution–individual liberty, limited government, the free market, and the rule of law–call themselves by a variety of terms, including conservative, libertarian, classical liberal, and liberal. We see problems with all of those terms. “Conservative” smacks of an unwillingness to change, of a desire to preserve the status quo. Only in America do people seem to refer to free-market capitalism–the most progressive, dynamic, and ever-changing system the world has ever known–as conservative. Additionally, many contemporary American conservatives favor state intervention in some areas, most notably in trade and into our private lives.
“Classical liberal” is a bit closer to the mark, but the word “classical” connotes a backward-looking philosophy.
Finally, “liberal” may well be the perfect word in most of the world–the liberals in societies from China to Iran to South Africa to Argentina are supporters of human rights and free markets–but its meaning has clearly been corrupted by contemporary American liberals.
The Jeffersonian philosophy that animates Cato’s work has increasingly come to be called “libertarianism” or “market liberalism.” It combines an appreciation for entrepreneurship, the market process, and lower taxes with strict respect for civil liberties and skepticism about the benefits of both the welfare state and foreign military adventurism.
The market-liberal vision brings the wisdom of the American Founders to bear on the problems of today. As did the Founders, it looks to the future with optimism and excitement, eager to discover what great things women and men will do in the coming century. Market liberals appreciate the complexity of a great society, they recognize that socialism and government planning are just too clumsy for the modern world. It is–or used to be–the conventional wisdom that a more complex society needs more government, but the truth is just the opposite. The simpler the society, the less damage government planning does. Planning is cumbersome in an agricultural society, costly in an industrial economy, and impossible in the information age. Today collectivism and planning are outmoded and backward, a drag on social progress.
Market liberals have a cosmopolitan, inclusive vision for society. We reject the bashing of gays, China, rich people, and immigrants that contemporary liberals and conservatives seem to think addresses society’s problems. We applaud the liberation of blacks and women from the statist restrictions that for so long kept them out of the economic mainstream. Our greatest challenge today is to extend the promise of political freedom and economic opportunity to those who are still denied it, in our own country and around the world.

I have read somewhere that Ice Ages start overnight. Ie 1 to 2 years.
This World we call Home is in survival mode. The Sun is cooling, the oceans are cooling. The Planet Earth is trying to keep warm. CO2 levels are increasing. Volcanic activity is increasing, The Magnetic Poles are about to reverse.
New Species will be created – Old Species will die out.
Maybe when 100 foot snowfalls occur in Europe and North America next year the myth of Global Warming (Sorry – Climate Change) will die out.

OT:
Has anybody read this NOAA report:
Reanalysis of Historical Climate Data for Key AtmosphericFeatures:
Implications for Attribution of Causes of Observed Change
Some key points (for North America):
“The 56-year linear trend (1951 to 2006)
of annual surface temperature is +0.90°C
±0.1°C (1.6°F ± 0.2°F).”
There is only 66% chance that more than half of this warming is the result of human-caused greenhouse gas forcing of climate change.”
“There is no discernible trend in average precipitation since 1951, in contrast to trends observed in extreme precipitation events.”
“It is unlikely that a systematic change has occurred in either the frequency or area coverage of severe drought over the contiguous United States from the midtwentieth century to the present.”
This is peer reviewed material showing several interesting conclusions, just some of them listed above. Has this been discussed on this blog earlier?

nelsonleith (02:32:52)
Does anyone have any clue what this person is talking about? Perhaps the poster? Unlikely?

“Climate change not all man-made, report says”
“Cites Natural Causes”
The National Post Tom Spears, Canwest News Service Published: Thursday, April 02, 2009
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.html?id=1453831
It appears as though yet another MSM paper is softening the field for eventual disclosure. AGW – an act of the imagination?

Thanks,Ric…all I could think of was the half English,half German version by JB.
It just gets better!….
“Where have all the warmers gone,gone to London every one.
When will they ever earn, when will they ever earn………”

Henry,
Austin is NOT mentioned in polite company. I spent too many crazy days and nights there in my youth.
I can still spend an enjoyable evening on 6th St. Good music, cold beer… all in all the better part of Austin.

I have been reading this website for just a few months, and while I cannot claim to be a climate scientist I am a skeptic of most of what is purported to be true by the extreme AGW-ists. I may or may not submit additional blog entries in the future, but I felt that the following link of an editorial comment in the News Tribune (Tacoma, WA) today 3 April 2009 would be of interest to the rest of you who read WUWT…A small chink in the ice-choked river (morass?) of pro-AGW flow of information in the media today…possibly leading to a massive blowout of the truth – even if it is inconvenient to AGW-ers???
Side note, I find this site to contain some of the most relevant, quasi-non-biased, informative, and downright interesting infomation avaiable to the scientifically leaning mind on the web…
Here’s the link:
http://www.thenewstribune.com/opinion/othervoices/story/697485.html
Enjoy,
MCR
And Break Out The Woolen Socks (Seattle-Tacoma Area had snow above 500 foot elevation this AM – again!)

As a non scientist may I pose a question that someone on this site may be able to answer. We all know that “the truth will out”, but when. Is it possible to make some sort of prediction of when the GW alarmists will finally have to admit that the facts have proven them to be wrong? Millions of people word wide have their lives impacted by laws petty regulations and taxes excused by the GW scam. Politicians world wide and cross party are in too deep to back out gracefully, and people do not like being duped.Some fore knowledge of a rough date may prove usefull.

hotrod / Larry, (09:26:42) :
Well-said. I would add that there are some high-level political issues here to consider. First, is there any good-will to be gained by the West reducing their energy usage, and CO2 emissions? Second, will OPEC ever allow the price of oil to increase again, so that many of the renewable forms of energy become economic? I personally do not believe OPEC will.
The MSM also has a short attention span, very child-like in some respects. Another major event will also crowd out the AGW news from the forefront: Terrorist attack, natural disaster, nuclear arms, yet another war or escalation of existing war (Afghanistan comes to mind as a serious contender), biological threat (SARS, drug-resistant bacteria, etc). Finally, I would add the longer the economic downturn exists, or deepens, the more likely the realists of the world will say jobs are more important than CO2, especially when winters are growing colder and snows are getting deeper.
There is nothing like the tangible, visible, evidence of ice and snow to counter the AGW’s constant braying that the world is warming, and the apocalypse is upon us. Also, the constant reminder of the higher heating bills will help people remember that it is not growing warmer, but colder.
The U.S.A. just experienced a winter (and it is not yet over) with an average of around 3 percent more Heating Degree Days than last winter. But many states were much colder, so resident’s heating bills were higher.
My prediction is that by April of 2010, with another cold winter behind us, the tide will have turned for good.

Darn, it was such a great plan until it became obvious recently that the western style society and its financial excesses derived from capitalism are necessary to underwrite (fund) the ideological crusade against AGW and other such non-issues. I’m a little rusty so maybe one of you can develop a more elegant equation:
Ideological financial support = Capitalism² – Survival (basic needs)
When survival (in the broad sense) requirements outweigh the output of the worlds economical growth engine, then these types of ideologies fade into memory. It should also be noted that the climate really did not change, but rather this ideology movement did a great job of marketing its product with the support that it did have…