Cause for alarm?

Why do scientists and news stories blame everything on global warming? Fortune and glory.

Federal Signal Alarm Bell - Click for sound

Guest post By Paul Driessen, Willie Soon, and David R. Legates

We’re often asked, What really causes all these alarms about global warming disasters?

As scientists and policy analysts who’ve studied our ever-changing climate for a combined 65 years and attribute the changes primarily to natural forces, we’ve wondered that ourselves and also asked: Why is warming always framed as bad news? Why does so much “research” claim a warmer planet “may” lead to more diarrhea, acne and childhood insomnia, more juvenile delinquency, war, violent crime and prostitution, death of the Loch Ness Monster – and even more Mongolian cows dying from cold weather?

We’re not making this up. In fact, this is just the tip of the proverbial melting iceberg of climate scare stories chronicled at http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm.

Clearly, too much money is being spent on one-sided global warming advocacy cloaked as “research,” not enough on natural causes and adaptation. Despite the best of intentions, too much money can corrupt, or at least skew the science.

As they say, follow the money. Remember Indiana Jones’ immortal words: “Fortune and glory.”

Too many people in government, wealthy foundations and activist groups have decided they know what’s best for us, what kind of energy and economic future we should have, and who should be in charge. They intend to implement those policies – and global warming scare stories are key to achieving that objective. They’re pouring tens of billions of dollars into the effort.

A good example of how research money politicizes science is this May 4 headline: “Carbon dioxide effects on plants increase global warming.” The story enthusiastically reported the results of a science journal paper by Long Cao and Ken Caldeira from the Carnegie Institution. Carbon dioxide is not just making the atmosphere trap more heat, they say. It also enables plants to absorb CO2 more efficiently, so they don’t have to open stomata (pores) in their leaves as much, and they evaporate less water.

That should be good news, as it enables plants to survive better under dry conditions, even in desert areas where they couldn’t before. Any botanist or visitor to CO2science.org knows this. Indeed, hundreds of experiments show how growth, water efficiency and drought resistance of crop and wild plants are enhanced by higher levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide. So more CO2 and better plant growth should be celebrated – not serve as another “climate crisis” to further the political goal of ending hydrocarbon use and controlling our factories, jobs, cars, lives and living standards.

But the Carnegie folks turned this good news into bad, ominously saying the reduced evapotranspiration means plants don’t cool down as much, and that supposedly raises global temperatures slightly.

Equally interesting, the researchers based their findings not on actual experiments, but on yet another computer model that allegedly predicts future temperatures. When they tweaked various assumptions about the physiological effects of CO2, global air temperature over land increased 0.7 degrees F (0.4 deg C) above what supposedly would occur just from doubled CO2 levels directly increasing the greenhouse effect. But just six months earlier, the same authors tweaked the same model differently – and got only 0.2F (0.1 deg C) of additional warming. The authors now say this earlier result is “unrealistic.”

However, what guarantee do we have that the new assumptions are “realistic”? Maybe they are but, face it, there’s far less “fortune and glory,” far less headline grabbing, in a mere 0.2 degrees. It’s also far less “realistic” to expect another research grant, if the first one could only come up with 0.2 degrees of crisis. That’s not even 9:00 versus 9:30 on an average summer morning.

Besides fortune and glory, and more research grants and publications in prestigious journals, there’s also the matter of reputation. Dr. Caldeira, besides being a reputable scientist, is also an advisor to billionaire Bill Gates on renewable energy, and in charge of the $4.5 million in geo-engineering research funding that the Gates Foundation has provided over the past 3 years.

How many climate scientists can rub elbows with Bill Gates? Glory indeed. So 0.7 degrees it is.

Of course, this does not mean more robust plant growth can never be harmful. But does it really take five researchers and six funding sources (including the National Environmental Trust, NSF, NASA and NOAA) to model ragweed under doubled CO2 computer scenarios and conclude, “there may be increases in exposure to allergenic pollen under the present scenarios of global warming”?

All this makes us wonder: Why is it a bad thing that more CO2 helps plants tolerate droughts better and revegetate deserts? Should we cut down more forests, to generate even more cooling than the planet has experienced since 2005? Why do “error corrections” always seem to result in more warming than originally predicted, instead of less? And why do taxpayers have to shell out Big Bucks on this stuff?

The United States alone has been spending some $7 billion a year on “climate change research.” That’s a lot of money. But a majority of Americans now say climate change is due to natural forces, not to human CO2 emissions. To alarmists that means more “research” and “education” on the “climate crisis” is clearly needed – but not more on better oversight of questionable research or studying natural causes.

During a March 2009 closed-door meeting, Department of Energy senior advisor Matthew Rogers outlined his “dilemma” over how to comply with his new mandate to quickly spend $36.7 billion in grants and loan guarantees from the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (aka, the Stimulus Act) on renewable energy and climate change. Today, with only $300 million of our taxpayer money and children’s inheritance left to spend, poor Matt says his “popularity continues to decline.”

Nearly $2.4 million dollars of that Stimulus loot may be funding the latest research by Penn State University Professor Michael Mann, father of Mann-made global warming, the debunked hockey stick temperature graph and many infamous Climategate e-mails. In one new project where Mike is the principal instigator, over a half-million dollars in grant money generated only “0.53” jobs in Pennsylvania. We must have missed the headline “Stimulus Creates Millionaire.”

We’re not suggesting fraud or corruption by Caldeira or anyone else. But we do find it curious that the vast bulk of the money goes to research that consistently discovers more “global warming crises.” We find several other phenomena equally curious.

* In an era when ExxonMobil posts all its grants on its website, and we have the “most transparent government in history,” government agencies, liberal foundations and activist groups jealously guard information on who’s getting how much money from whom, to finance all this crisis-oriented research.

* Universities are fighting attorney-general investigations, and insisting that any investigations into alleged misconduct must be conducted in-house and behind closed doors. Yet they are happy to give Greenpeace fishing-expedition access to emails and work product by climate crisis skeptics.

* Despite insisting that their research and findings are completely honest and above-board, climate alarmists still refuse to share their data, computer codes and methodologies, or discuss and debate their tax-funded work with scientists who might “try and find something wrong with it.”

If we didn’t know better, we’d think the operative rules were: Never seek logical or alternative answers, if you can blame a phenomenon or problem (like decreasing frog populations) on global warming. Do whatever it takes and fund whatever research is needed, to advance the goals of ending hydrocarbon use, increasing government control and “transforming” society. And always include the terms “global warming” or “climate change” in any grant application.

It may not be corruption. But it sure skews the research, conclusions and policy recommendations.

Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org). Willie Soon is an independent scientist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. David Legates is a climatologist at the University of Delaware.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
DirkH

“During a March 2009 closed-door meeting, Department of Energy senior advisor Matthew Rogers outlined his “dilemma” over how to comply with his new mandate to quickly spend $36.7 billion in grants and loan guarantees from the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (aka, the Stimulus Act) on renewable energy and climate change. ”
Easy. Buy a battery-powered Lotus Elise (or “Tesla”) for every official. Or better two. So one can recharge while he/she drives the other.

Enneagram

Too many people in government, wealthy foundations and activist groups have decided they know what’s best for us, what kind of energy and economic future we should have, and who should be in charge..
It all began in the “enlightenment” movement, back in the 18th century: Then, the “Illuminati”(the enlightened ones) separated religion from government…after more than 200 years it became a belief, a religion, with all its paraphernalia, its Archbishops, Bishops, Saints, its “holy inquisition”, etc.
They became what they hated the most!

Neo

I believe that you managed not to mention that “Global Warming” causes dogs and cats to live together.

Al Gore's Holy Hologram

You forgot their magic term for what they are trying to do to us – “behaviour change”.
It’s a Marxist world religion being imposed by elites who never leave home without bodyguards and can’t even go shopping on foot.

Curiousgeorge

Perhaps all the alarmists could be provided with large white sandwich boards to increase albedo, thus helping to cool the planet. No printing on them of course.

Jimbo

“But the Carnegie folks turned this good news into bad, ominously saying the reduced evapotranspiration means plants don’t cool down as much, and that supposedly raises global temperatures slightly.”

Yet more plant growth due to co2 would leads to more (smaller) stomata and evapotranspiration. Note that the biosphere is greening.
—-

“Equally interesting, the researchers based their findings not on actual experiments, but on yet another computer model that allegedly predicts future temperatures.”

Gavin Schmidt and Michael Mann put their names to a document that stated among other things: “Modellers have an inbuilt bias towards forced climate change because the causes and effect are clear.
—–

“It may not be corruption. But it sure skews the research, conclusions and policy recommendations.”

It is corruption of the scientific method and Mann is being investigated for possible fraud by his local prosecutor.

There is one thing I like to say: “Ain’t no news like bad news.” Bad news gets ratings. Why do you think network news stations start with the bad news and end with the good news? If there is any good news. The feel good story is at the end, not the beginning or middle. Cable news are even worse. They have 24 hours to fill and they love a bad story. Someone once told me CNN stands for Constant Negative News. The other cable news stations are just as bad. I can sum up what MSNBC pushes in two words: “Conservatives bad”; I can sum up what Fox News pushes in two words: “Liberals bad”.
It is all about ratings because without ratings, the money is not there. This fact is not lost on scientists. Don Henly had it right in his song Dirty Laundry. There ain’t no news like bad news.

Jimbo

Correction:
“Yet more plant growth due to co2 would lead[s] to more…”

J.Hansford

“They’re pouring tens of billions of dollars into the effort.”
…… Not quite right. They are misappropriating our hard earned tax dollars, is more like it. They never use their own money.
In Australia our Labor government has even included Climate Change spending in the foreign Aid budget. …. Also money for “enviromental programes” gets redirected to climate change groups under the guise of “educating awareness”….. It’s a G’damn rort and the Labor party is happy to oblige.

jack morrow

You can’t have cap and trade without global warming and the disasters that go with it.
You must have cap and trade to fund your policies and pay for spending and get rich.
Boy, these answers are so easy! Hope, change, and something to believe in–November!

4

Amazing piece! This year we have seen in a number of nations that the public is not as stupid as the UN/IPCC would like to believe.

Henry chance

Look for the money. Watch for the dishonesty,
Many of the most dishonest people around rail in regards to how much Big Oil gives money. to the skeptics.
The Nature Conservancy gets 10 million a year from BP.
If the eco terrorists can whine, activate alarms and get this kind of money they will keep sounding the alarms.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/23/AR2010052302164_3.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010052203644
How many of our friends have money from BP? If we triggered fear and sounded the alarms, would we get ca$h?

Logan

The polite style of discourse in the academic and scientific worlds is traditional and appropriate for an abstract discussion. But that is not appropriate in the AGW attack on the West. From time to time, readers new to these issues should be directed to a website such as
http://www.green-agenda.com
to learn the extreme political and philosophical attitudes behind the AGW facade. There is a lot more than grant money for a subculture of professors at stake. The AGW hoax is a deliberate and well-funded attack on all industrial nations and anyone to the right of Karl Marx. Lysenko was a choir boy by comparison.

Brego

In a lot of ways, the Global Warming Hoax reminds me of the witch craze in England and the American colonies during the late 1500’s and early 1600’s.
Back then, everyone “knew” that a witch could not be killed by drowning. It was common knowledge. There was a consensus! And so the dunking chair was employed to test those who had been accused of being a witch.
That continued for quite a while, but the people finally did come to their senses and put a stop to that nonsense. The reason they did was because in local areas the witch accusations were approaching a majority of the population and the people realized that they could not all be witches because that just didn’t make sense. A critical threshold had been breached beyond which the accusations were simply no longer credible.
I think the Global Warming Hoax is rapidly approaching this same threshold, if it has not surpassed it already. The accusations blaming global warming have turned stupid and silly, and are no longer credible.
I think the Global Warming Hoax will end sooner rather than later, undone by its own fervor.

rbateman

“MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW. DECEMBER1898
ARE OUR WINTERS CHANGING’?
By ALFRED J. HENRY.
The frequency and severity of the cold waves that have
visited the soutbern portion of the United States in late
years, and the fact that the present winter season began
much earlier than usual have led a number of people to bake
inquiry as to what are the reasonable expectations for the
future ‘? Is it prolsable that a more or less permanent change
in the character of the winters has taken place? This problem
is important since it involves a possible readjustment
of present economic conditions. It is not new, nor is it any
nearer a clear and definite solution than it was fifty years ago.
According to the trend of the best thought of to-day the climate
is not perceptibly changing. The mean temperatures
obtained by the earliest instrumental observations, both in
this country and abroad, show no differences greater than
might reasonably be due to the character of the instruments
used and their environment.
The impression that the climate is changing is partly due
to the fact that in recent times an account of every severe
frost and freeze that occurs in the South is sent broadcast to
all parts of the country, whereas, during earlier times no record
was preserved except of the very severe freezes. This
very lack of information respecting the earlier minor freezes
prevents us in a measure from asserting in a more positive
manner a rule of climate that appears to be common to all
parts of the United States, viz, that periods of great refrigeration
generally extend over several years.”
And today, with the focus on every thing that can be found to bolster the claim of Global Warming, no matter how trivial, convoluted or isolated, is our weather changing once again?
Or, is the obsessive preoccupation with warming a fatal attraction, whereas the real movement of climate in the populated zones of the Globe are going in exaclty the opposite direction, catching many off-balance?
Yes, I do believe it is an obsession.

Ben U.

It’s not just fortune and glory. The mana compass points are four: power, wealth, glory, and honor. Not bad in themselves, in fact quite nice to have, but liable to corrupt.

Michael

I hear them talking all the time on the CNBC business channel about countries like China going green and fighting climate change. Fighting climate change is a losing battle as the climate has bee changing for millions of years and cannot be stopped. I just want to rip the TV off the wall sometimes. The TV propaganda machine is Earth’s enemy. They must be stopped.

pat

cause for alarm? LOL
20 May: Reuters: UK arrests four more in suspected CO2 tax probe
The HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) investigators also found firearms and large amounts of cash during the early morning raids on seven properties in London and Leicester areas, the agency said in a statement…
In late April, Germany and Britain arrested 25 people in connection with suspected tax evasion in carbon permit trading.
European prosecutors are investigating a suspected 5 billion euro ($6.66 billion) tax evasion in carbon trading across at least 11 countries, under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme.
Raids and other measures have also been carried out in Spain, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Finland, the Netherlands, Portugal, the Czech Republic and Cyprus, prosecutors said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64J53X20100520

tommy

It now also causes UFO sighthings….
“There has been an unusual number of sightings recently.
“Some experts believe it could be linked to global warming and craft from outer space are appearing because they are concerned about what man is doing to this planet.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/2261941/British-UFO-sightings-at-bizarre-levels.html

latitude

“We’re often asked, What really causes all these alarms about global warming disasters?”
Who cares Paul, just encourage them to do more of them.

tommy,
Thank you. I love these stories!
One of my favs was a story from Arizona last year [IIRC] about mysterious lights in the distance. An ex-Air Force officer was quoted as saying, “They were not of this world.” I’ll never forget that quote.
Turns out the lights were air force parachute flares dropped during a practice mission.
And the same page you linked had this:

An equestrian club without horses or stables…

You couldn’t make it up!

pat

good ol’ Alcoa!
22 May: Consulate General of the United States, Shanghai: U.S. Commitment to Environmental Sustainability at Shanghai Expo
Grant from Alcoa Foundation helps make the USA pavilion green
Offsetting of all GHG emissions through the purchase of high-quality carbon offsets that are sourced entirely from China-based carbon offset projects. These offsets will meet the highest international standards (e.g., the Gold Standard or the Climate, Community and Biodiversity Project Design Standards)….
Support for the Commitment. The USA Pavilion’s sustainability initiative is supported through a grant from the Alcoa Foundation, which is committed to addressing climate change inside its operations, across its industry, and within communities worldwide. Implementation of the initiative will be carried out by ICF International (ICF), a leading U.S. climate change, energy, and environment consultancy that has long supported the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in developing the annual U.S. national GHG inventory….
http://www.america.gov/st/energy-english/2010/May/20100522091743abretnuh0.3020703.html?CP.rss=true

George Turner

Reading warmist press releases, you’d think the sun was already expanding into a red giant.
Oddly, if it was they would downplay it because it would be natural instead of human influenced.

Mike H.

And yet Glowball Warming is going down.

Daniel H

“It may not be corruption. But it sure skews the research, conclusions and policy recommendations.”
If squandering billions of taxpayer dollars on distorted scientific research in order to skew public policy and create a perpetual self-sustaining gravy train of political and corporate kickbacks is not corruption — then what the hell is?!

u.k.(us)

pat says:
May 23, 2010 at 7:20 pm
good ol’ Alcoa!
22 May: Consulate General of the United States, Shanghai: U.S. Commitment to Environmental Sustainability at Shanghai Expo
Grant from Alcoa Foundation helps make the USA pavilion green
Offsetting of all GHG emissions through the purchase of high-quality carbon offsets that are sourced entirely from China-based carbon offset projects. These offsets will meet the highest international standards (e.g., the Gold Standard or the Climate, Community and Biodiversity Project Design Standards)….
Support for the Commitment. The USA Pavilion’s sustainability initiative is supported through a grant from the Alcoa Foundation, which is committed to addressing climate change inside its operations, across its industry, and within communities worldwide. Implementation of the initiative will be carried out by ICF International (ICF), a leading U.S. climate change, energy, and environment consultancy that has long supported the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in developing the annual U.S. national GHG inventory….
http://www.america.gov/st/energy-english/2010/May/20100522091743abretnuh0.3020703.html?CP.rss=true
=========================
Wonder how many workers lost their jobs to pay for the Press Release.
Green profits, Green press.
Subsidised by the taxpayer.
(I know, a family blog).

Arno Arrak

All true and deplorable. But why give an out to them with …”We’re not suggesting fraud or corruption by Caldeira or anyone else”…??? I do suggest that the entire case for global warming rests on corruption and scientific fraud. It starts with Hansen’s testimony in 1988 when he claimed that global warming had started and that CO2 we were putting into the air was the cause. He already had a computer projection then showing that 2020 would be one to one and a half degrees warmer than the seventies. This energized the global warming movement and brought us IPCC, Kyoto, and Copenhagen among other things. But satellites have been measuring global temperatures for over thirty years and they simply cannot see that warming that Hansen is talking about. What they do see in this time slot are temperature oscillations, up and down by half a degree for twenty years, but no rise until 1998. That is twenty years after Hansen’s talk. Real warming began with the 1998 super El Nino, not with Hansen’s bogus warming. It was caused by a storm surge in the Indo-Pacific region that dumped a large amount of warm water at the beginning of the equatorial countercurrent near New Guinea. The countercurrent brought it to South America where it ran ashore, spread out, and caused the observed warm peak of the Super El Nino. Its aftermath was the twenty-first century high, a run of six warm years that ended with a La Nina cooling in 2008. Its cause was left-over warm water from the super El Nino. Its average temperature was 0.3 degrees higher than the average of the nineties. This, and not some greenhouse effect, makes the first decade of the century exceptionally warm. And since Hansen’s warming is non-existent and subsequent warming was not carbonaceous we can say that anthropogenic global warming has never been observed. But now comes the real crime: NASA, NOAA, and the Met Office temperature curves all show a “late twentieth century warming” in the eighties and nineties, just as Hansen testified. How is this possible? To find out what is going on I compared their temperature curves with satellite temperature curves. Figures 16, 17 and 20 of “What Warming?” show these comparisons. It turns out that they are all cooked. As in falsified. Lets take the HadCRUT3 from the Met Office and observe what they have done. It has the same resolution as the satellite curve does and the El Nino peaks in both curves can be matched up. They start out by cherry picking the peaks and then raising up the valleys in between to change a horizontal temperature trend into a rising temperature trend. But this works only with the first four El Ninos. The fifth one is out of line and too low for them so it gets raised up. The super El Nino is next and it helps them out but the twenty-first century high is too low for their taste so the entire right side of the curve gets raised up. NASA (Land-Ocean, from Hansen 2006) starts out exactly like Hadcrut3. It almost looks like someone passed out the word to stay with the peaks and adjust the low values as needed. But this works only until 1990 and after that they had to do their own data manipulation. Where HadCRUT3 lifted the curve NASA does not have the nerve to do it and their twenty-first century high is in the right place. NOAA is also in the game and they simply eliminated the low values between peaks and then lifted the right side. This is colossal scientific fraud. Trying to extrapolate this fraudulent warming as the IPCC modelers do will produce nothing but GIGO. And since three organizations are involved it is also a criminal conspiracy. The entire global warming movement rests upon this fake warming but Uncle Sam not only keeps funding it but is taking their policy advice too that will destroy our economy if followed.

jonjermey

Humanity loves apocalyptic scenarios: Why?
1. It makes them feel important — it’s far more exciting and interesting to imagine yourself living in the End Times, rather than in some boring section of ongoing history.
2. It promotes solidarity — like the Blitz in London, people can gather together and draw emotional comfort from their common resentment of everyone else.
3. It allows ‘feel-good’ behaviour — fixing a dripping tap is not just saving on your water bill, it is helping to save the human species from disaster.
What’s the solution? Unfortunately we may have to wait until the real costs of ‘saving the planet from global warming’ start to become apparent to everyone. Once people start saying: ‘Hold on, I’m not doing that!’ then it becomes much easier to convince them how little evidence there is for their other beliefs.

Frank K.

Finally! Someone writes an article which gets right to the heart of the Global Warming Mania, namely the billions in Climate Ca$h being consumed by our friends in the Global Warming Industry – Bravo!
“Clearly, too much money is being spent on one-sided global warming advocacy cloaked as “research,” not enough on natural causes and adaptation. Despite the best of intentions, too much money can corrupt, or at least skew the science.”
And, as someone pointed out above, it’s NOT their money – it’s OUR hard-earned tax money they’re spending like drunken sailors. It irks me to no end to think that 2009 “stimulus” funds were actually dumped into climate “research.”

Enneagram says:

It all began in the “enlightenment” movement, back in the 18th century: Then, the “Illuminati”(the enlightened ones) separated religion from government…after more than 200 years it became a belief, a religion, with all its paraphernalia, its Archbishops, Bishops, Saints, its “holy inquisition”, etc.

I would say it’s more that the science movement attempted separation of knowledge-generation from religious dogma generation. Science (as instituted by RoySoc etc) was supposed to provide knowledge on the authority of its empirical methodology (nothing by word, but by showing, based on experience etc). It was slow to catch on, but especially after WWII, and among all those now educated to high school and above, the authority of science became greater as the authority a centralised state-sanctioned religious dogma declined. The more its power, the more science became exposed to attempts to colonise it for dogmatic authority – to abuse its power. And so, yes, we have corruption of all the types we normally associate with politicised religion.
Power corrupts and the temptation for scientists was great.
I get this real sense that after Hansen gave his ‘99% certainty’ testimony in 1988, sweating in the glorious light of the TV cameras, a lot of climate science folks (including Schneider) thought ‘jeez, he shouldnt have said that!’ but at the same time they where in awe of the power and the glory such a strong statement generated. Where they to give up their chance for a place in the sun? If we were to be nice we could say that those who (consiously or unconsiously) entered the devils bargain, and took the money, playing to the AWG cause…some of the science done under the cover of this cause has been good science. But can we forgive folks for that? Indeed, I find it hard to do so, because they have exploited the hard won reputation of science, ruined it, for their short-lived power and glory.

Wade, May 23, 2010 at 5:49 pm :

The other cable news stations are just as bad. I can sum up what MSNBC pushes in two words: “Conservatives bad”; I can sum up what Fox News pushes in two words: “Liberals bad”.

Hmmm … market forces at work: Fox viewership: UP, CNN/MessNBC viewership DOWN.
You can try and push string (or rope), or you can pull it … which technique suppose works best? Ans: Market forces are RARELY wrong in the long term and yes, you can ‘push’ string but it doesn’t accomplish much …
.
..

Reed Coray

Why do scientists and news stories blame everything on global warming? Fortune and glory.
Because they can.

CRS, Dr.P.H.

…as best I can tell, the origin of “runaway global warming” really took off with Hansen in the 1970’s. He was an astronomy student at University of Iowa and studied the atmosphere of Venus (see related WUWT threads on this topic), and spread great fear that, if we reached a certain tipping point, the Earth would evolve into something drastically different and horrible, Venus-like.
Here’s a recent document by Dr. Hansen:
http://www.mediafire.com/?trm9gnmznde
On Page 22 of 39, Dr. Hansen says:
“The Venus syndrome is the greatest threat to the planet, to humanity’s continued existence.”
AGW crowd have a real problem with their SOCO (single overriding communication objective). Their SOCO changes minute-by-minute…..on some days, it is catastrophic melting & loss of coastal areas, the next it is death of polar bears, then hurricanes etc. etc. Each scenario is more extreme than the next.
They’ve lost the trust and even the interest of the public, and really seem to resent “one man, one vote.” Oh well, tough nails, I hope we can stall off the really drastic economic and geoengineering debacles that many propose. Loss of faith in AGW seems to be a worldwide movement, which is interesting.

Tommy, Smokey,
Re UFO’s
As a teen ager it occured to me that a large ring cut from cardboard and fitted with candle holders could be attached with coat hangers to a large green plastic garbage bag. By lighting the candles and carefully arranging the garbage bag to fill with hot air, one could demonstrate how a hot air baloon works.
I maintain that this was a high school experiment and that I was in no way responsible for reports of large green glowing objects that ranged in size from several meters to “a football field” and which were traveling from “just hovering there” to at least “two hundred miles an hour”. Those were clearly actual UFO’s and had nothing to do with my experiment which escaped ooops I mean had to build all over again because of not having thought of the need for a tether. Never found it, one of the UFO’s probably got it.

DJ Meredith

The alarmists aren’t gonna like this at all!!!
“Death rates in children under 5 are dropping in many countries at a surprisingly fast pace, according to a new report based on data from 187 countries from 1970 to 2010. ”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/24/health/24child.html?src=me
They’re supposed to be dying at a surprisingly fast pace…….because of global warming.

R. Gates

The post said:
“Too many people in government, wealthy foundations and activist groups have decided they know what’s best for us, what kind of energy and economic future we should have, and who should be in charge. They intend to implement those policies – and global warming scare stories are key to achieving that objective. They’re pouring tens of billions of dollars into the effort.”
_______________
Budgets? Data? References? “Tens of Billions of dollars” would buy a whole lot of “scare” stories. I find hyperbole on both sides of this issue…
REPLY: Hmmm. Sometimes I think you must live in a shack in the woods by yourself with a cat, with only a dialup connection. Oh wait, that’s Tamino.
But you really need to get out more.
Here’s your numbers: http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/massive-climate-funding-exposed/
It’s quite well known to those that choose to look. – Anthony

Darren Parker

Global Warming has caused thursday nights to be on tuesday mornings instead now

Don E

The more scare stories the better. A scare story will often be so outrageous that even someone who is scientifically challenged will say “that can’t be true.” So for every scare story you create more skeptics. Additionally, is it business psychology 1A that fear is the least effective means of selling a product. People tend to tune out. Scare stories are the skeptics best friends.

Frank K.: May 23, 2010 at 8:23 pm
And, as someone pointed out above, it’s NOT their money – it’s OUR hard-earned tax money they’re spending like drunken sailors.
The difference is that a drunken sailor will stop spending when he runs out of money.

Al Gored

Fear sells. Extortion works. The eco-crisis research-industrial complex sells fear the same way the military-industrial complex does.
Stranded polar bears, mushroom clouds. AGW, WMDs. The same trick.
Give me money or the planet will die. Or, give me money so I can save you.
Its an offer we can’t refuse. The media is owned by them so they deliver the message, repeatedly. That’s the way brainwashing works.
Any doubts about the complicity of the media in this have been erased by their silence or spin of what the Climategate leaks really revealed, and their complete silence on any of the real questions about the whole AGW story.
The only reaction so far is that they have reduced the number of daily climate doomsday features, but they are still coming out as if nothing has changed.
——-
rbateman noted (May 23, 2010 at 6:17 pm) “MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW. DECEMBER1898, ARE OUR WINTERS CHANGING’? By ALFRED J. HENRY.”
About our perceptions of climate change. A huge factor now that is constantly exploited by the media parrots, is that there are video cameras everywhere all the time so every event is featured. And selectively, of course. Flash flood in some village in Tierra del Fuego is suddenly world news. It adds up. Brainwashing.
And who can forget that reporter telling her scary story from a canoe when some guy walked by behind her in ankle deep water? That kind of crap is happening constantly. At their most honest, the video focuses on the worst case, e.g. the one low lying street in a town that happens to be flooded, etc.
—————-
Henry chance noted (May 23, 2010 at 6:01 pm): “Look for the money. Watch for the dishonesty… The Nature Conservancy gets 10 million a year from BP.”
The chairman of the Nature Conservancy is or was Hank Paulson. Enough said.

Pete H

Slightly O/T
pat says: May 23, 2010 at 7:20 pm and u.k.(us) says: May 23, 2010 at 7:51 pm
“22 May: Consulate General of the United States, Shanghai: U.S. Commitment to Environmental Sustainability at Shanghai Expo ..Grant from Alcoa Foundation helps make the USA pavilion green”
Coffee over the keyboard moments again guys!
I have been in Shanghai for the last 3 years. First we had to put up with the upheaval over the Olympics and for the last year its been the bloody Expo!
GREEN???? I think the Consulate General has probably not been out of the U.S. compound for 18 months!
Putting aside the Expo site itself and the impressive engineering that has gone into it, Shanghai has once again been ripped apart and painted! Imagine ripping up the many parquet block pavements and replacing them! Miles and miles of the bloody stuff, forcing pedestrians to chance there luck with Shanghai’s fine drivers! The crazy thing is, the old pavements were in good condition but I guess if someone has a budget to spend..they find a way to spend it!
China has spent an estimated $4.2 billion on this fun, get together, so how the Consulate General can claim to be “Green” is beyond my confused brain. The amount of air travel alone that the inept U.S. organizers ( http://shanghaiscrap.com/?p=2926 ) have made would be in the “Carbon Budget” of the building? What about the Expo visitors travel? Make me wonder how they plan to “Green Cool” the building in the next few, hot, humid, months!
Putting all that all aside, I am sure Anthony, with his love affair with L.E.D. lighting, would love to visit the Expo simply for the light show each evening. It even made a cynical old goat like me stand open mouthed watching it!

Captain Tuttle

“Why do scientists and news stories blame everything on global warming?”
Because they have to. It’s the domino effect. If something is not due to humans, it immediately weakens the causation because just about everything is related. For example, if Arctic sea ice decline were to be natural, then what else would be natural?
For this reason it is unlikely we are responsible for most of the warming, because the attribution of universal change to AGW is not plausible. Sure a bit of warming is man made…but compared with other changes it’s likely to be small.

Perry

A possible “cause for alarm” might, repeat might, be EQs in the region of Katla in Iceland.
Lo & behold!
http://en.vedur.is/earthquakes-and-volcanism/earthquakes/myrdalsjokull/
Steinunn Jakobsdottir, a geophysicist from the Icelandic Meteorological Office, told the BBC that the Eyjafjallajokull volcano was “kind of dormant for the moment”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/10144911.stm

savethesharks

Once again, Anthony, a razor-sharp post.
In a related topic, I just got my new National Geographic entitled “Greenland. Ground Zero for Global Warming.”
Now….as I have always considered Nat Geo one of the greatest magazines in the world, I have also always taken with a grain of salt their political bent….thinking, you know, it is what it is.
Well I have skimmed the articles…not read them yet, and the interesting thing is, save for the “but global warming” phrases [like GW is some inanimate or animate object or creature] appear in the first article describing the moulins, the tone is overall POSITIVE for Greenland.
DUH. Yeah, but don’t let Mann have any say so. Remember….the MWP doesn’t exist.
Interesting subtitle quote for the second article, called “VIKING WEATHER”:
Quote: ” As Greenland returns to the warm climate that allowed Vikings to colonize it in the Middle Ages, its isolated and dependent people dream of greener fields and pastures…and also of oil from ice-free waters.”
But then the author asks: “When I ask [Greenland native] Poulsen if he thinks global warming will make life easier for him or his child, his expression becomes almost pained…. ”
Poulsen: “‘Last year we almost had a catastrophe’, he says. It was so dry the harvest was only half as normal.'”
Of course , damningly, NOWHERE does the article provide a chart or refer to the Atlantic Multidecadal Osciallation.
You wanna know what it was so dry last year?? Geez.
But they sure do talk about the soot from third-world coal factories in Asia [a legit concern] that kills the albedo.
My big beef is the juvenile one-sidedness of these magazines and journals.
Sure, coal dust from inefficient third-world Asian crap coal plants is contributing to the loss of albedo in the Arctic and Greenland.
But what about the ****ing AMO and many other hereto-unknown other oceanic cycles???
So this leaves us with the title page of this months Nat Geo, which only tells one bl**dy myopic viewpoint and I quote the title: GREENLAND, GROUND ZERO FOR GLOBAL WARMING.
Nat Geo….I have given you lots of money over the past 20 years. Keep it up, and you will have one less subscriber.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA

David, UK

“It may not be corruption.”
No? It sure smells like it.

Kate

Arno Arrak
“…Lets take the HadCRUT3 from the Met Office and observe what they have done…”
Can you publish a link to the graphs from HADCRUT3 you are using?
According to their website http://hadobs.metoffice.com/crutem3/jan_2010_update.html they have corrected their original graphs.

anna v

I think that on the evolutionary tree we have a long way to go.
We are primates with self consciousness and awareness, who can ask: “who am I”.
We still are dominated by the primate herd’s instincts and social responses.
Alarms are very important on the evolutionary scale. We, our genes, are from ancestors that heeded alarms. The ones who didn’t never propagated their genes. The reaction of primates to alarms is with the whole body. First run away, then evaluate.
When we had the series of earthquakes in Athens in 1981 or so, for about a month we were like a bunch of monkeys on tree being shaken to fall down. The physiology takes over, the impulse on the muscles to run with every tremor is immense, even though the brain says one is safe. I have promised myself that if it happens again, I will put on my running shoes and run around the block to dissipate the anxiety.
The fact that we have a brain and imagination means that the scope of alarms can expand enormously with imagined dangers . That is where the quacks and semi literates can take over a crowd’s mentality, where the precautionary principle arises . Even though the alarms are intellectual, the physiology resonates and forces the primate patterns, “run first, look back later”.
In our earthquake case, we got earthquake prophets alarming the populace, scientists who were quite good in their original field taking over and becoming seismic experts, measuring this that and the other and predicting with flimsy numbers and bad statistics and analysis all sort of large earthquakes. The populace gobbled hungrily the lot. It is again primate behavior/impulses, the need to have leadership in the herd, expressed on the intellectual level .
In a sense, if there were truly a danger, this collective behavior would be useful. Suppose the data shows the ice age is coming in 200 years. Collective anxiety about this would be useful to husband resources and find ways to face the change.
What has happened with global warming is that some people are manipulating society with a false alarm. Some in good faith, following their prophetic delusions, but more and more it becomes obvious that the thesis “follow the money” applies, as shown here.
We could say that the manipulators are like cannibal predators ,they are aware of the primate herd behavior and are directing it for their own well being, treating the crowd as prey.
Let us hope that the winters turn colder and colder. No manipulation can work then. Reasoning, facts and scientific evidence have small weight against the released behemoth of AGW and the avarice of cap and trade.

Ibrahim

Look what’s in the yellow and click.
http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/canada_e.html
It’s a gouvernemental organisation.
See also Defra’s old website (England): “This website reflects the policies and priorities of the former government prior to 11 May 2010. The contents of the website are under review and are subject to change.”
http://www.defra.gov.uk/index-old.htm


The authors above mentioned a recent study published by Carnegie Institution investigators Long Cao and Ken Caldeira, and observed that they had “…based their findings not on actual experiments, but on yet another computer model that allegedly predicts future temperatures.
I immediately flashed on the statement articulated by Dr. William Happer of Princeton University on 20 May 2010 before the House Select Committee on Energy and Global Warming at the invitation of Edward Markey (National Socialist, Massachusetts), in which he said:

“Over the past ten years there has been no statistically [significant] global warming. This is not at all what was predicted by the IPCC computer models. The existence of large climate variability in the past has long been an embarrassment to those who claim that all climate change is due to man and that man can control the climate. To the best of my knowledge, none of the climate models designed to predict future climate have been successful in explaining these past fluctuations of the climate. If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future?”

And then I recalled my experiences in wargames design and development.
When I was in college, commercial “conflict simulations” boardgames – wargames largely employing die-cut cardboard counters and hex-gridded maps – became something of a flourishing industry. This continued through the mid-80s, whereupon “SPI Died For Your Sins.”
Having been there while it was happening, I tend to go along with Greg Costikyan’s explanation of why the industry got kilt, but I strongly suspect that a major factor – unaddressed by Costikyan – was that by the mid-80s a great many of us baby-boomer males who had been largely supporting the wargames publishers not only got married but started raising kids.
Ceteris paribus, wives hate their husbands’ hobbies. And keeping a diningroom-table-deployed wargame from being catastrophically dislocated by cats and house-apes is effectively impossible. To this day, there is a cardboard counter designating the Scharnhorst somewhere behind a baseboard in my home. I have long since resigned myself to its loss.
Now, in addition to being a former wargamer, I am also a former wargames designer and developer, strongly affiliated with Simulations Publications, Inc. I have some considerable experience of the methods by which SPI games entered the gestation process, how systems were devised to effectively model historical events, what mechanisms were used to make these conflict scenarios into real, playable, balanced games instead of heuristic intensive manual simulations (and at SPI we did just that – once and never again).
Think of those wargames created in the ’70s and ’80s in much the same light as we speak of computer models for any purpose.
The sine qua non of our work – for a damnably finicky core clientele of grognards whose knowledge of military history rivaled that of the teaching staffs at Carlisle, Leavenworth, and Newport – was that each wargame must be capable of simulating the historical events of the war, campaign, or battle we were addressing, and doing it pretty goddam precisely.
The “what if?” element had to come later, despite the fact that our customers bought and played these games chiefly out of a desire to explore possible alternative outcomes. I cannot tell you how many times (and how many ways) I have been involved in explorations of what might have happened if Longstreet’s corps had swung wide to the south of Round Top on that second day at Gettysburg to take the Army of the Potomac in the left flank and rear.
(Mostly, the answer to that question is found in Clausewitz’ “friction of war.” It doesn’t work all that well. By the afternoon of 2 July, VI Corps was lurking back there in reserve, and it would take a helluva stretch on the credulity muscles to assume that Longstreet wouldn’t have Sedgwick down his throat like a dose of castor oil had he tried an end-around like that.)
Despite the fact that commercial wargames design and development in those days was a completely informal and non-rigorous process – decidedly not undertaken for any academic purposes whatsoever – we were held to exacting standards when it came to our obligation to “model the past” accurately.
Much more so than are these AGW fraudsters today.
The reason why the AGW hucksters cannot come up with accurate and reliable models of the climate (or any aspect thereof) is because their incentives are precisely the opposite of those under which we were operating in the commercial wargames industry twenty and thirty years ago.
We were under immense pressure to maintain adherence to documented factual reality, and their “Fortune and glory” comes entirely from supporting blatant falsehoods which are conducive to socialist and mercantilist scheming on the part of professional politicians and other bloodsucking sons-of-anonymous-fathers.
Interestingly, I recall being involved in the late ’70s with a young meteorologist whose hobby was wargaming, and who wanted to develop a “conflict simulation” that modeled a succession of hurricane seasons impacting the southern and eastern United States. He planned to have the game system “generate” the hurricanes according to then-understood principles of Atlantic tropical storm gestation, and the game player would allocate resources, both in anticipation of likely landfalls and remediatively, to get the maximum positive outcome for the expenditures made.
The damned thing foundered on our conjoint inability to get a hurricane-cranking system that came remotely close to simulating historical hurricane season events.
And by the looks of it, even with their oh-so-sophisticated megabuck mathemagical computer models today, the “climatologists” aren’t doing any better than he and I – working on paper and without much more than a calculator – could do back in ’79.

Another excellent article; WUWT continues to grow in status with the quality of posters and their offerings.
David M Hoffer: Your story rings memory bells. At a student party many years ago a couple of us made two tissue hot air balloons powered by tiny spirit burners crafted from the bottom end of a Coke can. We released them into the night sky and were struck by their etherial beauty as they slowly drifted from sight. The reponses in the local newspapers next day made one think hard about the thought processes of the citizenry – everything from ‘spy drones’ to UFOs were thought to be the cause of the ‘sinister’ and ‘threatening’ lights in the sky. We felt any confession would not be believed as the truth was too mundane and unthretening.