Tipping Point In The Media

Guest Post by Steven Goddard

tipping_point

Over the last year or so I have been taking an informal survey of a key news metric – Google news searches for the term “global warming.”  A year ago, the ratio of alarmist/skeptical articles was close to 100/1.  About six months ago, the ratio was 90/10, Two months ago it was 80/20, and today it hit 50/50 for the first time – including the lead skeptical story “A Cooling Trend Toward Global Warming“.  One thing that has changed is the rise of blogs written by informed citizens, complemented by the demise of corporate newspapers which make money from keeping people continually alarmed about one thing or another.

Congratulations to Anthony and all the readers for being a big part of this.  Democracy in it’s purest form – hope and change we can all believe in.
The top two items from Google news “global warming” search today.  The distribution of all stories through the first few search pages was similar in makeup as seen below:


The Tech Herald
A Cooling Trend Toward Global Warming
The New American – ‎1 hour ago‎
With the election of a president who is solidly in the global-warming-alarmist camp – and with many high-level appointees who are bona fide climate-change
Global warming and climate change: facts and hype Examiner.com
UN global warming stand criticized Delta Farm Press
UN Con on Global Warming Nearly Foiled NewsMax.com
Opposing Views – Atlanta Journal Constitution
all 36 news articles »

New York Times
House Democrats release draft energy, climate bill
New York Times – ‎8 hours ago‎
By DARREN SAMUELSOHN AND BEN GEMAN, Greenwire Democratic leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee today unveiled a 648-page draft global warming
House Democrats unveil sweeping plan to reshape energy in America MiamiHerald.com
Waxman’s clean energy draft includes cap-and-trade proposals Oil & Gas Journal
US lawmakers present draft bill on ‘clean energy’ AFP
iBerkshires.com

About these ads
This entry was posted in Climate_change, media. Bookmark the permalink.

133 Responses to Tipping Point In The Media

  1. twawki says:

    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

  2. Jack says:

    Thanks for a very encouraging article. I sense for the first time that the end is nigh for the “greatest scientific scam in history”. We just need one major MSM organisation to opt for the truth. Then we will be at the beginning of the end of this pernicious movement.

    Best wishes

    Jack

  3. Anaconda says:

    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.

  4. Jon Jewett says:

    May God Bless the Great State of Texas,
    these United States,
    and Anthony Watts!

    Steamboat JackMaybe

  5. crosspatch says:

    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.

  6. tokyoboy says:

    I sincerely hope this is never a joke on the April Fool’s Day!

  7. bfwebster says:

    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..

  8. Leon Brozyna says:

    Well, so much for the idea that hype sells.

    They pushed and pushed, and shoved and shoved, and kept raising the shrillness of their message.

    I suspect that people are responding the way I respond when someone tries to rush me into a course of action without allowing me time to consider my actions — someone’s trying to slip something past me and I don’t take too kindly to that.

  9. AEGeneral says:

    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.

  10. Just Want Truth... says:

    AGW believers must act now or irreversible damage will be done to their side!!! AAHHHH!!!

  11. Chuck says:

    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.

  12. Robert Bateman says:

    People I know are shaking thier heads over this global warming stuff. It’s the joke of the year. Crying wolf has given way to blaming everything on global warming, and that’s how the joke goes.
    Expecting a January snow level of 1500 feet next Monday, April 6th.
    It warmed up twice here today, in No. Ca, but each time the icy winds returned and put a big global warming chill on Spring.

  13. DaveCF says:

    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.

  14. Corky Boyd says:

    I recently posted two items on my blog that threw doubt on the conventional global warming metric. Both were documented with NOAA or NOAA/Canadian Ice Services graphics that hadn’t been circulated on the climate blogs. Both were picked up by IceAgeNow and I had an instant, massive increase in his. The first was about three of the Great Lakes freezing over and the second challenging Obama’s intimations that the Red River flooding was caused by global warming. Both were tagged with the keyword, Global Cooling.

    The response was workdwide. I was linked by several other sites including a Jeff Jacoby article in the Boston Globe. There were French and Spanish translations of my and Jacoby’s articles.

    My advice: If you want a high volume blog, do some digging about Global Cooling. There is an overwhelming hunger for these articles that have been suppressed in the MSM. That ‘s the reason WattsUp has had such a growth in readership. Some day, if it’s not too late, the MSM will provide the news readers are hungry for not the agenda they think we should be fed.

    That’s the reason for Fox News’s success and the decline of newpapaers and network news. They would rather die delivering propoganda , than live with the truth. Very sad!

  15. Steven Goddard says:

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

  16. Many of the Main Stream Media Corporations are bankrupt, or getting there soon, and whatever pronouncements/fads they embrace these days are becoming increasingly irrelevant to the public.

    I believe we are participating in the up and coming MSM right here, now, folks, at least the part that pertains to climate issues. Outstanding work, Mr. Watts. Participatory news media is undoubtedly the future, and thank goodness for that. Now, if we could just somehow extend the idea to federal and state government. Blog your reps!

  17. Mark N says:

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

  18. Graeme Rodaughan says:

    DaveCF (21:21:00) :

    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.

    Might as well call them “Federal Motors” they will be owned by the US Federal Government…

  19. Brian in Alaska says:

    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…

  20. Lance says:

    A good tipping point, all depends on a great fulcrum! Hehe!

    A wedge of understandable data, influenced by the size of good tipping!

    We should not be held accountable for a bad fulcrum tipping point. : p

  21. John F. Hultquist says:

    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.

  22. J.Hansford says:

    Good stuff…. But I’ll be much happier when opinion turns to action… When our Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, tears up his policies that will implement an Emissions Trading Scheme.

    When he does that. I will know that sanity reigns once more.

  23. Michael says:

    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

  24. vg says:

    New Scientist still published a complete farcical one this week. Apparently the whole artic is melting…LOL. I Don’t read this magazine anymore

  25. Just Want Truth... says:

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

  26. GeoS says:

    Mark N (21:44:53) :
    It`s the following I’d like to see change:
    The Economist
    New Scientist
    Nature

    I remember the Economist with pleasure when it championed Bjorn Lomborg and his Skeptical Environment book, while the other, so called, high class journals participated in a shameful campaign of denigration. I believe shortly after, the editor was replaced and sadly the Economist joined the rest of the bunch.

  27. 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!

  28. Cold Play says:

    Sad I know.

    A few years ago I would type in the Google search boxy thingy “Global warming myths and would get Robert Carter and other rationaist. In the uk the met office and local authorities had headlines or articles such as The ten myths of Global Warming and these then started coming up.

    I have just tried Global Warming Myths and the majority are no longer supporters of global warming theory.

    So is it the argument is being won or has Google done something with their search engine to filter out.

    Who can tell?

  29. David Porter says:

    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!

  30. Boudu says:

    Sir Nicholas Stern, billed as a ‘climate change guru’ was on BBC Radio Five yesterday, one of the UK’s most listened to stations. I was expecting the usual and predictable responses from emailers to the show but was pleasantly surprised and encouraged. Of the ten or so listeners views that were read out, only two were pro AGW. One from an eighteen year old girl who blamed ‘men’ for the planet’s woes and one other brief comment, again from a woman.

    All the other contributions were from seemingly informed individuals (all male if that has any bearing) who called Stern out on his proclamations. Stern’s repeated response was to say “They obviously don’t understand the science, if only they were to look at the data. . . things are going to get really bad . . . have to do something now before it’s too late . . .” Obviously I paraphrase.

    The point is that the AGW proponents were easily outnumbered by skeptics. Something I’ve not seen, or heard before on UK MSM. Encouraging.

    The programme is available as a podcast on bbc.co.uk/radio – look for Simon Mayo’s show on Five Live.

  31. Michael T says:

    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

  32. Adam Gallon says:

    Unreal Climate is jumping up & down about this, how 97% of scientists believe in AGW, but a mere 58% of the public do. The rest are “Scientifically Illiterate”.
    I did put in my ha’porth and I think I may now be on their black list!
    Apparently the “Denialists’ PR machine” is responsible for this public ignorance, but thankfully there’s the wonder that is Al Gore standing out as a beacon of truth & probity to guide the ignorant towards the light of truth.
    The good Dr Schmidt seems to find it incredible that anyone disbelieves the output of the IPCC.

  33. Rhys Jaggar says:

    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?

  34. Graeme Rodaughan says:

    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.

  35. Graeme Rodaughan says:

    Giving the BBCs board has committed the BBC to being an AGW propaganda outfit in contradiction to the organisations own charter – I would expect them to be the last to jump ship.

    Perhaps even heads will roll (figuratively).

  36. Aron says:

    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.”

  37. Aron says:

    I thought this must have been an April Fools

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7968745.stm

    “We have seen winter becoming drier and drier in the last three or four years, but this year has set the record”
    Nirmal Rajbhandari
    Department of Hydrology and Meteorology

    Why doesn’t the BBC and Rajbhandari understand that the dry Nepalese winter was from a lack of precipitation caused by global cooling, not warming?

  38. RoyfOMR says:

    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

  39. schnurrp says:

    Aron (02:28:26) :

    Cute…’runaway’ ACD.

  40. Apophatic1 says:

    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?

  41. PHE says:

    I find the similarities between the ‘case for WMD’ and the ‘case for AGW’ amazing. One main difference was that only in USA and UK were the WMD sceptics in the minority. In both cases I became sceptical by first having an open mind, but reading the evidence for myself, and judging the plausibility.
    – Change of name: (i) from ‘chemical weapons’ to ‘weapons of mass distruction’. This would allow the gullable to think this included nuclear weapons. (ii) from ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’
    – “The experts all agree”. Any sceptics have an agenda (i) lefty pacifists who will have “blood on their hands” (ii) right wing anti-environmentalist deniers
    – propaganda. If you know you are right, its ok to use fear and extreme examples in order to get the public to agree with you.
    – From time to time, I have self-doubt due to the bombardment of conviction from the media and politicians. The fact that my scepticism was proven more than 100% correct with WMD gives me great confidence now.
    – The gradual dawning of the truth (i) failure of weapons inspections in Iraq to find ANYTHING (ii) the tipping of the balance for AGW as reported here
    – the growing desperation of the faithful (i) Blair and Bush saying ‘we just need a little more time’ (ii) AGWers saying ‘we just need a bit more time before we seen temperatures start to rise again.
    – and to come? (i) motive changed from stopping WMD to ‘regime change’. What ever the ‘case for war’, it was right to get rid of Saddam (ii) what the AGWers will say is that ‘global warming’ is being overtaken by ‘global dimming’ (from China, India’s industrialisation, etc), and thus we are still to blame, and its still due to over-zealous industrialisation.
    – If really stuck, they will blame the ‘experts’ for getting it wrong. We need to review how data were processed and ‘make sure this never happens agains’.

  42. RoyfOMR says:

    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

  43. smile4me2222 says:

    “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). ”

    I agree. Also, organizations like the NAS and the IPCC (and their constituents) will claim that they were skeptical all along and simply presenting valid concerns. If you look carefully at what they are saying now, there is plenty of wiggle room in their statements.

  44. Pierre Gosselin says:

    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.

  45. Pierre Gosselin says:

    Schnurpp,
    I expect a lightweight El Nino this year, followed by a moderate La Nina. That is, some warming, but then another cooling like in 2008. In general – a cooling trend.

  46. Pierre Gosselin says:

    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…

  47. Don Fleming says:

    Aron: I’m still laughing. ACD…brilliant.

  48. Frank K. says:

    Aron (02:28:26) :

    Aron – thanks! That was really funny, and quite appropriate for April 1 :^)

    I guess I better not run that marathon I signed up for in May – imagine what effect THAT will have on the ACD…

  49. 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.

  50. Pamela Gray says:

    I see a tipping point on fishing and oceanic oscillations happening too. Interesting reason: from the 50’s on, fishermen started keeping track of wind, salinity, water temperature, weather pattern conditions, water layering, etc because they noticed a pattern of fish numbers tied to these parameters. Early on the industry did studies about this relationship inside Universities that catered to marine and agricultural business (which many did back then, such as Oregon State University). Then global warming turned the discussion away from the coupled observations and started screaming wolf that the impending global warming would disrupt this pattern. However, I am beginning to see a new interest in the extensive records these fishermen maintained. From the longer term data available, they can study multiple variables over multiple oscillations. While it may not answer the question of whether or not global warming can halt the cycles, it does theorize, based on the data analysis, that fish stock coincide with oceanic oscillations and not fishing practices. There is even a study out now that tags elk populations and mortality to PDO, not elk populations and mortality by hunting. Again, these are records that go back quite some decades and provide a rich data pool for further studies.

  51. James Chamberlain says:

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

  52. pyromancer76 says:

    Steven Goddard, thanks for the time and effort in doing this research — in addition to everything else. We — readers of WUWT — can begin to have some sense of a positive way forward if we remain true to the science. Something like old-fashioned truth and justice.

    I know, we have a long way to go and a tough row to hoe if we are to help stop the $900 billion (if I have my numbers right) nonsense of the cap-and-trade tax which Totus Obama plans to use pay for the massive debt he has helped create and and will continue to grow through his policies. There is absolutely no science that proves any relationship of CO2 production to worrisome climate change. In fact, CO2 might add a tad of warming to a cooling planet and a quiet sun. It will help crops grow. And there is no hope for productivity in this budget filled with massive taxation.

    And to John F. Hultquist (22:06:52) :

    “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.”

    A great idea.

    I plan to write to Kurt Gottfried and Harold Varmus, editorial writers in Science Magazine, March 20 2009: “Recently…the precepts of the Enlightenment were ignored and even disdained with respect to the manner in which science was used in the nation’s governance. Dogma took precedence over evidence, and opinion over facts. Happily, as was made clear by two policy announcements by President Barack Obama on 9 March 2009, the break in the traditionally harmonious relationship between science and government is now ending.”

    Can you believe this statement!?! Whose payroll are they on? Will they hold Obama responsible for policies based on science?

  53. Neil Craig says:

    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).

  54. Joseph says:

    Thanks for pointing out this “tipping point” Steven, but does it really make any difference?

    Obama’s budget is wholly and completely dependent upon carbon cap-and-trade. He has bought into this nonsense hook, line and sinker, for whatever reason. He has made AGW federal policy. Regardless of the evidence that accumulates to the contrary, or the proportion of people that disagree with it, or any lawsuits that might arise, we are stuck with this AGW lunacy for at least the next four to ~shudder~ eight years and it is going to hurt us. The possibility of Obama doing an about-face and changing his position on this issue is zero.

    This is a really sad time for our society. I don’t know whether to be angry, embarrassed or ashamed. We are supposed to be getting smarter, not dumber. Makes me consider that cabin way up in the mountains all the more.

  55. An Inquirer says:

    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.

  56. chris y says:

    This is part of what I wrote in a letter to the editor of our local paper about 2 months ago. It was published without editing.

    “The Carbon Pyramid

    The threat of man-made global warming is based on the working hypothesis that increasing atmospheric CO2 concentrations will drive up global surface temperatures at supernatural rates, perhaps reaching climate tipping points that will result in catastrophic, irreversible changes to Earth’s biosphere. This unconfirmed hypothesis is the tip of a colossal inverted carbon pyramid. The pyramid contains billions in research funds for scientists to study ‘settled science’, millions of ‘green’ jobs, thousands of political appointees and staff salaries, carbon market traders, carbon offsetters and doomsday prophets.

    The problem with an inverted pyramid, of course, is its inherent instability. If the pyramidal tip’s hypothesis should ever come into question, the entire structure crumbles. This is the tipping point about which climate alarmists should be acutely concerned. A principle function for AGW ‘pre-cogs’ involves buttressing the pyramid’s apex, no matter how comical the claim.

    And so the endless climate calamity claims continue, although many are soon dust-binned by observations and corrections to poor scientific method….

    The global warming inverted pyramid is dangerously close to a tipping point that should spell its demise. This is partly due to a small cadre of respected scientists who, in the face of scandalous behavior by their peers, continue to participate in the scientific process. It is also partly due to an extraordinarily long solar cycle 23 and a likely weak pair of upcoming solar cycles 24 and 25. Coupled with a recent swing to cooler oceanic cycles, the likelihood of a major volcanic eruption, and a weak solar magnetic field allowing higher cosmic ray fluxes to impact Earth and likely create more low-level clouds, the globe could experience significant cooling over the next 25 years.

    I for one hope the inverted carbon pyramid collapses before more damage is wrought on our economy and on the health of more than a billion people worldwide who today lack clean water, sanitation, medications, food, affordable energy and education.”

  57. Robinson says:

    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.

  58. AnonyMoose says:

    It’s not necessary to do daily news searches. Use RSS gadgets on iGoogle and use iGoogle when you search on Google (if you have a Gmail account use that to log in). So whenever you start a search, you have recent headlines presented.

    Go to Google News and do searches for “global warming” and “global cooling” and click on the RSS icons (orange dot with two arcs) to add those to iGoogle… if your browser has configured for Google iGoogle/Google Reader feeds.

    And click on the RSS icon at the top of the WUWT home page to add this RSS feed too.

  59. Thanks Steven!
    Here the link again: http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech-mainmenu-30/environment/942
    Nevertheless this issue, from the beginnig I guess, was not a science issue and the masterminds of this new armageddon must be anxious to fulfill its goal: They are the ones, the liberators, the most reamarkable specimens of humanity!…really, the undertakers of civilization.

  60. Tom says:

    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.

  61. Shane says:

    Sorry to burst a baloon.

    I took a look at the link to the search results and three of the first six were certainly Anti AGW, … Gore admits hoax, Vail not warming, Nobel committe withdraws prize from Gore…

    but

    Have you looked at the date.

    I suggest you rerun the analysis tomorrow April 2nd.

    S

  62. Pragmatic says:

    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.

  63. Roger Knights says:

    OT: “EU Carbon Emissions Likely Fell Less Than Expected”

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ase.G2_vUyJw&refer=home

  64. Retired Engineer says:

    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?

  65. William R says:

    “Chuck (21:11:56) :

    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.”

    This is exactly right. The trend he identified is by no means a reduction in alarmist rhetoric in the media, but instead a shift away from the term “Global Warming” to “Climate Change” by those who seek to link anything and everything to the CO2 boogieman.

  66. Aron says:

    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.

  67. Arn Riewe says:

    Aron (02:39:17) :

    Aron, don’t you get it! That’s why it’s now “climate change” No need to specify which direction is up anymore. Up is down, down is up… it’s all caused by “climate change”.

  68. Wondering Aloud says:

    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.

  69. walshamatic says:

    “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/

  70. Matt Dernoga says:

    looks like one of the college writers has finally caught on to this being a Hoax

    http://madrad2002.wordpress.com/2009/04/01/why-i-hate-the-environment/

  71. Ron de Haan says:

    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

  72. Aron:
    You are right again. The story about india it is perfectly applicable to my country Peru, in the 50´s there were thousands if not millions of poor people migrating to the capital, invading state owned lands to build their homes and their future, at the beginning formed only shanty towns. Those thousand of families, with a lot of children, against all odds and family planners´theories, those children in particular, became entrepeneurs, now owners of really big industries.That is why last year Peru´s GDP grew 9.84%, but a GDP so diversified that we still do not feel any crisis whatsoever.
    This is the teaching of the hard working human race to those self indulging feeble minders who pretend to rule the world, impose the people the ideologies of a lunatics´asylum. These grown up kids, never knew, as you say, what decent work and effort is all about.
    These ideologies were already tested, in the jungles of Cambodia, when the Khmer Rouge sent millions to death.

  73. Mike T says:

    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.

  74. juan says:

    “David Porter:
    Either that or I’m paranoid. Could be the latter!”

    Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you….

  75. Adam from Kansas says:

    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.

  76. Roger Sowell says:

    Apparently California’s consultants have not yet got the word that the sea is not rising, the ice is not melting, and the global air temperature is decreasing.

    Furthermore, anything California does or does not do is a drop in the bucket, so to speak. Even if California used zero energy and emitted zero carbon dioxide, the impact on the world would be less than 2 percent. Reducing California’s carbon output by 30 percent, as AB 32 requires, will have an even smaller effect (roughly 0.6 percent in the world).

    The CAT (Climate Action Team) issued a report predicting dire consequences from Global Warming, and urges great counter-measures. (see link below)

    A quote:

    “The Climate Action Team plays an essential role in the implementation of the state’s climate initiatives and is guided by these important technical studies to ensure policy decisions are based on sound science,” said Linda Adams, Secretary for Environmental Protection and Chair of the state’s CAT. “Any delay in fighting global warming would be detrimental to our economic stability – costing us billions of dollars and dampening the state’s most important economic sectors. Taking immediate action on climate change is essential to slow the projected rate of warming. We also need to make smarter decisions in order to anticipate and adapt to the changes.”

    This is what we have to deal with in California…and soon nation-wide when Obama gets his way.

    http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/550677/

  77. Anybody have some spare time to go blogging:

    http://www.journalismjobs.com/Job_Listing.cfm?JobID=1039695

    “In October 2008, Change.org launched a blog network for social issues that has grown to more than 1 million monthly visitors and 20 bloggers in its first 6 months. The Managing Editor’s role will be to take Change.org’s content strategy to the next level — significantly expanding our team of bloggers, defining the site’s editorial voice, and building Change.org into the leading destination online for issue-based news, commentary, and action.”

  78. Aron says:

    I’ll say this from experience. India still has a very slow moving and corrupt bureaucracy but its population has more liberty than the people do in the US and UK. They also have a free market that put us to shame. The only obstacle I found there is that you have to give a little cash under the table to get things done other bureaucrats and form fillers don’t move a finger. But on the bright side hardly anyone pays taxes as they also bribe the taxman :)

  79. Mark T says:

    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

  80. H.R. says:

    @Tom in Texas (10:12:37) :

    “Golf War”?

    Yeah. We beat ‘em 3 & 2. The MSM didn’t report it, natch.

  81. E.M.Smith says:

    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

    The gubmint is about 80% ownership now (per the above estimate). I expect by the time they are done they will bankrupt the common stock leaving all ownership in the preferred stock, so that the Gov owns it all.

    The suggestion it so call them Government Motors (so GM still works ;-)

    There is a proposal for GM to hand over $10B in preferred stock to the retirees to pay off the health care debts. I could see that happening too… the workers do need to own the means of production, after all…

    Do not buy GM common. Do not buy GM preferred. You do not ever want the government as your business partner (but especially so now that they have decided to ignore contract law and want socialization of the means of production…)

    Buy a GM car? I’ll leave that to your preferences but only note that if you want service on that car, government run services are not known for their, um, quality and speed…

    IMHO, the best car company stocks, more or less in order, are: TM HMC (up over 9% today and running up off a bottom) F with an honorable mention for Daimler (DAI), BMW (BAMXY), VW (VALKY), and FUJHY (Fuji Heavy that also makes Subaru, up 8% today in a rising trend!) but the German stocks are sometimes thinly traded in the U.S.A. and can be tough trades.

    DISCLOSURE: I have positions in FUJHY, F and TTM (also up 8% today – owns Jaguar since F sold it to them – an India car maker up off a bottom; nice long term investment gamble on 3rd world growth).

    Just don’t ever ever own an airline or be partners with the government in the common stock…

  82. E.M.Smith says:

    Starting with “Um, you are” in the last posting from me is mine (it’s easy to type so fast that the / before the i> gets left out and the whole thing stays italics…)

  83. David Porter says:

    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.

  84. maz2 says:

    Exposed: Earth Hour defeated.

    The intimidation/greenmail tactics of the AGW Church.

    >>> “Signing up to the Charter had been necessary if the town wanted to receive grant money.”

    “the revelation that some councillors do not accept an anthropogenic cause for global warming contradicts the town’s previously stated position on the subject.”.

    …-
    Headline:

    “The Town of Smithers decided to stop the clock on Earth Hour this year.

    In a Committee of the Whole session last week, councillors were divided over a proposal to endorse a one-hour power cut off on the weekend. The motion was narrowly defeated.

    One of the main sticking points in the proposal was the reference to global warming, two words that ruffled the feathers of a few councillors. Council was also required to sign up to the animal-activist group World Wildlife Fund’s website.

    Observing Earth Hour wasn’t itself especially controversial. But councillors balked at registering with the WWF.”
    http://www.bclocalnews.com/bc_north/interior-news/news/42161922.html

  85. Graeme Rodaughan says:

    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.

  86. Dave Wendt says:

    I’d say the tipping point was reached when Obama and his leftist cronies took over and it suddenly became all too apparent what the plan was all along. For years AGW was wrapped in feel good environmentalism, change your light bulbs, buy that Prius, recycle those cans, etc. There was no real price to pay for believing the propaganda. Now the wider public is being forced to recognize that the price for this will not be paid by just Big Oil and the evil corporations, but by each and every one of us, in incredible losses to our liberty and prosperity. The prospect of sacrificing their and their children’s future to save some guy drinking Appletinis on the patio of his beachfront mansion in Florida in 2088 from getting his ankles wet is providing a bracing hit of reality. I only hope that it has not come to late.

  87. Roger Sowell says:

    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.

  88. E.M.Smith says:

    Roger Sowell (11:58:31) : The CAT (Climate Action Team) issued a report predicting dire consequences from Global Warming, and urges great counter-measures. [...]
    A quote: “Any delay in fighting global warming would be detrimental to our economic stability – costing us billions of dollars and dampening the state’s most important economic sectors.

    Contrast with:

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/02/27/financial/f112511S11.DTL

    “(02-27) 18:54 PST SACRAMENTO, (AP) —

    California’s unemployment rate jumped to 10.1 percent in January, the state’s first double-digit jobless reading in a quarter-century.

    The jobless rate announced Friday by the state Employment Development Department represents an increase from the revised figure of 8.7 percent in December. It also is 2.5 percentage points higher than the national jobless rate in January of 7.6 percent.

    I mentioned the 10% unemployment rate to a friend who informed me that the latest report is 11% and rising…

    I suspect that CAT (and CARB and others) will meet their reduction goals for CO2 and related gasses – but not the way they were expecting…

    Tax beatings will continue until morale improves and business returns…

    That they don’t see the present crisis and think that raising sales tax to 10% (as has been done) while punishing anyone who dares to try to run a business, yet somehow think doubling or tripling the cost of fuel and electricity will somehow cause economic recovery; it just boggles the mind.

    “Intelligence is limited, but stupidity knows no bounds. – emsmith”

    I’m betting on 14% unemployment before long. Not sure if we will reach 20% before folks start revolting. Figure about the time the State can’t borrow the money for the next unemployment / welfare checks the SHTF.

    http://www.sacbee.com/103/story/1296762.html

    says they were running out last October and it must be worse now…

    (Presently doing research on Belize but wondering about a low laying tropical island in the Pacific “threatened” with inundation from sea level rise — ought to be cheap…)

  89. Ross says:

    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.

  90. E.M.Smith says:

    Mark T (12:25:59) : 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?

    Partly it is the dominance of the cities over the rural. The Central Valley of California would like nothing better than to split off and toss SF into the sea (or let LA go to lala land) but is outvoted. Small power blocks control the cities, and those tilt the whole thing (see Pelosi and her secure district with unlimited seniority as an example).

    Similarly, the huge area of San Bernardino county that is inland is flat out dominated by the tiny corner in the urban metroplex (despite desires to leave…), so that whole county stays ‘liberal’. At a micro scale, this repeats within voting districts so as to effectively disenfranchise enough of the conservatives to assure a workers paradise…

    Are people just leaving?

    Yes. Though it takes a few years for any one family to decide to up root and leave. Of my Dads family (3 siblings & me) born in California to a Dad from Iowa and a Mom from England: 2 are in Nevada now, one is preparing to retire on a State of California pension – she had the good sense to get on the gravy train early ;-) and I’m looking for what to do in the next 1 to 2 years as my kids finish up school. (One is on a full ride state scholarship; at least as long as I don’t earn too much money – I learned to get on the gravy train later; though I’m younger so I have an excuse…) If you can’t beat it; use it until it breaks. Parasite or bloodless corpse, you choose…

    Aren’t they trying to vote this [snip] down?

    Some of us thought that maybe the pseudo-Republican might do some good. Wasn’t much of a choice available. Look! The Republicrat won! You had a choice! Yeah, right. Why I’m a registered independent…

    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. ;)

    And that is the problem in a nutshell. One could say, literally and figuratively, that: In California the Republicans are in bed with the Democrats at the expense of the people.

    I don’t expect it to get fixed until it is completely and irretrievably broken. Folks will act from their bigotries and preconceptions until forced to change by unmitigated and undeniable disaster. I give it 1/2 way through the next Governor’s term. (i.e. when it’s clearly not Bush, not AahNold -who will be out by then, AND TheNewGuy has had unemployment hit 15%+ with no end in sight and nobody willing to buy another California Welfare Bond… Basically when we’re out of jobs, out of taxes, and completely out of credit card to charge more welfare…)

    At least, my 2 years and gone schedule sure hopes and depends on the wheels not coming off for another 2 years! In the next 2 years, as well, I will be strongly encouraging my kids to take their California University degrees and head for greener pastures… No reason from them to pick up the $40B and rising tab here…

  91. Graeme Rodaughan says:

    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.

  92. John Galt says:

    Here’s one good thing to come from the current world-wide economic crisis — people are worried about just making a living and that makes them pay attention to the frightening economics of AGW as well as the inadequate science.

    Skeptics are now being heard. Sure, the mainstream media is still on the AGW bandwagon, but who listens to/reads/watches them anymore? The media has blindly endorsed the left-wing progressive agenda and the public has responded by going elsewhere for news and information.

  93. E.M.Smith says:

    E.M.Smith (15:16:19) :
    Mark T (12:25:59) : Are people just leaving?

    Yes. Though it takes a few years [...] has had unemployment hit 15%+ with no end in sight

    Just heard on CNBC that the housing report showed home sales up (in some cases up double digit percents) in the whole country… except the West (i.e. California / Las Vegas…) due to: Job Loss.

    Home sales down about another 14% in California IIRC…

    Gee. No jobs due to business leaving the state, leading to a collapsing economy. Wonder why… (And yes, I am certain that the Powers That Be really do wonder why and have no clue…)

    “Tax beatings will continue until business morale improves. – emsmith”

    Latest round is the announcement of an increase to around 10% sales tax rate (if varies as different places add local bits).

    Wonder when the California media will reach a tipping point…

  94. Melody says:

    I have a question; just who was it that determined what the ‘normal’ temperature of the ‘earth’ should be?

    Just say ‘aaahhh’, as they stick the thermometer in a volcano.

    Wake up America, before you willingly give up more of your rights for another crisis that does not exist.
    Melody Scalley
    http://www.melodyscalley.wordpress.com

  95. Roger Sowell says:

    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….”

  96. Smokey says:

    Roger Sowell,

    You just don’t understand what Arnold is saying. Here he explains exactly how green energy will help balance the budget and create sustainable jobs: click

  97. George Bruce says:

    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.

  98. Rhyl Dearden says:

    Gordon Brown and Kevin Rudd are calling for ‘agreement’ at the G20 and still blaming the climate change as part of the world economic problem.

    I guess it is because when it all goes wrong they will not be blamed individually.

  99. Mike Bryant says:

    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

  100. Roger Sowell says:

    Mike Bryant,

    Awww…now why’d ya go and do that?!!! I get homesick enough just thinking about…real BBQ…real Tex Mex…Blue Bell (homemade vanilla, of course)…sopapillas…bluebonnet fields…people that sound like me, no accent …

    I’m on my way, just as fast as I can get there…coming HOME!

    Reply: Oooooh Luna de Noche ~ charles the moderator y’all

  101. Mike Bryant says:

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

  102. Roger Sowell says:

    Charles and Mike Bryant,

    Actually, I had this in mind for the Tex Mex:

    http://www.joets.com/

    The best, by far. (IMHO, of course!)

  103. evanmjones says:

    The only obstacle I found there is that you have to give a little cash under the table to get things done

    I’ll scratch your bakshish if you’ll scratch mine . . .

  104. Mike Bryant says:

    Texas?? nahhhhh

  105. Keith Minto says:

    “: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)

  106. James P says:

    From the Times piece (about the NYT article) – very nicely put, IMHO:

    “The article inside revealed that Professor Dyson – 85 years old and based in Princeton – not only possesses one of the finest noodles on Planet Earth, but also happens to think that most of what Al Gore and his band of Unmerry Men preach amounts to little more than yuppie self-loathing.”

  107. Aron says:

    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.

  108. nelsonleith says:

    Well, garsh, if’n it’s good enough for the internets, it’s good enough for me!

    I wonder what other Google searches would turn up split decisions between skeptics and believers… God? 9/11? Vaccinations? The Holocaust? The Chupacabra? Women make 78 cents on the dollar for the same work? John McCain’s POW record? Obama is a Muslim? The 2000 and 2004 elections?

    If this is the sort of “evidence” this side of the debate thinks is valid…

    By the way “The New American” may show up in Google’s news search, but it’s an explicit advocacy publication of the John Birch Society, not journalism.

  109. 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.

  110. 3x2 says:

    Aron (02:04:28) :

    Check this:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot….

    I see a problem here. Every time someone posts a link to “george” from here and somebody else follows it “george” gets a hit. The more hits “george” gets the more validated he feels and the happier his handlers are.

    Looking at the site stats for WUWT, “george” could be getting up to 1 1/2M hits a month just from this site alone. We are helping keep him and the Guardian in business.

    I for one am not giving him any more encouragement. It isn’t as though there are any surprises in store when you get over there.

  111. maz2 says:

    Canadian MSM front page/top-of-the-fold headlines.
    See National Post*, Ottawa Citizen**.

    The AGW fraud is exposed.
    Round up the AGW fraudsters.
    …-

    “Climate change not all man-made, report says

    Cites Natural Causes

    Tom Spears, Canwest News Service Published: Thursday, April 02, 2009″
    *urlm.in/cali
    …-

    “Nature, not just man, to blame for global warming: scientists
    By Tom Spears, The Ottawa Citizen”
    **urlm.in/calj

    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/011123.html#comments

  112. Jari says:

    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?

  113. Mike Strong says:

    RE: Debating skeptics versus pro-AGWers and the media tipping point.

    So, from Wiki here is the synopsis of the Chicken Little story with some inserted comments and slight modification:

    There are many versions of the story, but the basic premise is that a chicken eats lunch one day, and believes the sky is falling down because an acorn falls on her head (such as low Arctic Ice in 2007). She decides to tell the King (congress, the media and the president), and on her journey meets other animals who join her in the quest. In most retellings, the animals all have rhyming names such as Henny Penny, Cocky Lockey and Goosey Loosey (and Rantin’ Hansen). Finally, they come across Foxy Loxy (portrayed by Al Gore), a fox who offers the chicken and her friends his help.

    After this point, there are many endings. In the most famous one, Foxy Loxy eats the chicken’s friends (oh my, watch out James!), but the last one, usually Cocky Lockey, survives long enough to warn the chicken and she escapes (moves on to re-invent the internet with IPv7).

    Other endings include Foxy eating them all (or) the characters being saved by a squirrel or an owl and getting to speak to the King (who raises their taxes to prepare for the worst case scenario). One version in which the sky actually falls and kills Foxy Loxy (I don’t advocate this for Al Gore, it’s only a fairy tale).

    Depending on the version, the moral changes. In the “happy ending” version, the moral is not to be a “Chicken”, but to have courage (the pro-AGWers). In other versions the moral is usually interpreted to mean “do not believe everything you are told” (the skeptics).

    It could well be a cautionary political tale: The Chicken jumps to a conclusion and whips the populace into mass hysteria, which the unscrupulous fox uses to manipulate them for his own benefit (speaking fees, Nobel Prize, getting to talk to lots of hot looking Hollywood starlets attending lavish fund-raisers).

    The End

  114. Wondering Aloud says:

    nelsonleith (02:32:52)

    Does anyone have any clue what this person is talking about? Perhaps the poster? Unlikely?

  115. Henry Phipps says:

    Mike Bryant (18:55:53) :
    “Brought to you by The Texas Chamber of Commerce”.

    Mike, pardner, you forgot to warm ‘em about Austin. Folks, Austin is to Texas what a “play-date” is to braggin’ rights, no-helmets, sandlot baseball.

    Austin reminds me of Phoenix. And remember, now

    Phoenix is just Minneapolis, pretending it is Los Angeles.

    Henry

  116. Pragmatic says:

    “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?

  117. Ric Werme says:

    Keith Minto (21:57:30) :

    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)

    Pete Seeger. Link worth reading:
    http://www.fortunecity.com/tinpan/parton/2/where.html

  118. Keith Minto says:

    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………”

  119. philincalifornia says:

    Life after the tipping point ??

    From tomorrow’s Guardian no less:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/03/g20-gordon-brown-global-economy

    “The transatlantic compromise between America and Europe led to a jump in shares in London and New York. The FTSE index closed up more than 4% at 4,124.97. The deal won praise from business leaders, as well as anti-poverty campaigners, but dismayed the green lobby with its lack of measures to combat climate change.

    British government officials lost their battle to include a commitment to spend a substantial share of the economic stimulus on low-carbon recovery projects.

    Vague low-carbon language and climate change negotiations in Copenhagen in December were relegated to two paragraphs at the communique’s end.”

  120. Mike Bryant says:

    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.

  121. Pragmatic says:

    philincalifornia (15:51:15) :

    “Vague low-carbon language and climate change negotiations in Copenhagen in December were relegated to two paragraphs at the communique’s end.”

    And why? “Exaggeration leads the coalition of disbelief.”

  122. MikeRoberts says:

    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!)

  123. Jeff Alberts says:

    And Break Out The Woolen Socks (Seattle-Tacoma Area had snow above 500 foot elevation this AM – again!)

    I’m at about 220′ elevation on Whidbey Island, and what I thought was frost this morning was actually a dusting of snow, was gone as soon as the sun hit it.

  124. john kirkham says:

    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.

  125. hotrod says:

    john kirkham (03:28:40) :

    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.

    Populations are a lot like a herd of cattle when stampeded. A single individual or a small group sense a threat and start moving to excape the threat. Others nearby run because the others near them are running. It is hardwired into our genes to when in doubt follow the crowd. It is a survival imperative that dates back to the savanna’s of Africa. Over all it is safer to run 100 times when there is no threat than it is to not run and spend too much time looking for the source of danger. In the case of the stampeding herd they usually do one of two things. They run far enough that they are either exhausted by the effort, or a distance that experience has shown them is far enough to escape most immediate threats then the pause to look around to analyze the threat and if it still exists. Hunters use this behavior to their advantage. A spooked deer will run at top speed a short distance and then frequently pause and look back to determine if they are being pursued or the danger even exists.

    The other response is for the herd to be turned by another perceived threat and begin to circle in on itself and mill aimlessly as no individual is certain where the threat is or if it still exists. They mill anxiously to see if any other individual in the herd is still alarmed and over time they quiet down and assume the threat no longer exists.

    People react the same way when they perceive a danger with some minor differences. In the case of humans if they can they tend to confirm the alarm first before stampeding if the threat is distant or not imminent. If you jump out from behind a bush and startle a small group of people the reaction will be instant avoidance. Each will react instinctively to pull away from the threat. In less imminent and immediate cases they will try to evaluate and catagorize the threat and choose a best response. You see this during large scale emergencies, like tornados or wild fires, where folks first instinct is to turn on the TV to check the news, or call a friend to validate the situation of find a high point to view the oncoming threat to analyze for themselves the threat. In the vidio of the WTC collapse you can see the crowd response as the first tower began to come down. First everyone was fascinated and tried to make sense of it ( in the modern vernacular that would be the WTF phase).

    Then a few individuals decided it was a threat to them and they were not going to stick around and see and they started moving back first tentatively but you could see a herd response develop in a matter of a couple seconds as those who started to retreat got confirming votes from others that also thought it best to retreat. This crowd dynamic is basically a voting process where when a certain number of the group vote to retreat the rest of the group concludes they may know something I should know, and you get a mass decision to wheel and run, first tentatively but it quickly accelerates to a total group response. This is the fight or flight stage of response. Then you have confirmation as small numbers of individuals turn to luck back and re-evaluate the threat. If they quickly resume flight others take that as another vote that the threat is real. If they stop and slow the group begans to interpret that as a negative vote (no threat or we are out of the danger zone). Again as the number of “skeptics” increases the group as a whole continues to tally these negative votes and when some critical mass is achieved the group perceives that the threat is no longer critical and the stop to re-evaluate.

    In my opinion we are just now entering the re-evaluation phase where many have run a short distance from the threat and are beginning to tally up opposing views to confirm if they still need to run.

    Humans also weight these votes based on the perceived threat and the credibility of the votes they see. For example when I was in emergency management we had a joking rule of thumb if you are at an emergency scene and you see the fire fighters running don’t stop to ask them what the problem is, make sure they don’t catch up to you.

    In that scenario the threat vote of a running emergency responder is a highly credible vote that the threat is real. In a similar situation an obviously hysterical child running from the area would elicit a totally different response as their evaluation of the threat would not be given the same weight as the experienced emergency responder.

    We are now seeing that same sort of herd behavior, as for some time the “skeptics” were seen by the crowd as the hysterical child having an inappropriate response. In this case the curious kid that does not run from a threat obvious to an adult. But over time more and more credible votes have been tallied and the crowd is beginning to re-evaluate both the vote count and the credibility of the voters. The AGW votes are losing credibility, as they “protest too much” and are a little too shrill in their warnings of imminent danger. The crowd is tripping its street corner huckster alarm due to this behavior and wondering what that used car salesmen is really trying to sell. Simultaneously they are beginning to increase the crediblity of the votes for the “realists” who are saying the only thing new about the recent climate shifts is the number of folks watch them.

    Based on observation of how these sorts of crisis seem to reach a peak and then fade away, I would peg the shift as underway, and the heard will vote very soon that they have run far enough and that running farther will be more dangerous than not running at all.

    My guess you will see the shift this fall as other priorities like the economy push the AGW agenda off the table.

    Larry

  126. Roger Sowell says:

    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.

  127. Ellie in Belfast says:

    hotrod (09:26:42) :

    I agree with your comments (and Roger’s) but I maintain that many/most politicians know full well that the science is not settled, but will push the AGW agenda for as long as possible because it suits their political aims. What they will begin to do under failing popular support for AGW is to allow concessions that enable us to continue as normal ‘while warming is temporarily stalled’, thereby seeming to care about the people etc. Legislation will be deferred because of economic need without admitting error (and in the hope they can still puch it through later. We can only hope that science will then catch up and we will have solid evidence of the natural variation and the actual (small) contribution of manmade sources.

  128. Mark urbo says:

    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…

Comments are closed.