Tag Archives: Climate Change

McCain finally comes to his senses about climate change

Sounds like Senator John McCain has finally come to his senses about anthropogenic climate change being a giant crock of crap. Evidently Grist doesn’t like him anymore. Per their post titled “McCain has become a climate conspiracy theorist”…….

Now, like every other GOP candidate for the U.S. Senate this year, he opposes the climate policy he once supported. In a little-noted appearance stumping for Senate candidate (and fellow denier) Kelly Ayotte in Nashua, N.H., this March, McCain gave credence to the outlandish Climategate smear campaign against climate science:

They then proceed to bitch and moan about nuclear power and tie in weather events to climate change like the rest of the global warming lemmings. No evidence, just the usual BS.

What we do have here is another case of “were’ green and we don’t like anything” going on. Regardless what anyone comes up with, many of the greentards just won’t be the least little bit happy until we return to living like we’re in the dark ages. They do seem attracted to wind power though, despite the fact it dices birds up like crazy.

Source: Grist

Comments Off on McCain finally comes to his senses about climate change

Filed under Climategate, Co2 Insanity, Politics, Renewable Energy

Instead of “Where’s Waldo?” it’s “Where’s Warming?”

From C3 we get the above chart showing the maximum temperature records set and the fact that the last one was set 33 years ago. No warming here, nothing to see, please go home, nothing “unprecedented” going on like the “alarmist warmers” would have you believe, just more global warming fraud. Can  you say “busted?” Yet more climate “alarmist” BS. You can read all about it at the source below. More proof that CO2 Insanity exist with the “alarmist” pulling out all the stops because frankly, they’re getting desperate.

UPDATE: You can go to Iceage Now here and read about the early cold weather thus far like early snow in china and killer frost in Alberta, Canada.

Source: C3

Comments Off on Instead of “Where’s Waldo?” it’s “Where’s Warming?”

Filed under Climate Alarmism, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, Weather

Virgin Amazon? Think again


Yesterday I put up a post titled “Alarmist Whackjobism Continues?” where I chastised a recent alarmist report making claims the rainforests of the world are disappearing,which will increase CO2. I countered with a) the report only covers the period between 1980 and 2000, which seems a very dated and short time period, not to mention a seemingly convenient cutoff date, and b) because there is legitimate data showing that the regrowth ratio of the world’s rainforests is 50: 1, i.e., for every acre cut down, 50 acres are growing.

To pile some more fuel on the global warming isn’t anthropogenic fire, a friend tweeted me a URL this morning that leads to an article on Sott.net titled “Amazon was home to a large civilization, scientist says.” It is about a researcher who shows that much of the Amazon has been settled before by significant numbers of people. This means that a) much of it isn’t the “virgin” forest as the warmers and greens like to claim, and b) the jungle does reclaim what it had after man leaves.

This appears to be yet more evidence that condemns the claims in the study from Stanford University’s Holly Gibbs. More information to lead us in the direction that her study may just be last-minute alarmism and that perhaps the rainforests aren’t having the big problems the “warmer” crowd would like the public to believe.

Per the article you can see that Nigel Smith and others have discovered things long-buried in the jungle that seem to refute the claims that the rainforests are endangered. (Please note that this article originated from the Washington Post, which appears to be on the “warmer” side of the fence, which to me reinforces in my mind that the article isn’t just some “skeptic” BS).

To the untrained eye, all evidence here in the heart of the Amazon signals virgin forest, untouched by man for time immemorial – from the ubiquitous fruit palms to the cry of howler monkeys, from the air thick with mosquitoes to the unruly tangle of jungle vines.

Archaeologists, many of them Americans, say the opposite is true: This patch of forest, and many others across the Amazon, was instead home to an advanced, even spectacular civilization that managed the forest and enriched infertile soil to feed thousands.

What has been discovered is interesting. To make a long story short.

  • Man made indian mounts containing ceramic pieces and man-enrichened earth
  • huge swaths of terra preta, so-called Indian dark earth, land made fertile by mixing charcoal, human waste and other organic matter with soil
  • vast orchards of semi-domesticated fruit trees
  • moats, causeways, canals, the networks of a stratified civilization

Nigel Smith

It would seem to me that this research is another cog in the mounting evidence that is proving the global warming crowd is getting very over-heated about nothing. It appears to me that they’re on the defense after Climategate, and appear to be taking some great liberties with the way good science is done, as evidenced by some of the alarmist reports and articles we see. Lest you think not, you can go here and see a huge list of all the claims made by the “warmers,” many which appear contradictory.

They also appear rife to admit that perhaps Mother Nature takes care of herself and that what appears to be global warming to them is just part of a natural cycle, just like the rainforests rejuvenating themselves.

It appears to me that we have another nail in the CO2 Insanity coffin. I’d highly recommend you read the article from Sott.

Source: Sott.net

Comments Off on Virgin Amazon? Think again

Filed under Climate Alarmism, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, Science

Satellitegate: Scientists Speak

GOES-8 Satellite that will be missing 14 sensors it should have to see if we have global warming or not

From John O’Sullivan, via Canada Free Press, we get further information on Satellitegate. Satellitegate refers to problems that have been discovered with old satellites, satellite data, and even problems with satellites that have yet to be launched. This evidently has caused lots of action about this at NASA, NOAA, GISS and elsewhere.

In his article titled “Top Scientists Speak out on the Satellitegate Scandal” you can read about how this being exposed has affected things and some opinions of some scientists. It appears that one satellite has been shuttered and datasets may be disappearing.

US Government admits global warming satellite sensors “degraded” – temperatures may be out by 10-15 degrees. Now five satellites in controversy. Top scientists speak out.

In an escalating row dubbed ‘Satellitegate’ further evidence proves NOAA knew of these faults for years. World’s top climate scientists and even prior governmental reports cite underfunding and misallocation as the trigger for spiraling satellite data calamities. Key flaws with five satellites undermines global data.

Most disturbing of all is that it took publication of my article last week to persuade the authorities to withdraw the errant NOAA-16 satellite from service. But as Dr. John Christy indicates, the real Satellitegate is not about one satellite. The scandal is endemic with comparable flaws across the entire network; the scandal is also that it took a tip off from a member of the public and the widespread broadcast of my article before one of the offending junk boxes, NOAA-16, got taken down.

If you want to read about the whole big and getting bigger all the time scandal here are the links to the other articles and posts about Satellitegate.

  • You can read the whole article at Canada Free Press here.
  • This link is to my post about John O’Sullivan’s article on thr 10-15 degree warming added by NOAA-16.
  • This link is to my first post about the article titled “Dimmer View of Earth” in the Contra Costa Times, by Susan Bohan.
  • This link is to John O’Sullivan’s original article at Climate Change Fraud.
  • This link is to my post about John O’Sullivan’s article about the 600+ degree city of Egg Harbor, Wisconsin.

Sources: John O’Sullivan, Canada Free Press, Climate Change Fraud


Filed under Climategate, Co2 Insanity, GISS, John O'Sullivan, NASA, NOAA, Sattelitegate, Science

Dissent and you may disappear or go to jail

There’s several things going on and it’s potentially not smelling very good. The part in the US could be legitimate or not, but the part with the EU definitely is very smelly and appears to be a blatant attempt to silence people who think anthropogenic climate change is a gigantic fraud.

If you put all this together and look at what’s going on it could give one the distinct impression that governments around the world aren’t liking the internet, they’re not liking bloggers who disagree with them, and they want to make sure everyone cow-tows to whatever they decide you should believe in, and no bitching allowed. Make too much noise and your website will disappear and we now even have the potential in the European Union that you may go to jail if you don’t go along with the party line.

As I noted earlier this week, I was offline for a while because I had my blog hosted at Blogetery, who mysteriously had an entire server confiscated by an as yet to be discovered government agency for an as yet to be discovered reason(s).  This took about 70,000+ blogs offline instantly. Fortunately I was one of the few who did backups and I have most of my site back up and running, save for the posts that did not get backed up prior to this happening.  No one knows if they will ever see any of their stuff again. From what I’ve been reading a lot of people never backed up their stuff. Henceforth, the mantra “back up daily” no matter where you have your blog or website hosted.  Stuff happens.

From what I can see the people at Blogetery supposedly don’t know what’s really going on other than what Burstnet was able to discuss, and the people at Burstnet, who hosted the Blogetery server can’t talk about it or they’ll end up in  jail.  No one’s talking.  Kind of sounds like the old communist U.S.S.R., speak up and go on a vacation to a gulag in “sunny” Siberia. But, it could be perfectly legitimate, too because all one can do is speculate at the current time.

The rumor mill has the server being shut off for various reasons such as kiddie porn, terrorist activity, software violations, illegal selling of credit card information, copyright violations (RIAA), and probably anything else ONE could imagine.

What’s leading me down the conspiracy trail is that I’d really like to know why this happened, but the fact no one knows or if they do know they can’t talk about it under penalty of law, is making me highly suspicious about what’s going on here?  Was this a real legitimate action? Or, could this perhaps be some way the government is going to silence dissenters under false pretext?

When you don’t know who did it, why they did it, and everyone’s been told to STFU or go to jail, you have to start wondering about conspiracies.   This is being bolstered by the fact that you can add to this the fact that iPBFree disappeared off the face of the planet just before Blogetery did. Talk about a potential conspiracy.  One is bad, two is worse.

While nosing around about Blogetry, I found out this happened earlier with another blogging site called iPBFree that went dark prior to Blogetery. Thousands more blogs go dark, no one’s talking, perhaps a mysterious government agency shut it down? I again see claims that no one can talk or they’ll be in jail. I also see another rumor about iPBFree that has them merely going bankrupt, no conspiracy, just bad finances. Regardless what the real truth is, you have more people who may never see their blog again and you have no real answers about why.

The next one is an entirely different thing, but could be tied in to governments trying to silence dissidents, too. It seem the European Union (EU) is now taking the game to a higher level.  We now we have a new potential for the EU to make being skeptical about climate change (global warming, bullshit, or whatever term you prefer to use) a criminal offense.  That’s right! Call Phil Jones a fraud, or question why various data being used is phony, and you may be wearing a striped suit and eating bread and water for breakfast, lunch and dinner. A ridiculous but very serious premise that may or may not happen, but it certainly makes me wonder what’s going on out there in Realityland.

I hope that Blogetery and iPBFree turn out to be something legitimate and that when the government is done with the servers that they’ll at least let everyone who had blogs get their information back. If this doesn’t happen it’s only going to raise further suspicions about this being a government effort to remove dissident blogs from the internet.

You can toss in Janet Napolitano’s effort to make sure no one at the TSA could read websites with anything controversial (read anti-government) that she backed off on as another nail in the conspiracy to shut off the dissidents coffin.

If the EU makes it criminal to doubt anthropogenic global warming it will be very telling and in my mind another reason to start wondering if there really is a conspiracy afoot. If they do this then what’s going to be next? Why anything they don’t like will be made into a criminal offense. If they get away with it, the US could use that as carte blanche to put similar laws in place that will have a very chilling effect upon the internet.

Hopefully, I’ll be putting up a post in the future that this was done for very legitimate reasons, that could not be disclosed for very legitimate reasons, and that Blogetery is back up and running, or, at least that it will be put up for period of time so people who didn’t have the chance, can back their blogs up and re-post them elsewhere. That would be the fair thing to do for the innocent.

My personal favorite theory about the US part (or should I say hope) is that there was something very terrorist going on those servers and that Homeland Security did this for legitimate reasons. From what I read they can avoid the courts and I’d assume they have the authority to make good on the threat to lock anyone up who divulges what’s going on as it’s a matter of national security.  That seems, in my mind, to fit the puzzle best. Hopefully time will tell and the answer will be that this was all legitimate.

Regarding the EU plan, I hope that it’s not the start of a large government effort to lock down the internet, or silence climate skeptics so they can go about their carbon trading schemes. Then throw in the IPCC wanting their scientists not to talk to the media.

Conspiracy or coincidence? You decide.

Sources: Prison Planet, Cnet, Watts Up with That? BNPI Hate the Media Climate Change Fraud


Filed under Climategate, Co2 Insanity, Government, Legal, Politics

Are We Bored With Climate Change?

Americans Bored? This guy looks like the definition or boring!

Here’s a good one. A Brit named Ian McEwan writes a book on climate change called Solar (my how original!), then blames Americans being bored with climate change as the reason the book tanked. Gotta love that ego. Moreover he gets bad reviews and blames us being bored for that, too!

Here’s something from the Telegraph about the book and McEwan.

McEwan blamed American apathy for the negative reviews afforded to Solar, his satire about global warming.

The New York Times critic dismissed Solar as one of McEwan’s “lesser efforts” while the Washington Post called it “flaccid” and advised readers to “let Solar pass and wait for his next book to eclipse it”.

McEwan, who recently returned from a North American book tour, said many Americans had a “passionate dislike” for the novel.

Let me see does “lessor efforts” and “flaccid” sound like Americans are “bored” with climate change? Or, does it sound like the book sucks? Our fault we’re bored? Or, his fault for bad writing?

“Some of [the critics] were moaning that the novel had no plot and was formless, someone else was moaning that there was way too much plot. I think, though, that I caught America in a mood of profound boredom about climate change. They just didn’t want to hear about it any more, they were sick to the teeth. I think there was a strong element of that.”

Judging by the number of hits some climate change websites get, regardless if they’re “warmer” or “skeptic” sites I’d say he not only got the book wrong, he got the reason for bad reviews and sales wrong, too. Per his statement below, evidently he isn’t really sure we’re bored either.

He added, with a laugh: “Or maybe it was no good, there was always that possibility.”

This could also be a reason we’re turned off by the book.  It perhaps hits a little to close to reality.

The main character in Solar is Michael Beard, a deeply unlikable Nobel Prize-winning physicist engaged in the battle against global warming.

Man, if that doesn’t sound like Al Gore, as they say, “I’ll eat my hat.”  As “popular” as Al is, no wonder they’re panning the book.  I mean who wants to read about a boring, untruthful,  “sex-crazed poodle” who’s carbon footprint is so large someone might think he’s the cause of global warming all by himself? Flying all over telling us not to pollute, buying large mansions. That’s what I call getting off (pardon the pun) to a bad start from the get go.

Want another reason? Well, here from the horse’s mouth” we get the following.

“I did spend a lot of time with the science, and read an enormous number of papers, and it would seem to me there’s a fairly powerful consensus. About three-quarters of the papers I read thought we had a man-made problem and there was some urgency.

“At the same time, there are some very good sceptics out there. Sceptics are completely different from ideologically-driven deniers, who have no evidence but have interests to protect. It’s a very important distinction to make. Some of my best friends are climate change sceptics. The denial camp are really not scientists at all, they are very well-funded, particularly in the States, and they have specific agendas.”

See?  We’re back to that same old “warmer” song with words like “consensus” and “urgency” (damn he forgot unprecedented and robust).

Then we get to more of the same old “warmer” song about skeptics “have no evidence but have interest to protect,” “really not scientists,” “very well-funded,” “specific agendas”

Want some more? It appears us Americans aren’t the only one’s who panned this novel.  Seems the British don’t like it either, which is another indication that someone perhaps should admit that his book sucks, or at the very least that it’s only going to be read with any interest by people like him, who are dimwitted enough to believe in anthropogenic global warming. Here is some of the review from the Guardian, a British newspaper.

Ian McEwan excels at climate science but his one-dimensional protagonist makes you shudder.

Solar is a sly, sardonic novel about a dislikable English physicist and philanderer named Michael Beard. He’s a recognisable Ian McEwan type, a one-dimensional, self-deceiving man of science.

We have met others like him before in McEwan’s novels – such as Joe Rose, the science writer who narrates Enduring Love, or Henry Perowne, the brian surgeon protagonist of Saturday – but none is quite as repulsive as Beard.

Hmmmmmm…….other than the guy being British we’re sounding an awful lot like Al Gore again. I especially like the “repulsive” part. You can read the whole review here.  I love the last paragraph, which is below.

What is absent from Solar, ultimately, are other minds, the sense that people other than Beard are present, equally alive, with something to contribute. Without them, after a while, it feels as if you are locked inside an echo chamber, listening only to the reverberations of the one same sound – the groan of a fat, selfish man in late middle age eating himself.

“Fat, selfish man in late middle age eating himself.” You have to again wonder if he used Al Gore as his model for the hero of the book.  Perhaps he should have marketed as comedy instead of fiction.

No wonder his book tanked. Apparently no one likes it (well, maybe Al Gore bought it).  I may have to read it to see if the “her0” turns into a “sex-poodle” or not.  Perhaps if he’d put some good old-fashioned porn in there he could share the Nobel Porn Price with Pachauri, who writes sex novels. I can see it now…..

“He entered the room with spaghetti sauce dripping from his chin, a portly man who looked like his eyes might pop out of his head any minute. His dark blue robe was half-open and barely covered him up. All of a sudden he flung open the robe and started humping my leg like a sex crazed poodle.”

Nah, the thought of that is even more revolting than anthropogenic global warming.  More CO2 insanity.

Source: Telegraph.co.uk

Comments Off on Are We Bored With Climate Change?

Filed under Climategate, Co2 Insanity, Comedy Relief

Munchausen by Proxy and Global Warming

Here you can read the definition of Munchausen by Proxy…I made some changes to reflect what I’m talking about with respect to global warming fraud, but the basics are there.

Munchausen by proxy syndrome (MBPS) is a relatively uncommon condition that involves the exaggeration or fabrication of climate illnesses or symptoms by a primary caretaker (scientist). One of the most harmful forms of science abuse, MBPS was named after Baron von Munchausen, an 18th-century German dignitary known for telling outlandish stories.

Sound familiar?  See the the similarities?  Read on.

In MBPS, an individual — usually a scientist or warmer — deliberately “makes” the planet appear sick or convinces others that the planet is sick. The scientist or warmer misleads others into thinking that the planet has climate problems by lying and reporting fictitious data. He or she may exaggerate, fabricate, or induce symptoms. As a result, scientists usually order tests, suggest different types of solutions (like carbon taxes and other asinine ideas), and may even hospitalize the planet or perform surgery like drilling ice cores to determine the cause.

Sound like some warmers  and scientists we know?  Sure does to me.

Typically, the perpetrator feels satisfied by gaining the attention and sympathy of warmers, greentards, and others who come into contact with him or her and the planet. Some experts believe that it isn’t just the attention that’s gained from the “illness” of the planet that drives this behavior, but also the satisfaction in being able to deceive individuals that they consider to be more important and powerful than themselves. (Like Obama, Gordon Brown, etc).

Because the scientist or warmer appears to be so caring and attentive, often no one suspects any wrongdoing. A perplexing aspect of the syndrome is the ability of the scientist or warmer to fool and manipulate other scientists and the public. Frequently, the perpetrator is familiar with the science profession and is very good at fooling the scientists and warmers. Even the most experienced scientists can miss the meaning of the inconsistencies in the Earth’s symptoms. It’s common for scientists to overlook the possibility of MBPS because it goes against the belief that a scientist or warmer would never deliberately hurt his or her Earth or fellow human beings.

Diagnosis is very difficult, but would involve some of the following:

  • a planet that has multiple climate problems that don’t respond to treatment or that follow a persistent and puzzling course
  • physical or laboratory findings that are highly unusual, don’t correspond with the planet’s climate history, or are physically or scientifically impossible
  • a scientist or warmer who isn’t reassured by “good news” when test results find no climate problems exists, but continues to believe that the Earth is ill.

Other theories say that Munchausen by proxy syndrome is a cry for help on the part of the scientist or warmer, who may be experiencing anxiety or depression or have feelings of inadequacy. Some may feel a sense of acknowledgement when the false science confirms their skills. Or, the scientist or warmer may just enjoy the attention that the sick planet— and, therefore, he or she — gets.

The things that go on with climate “alarmist” “believers” “warmers” and scientist who continue to advocate anthropogenic global warming, or now “climate change” is amazingly similar to Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome.

How can it be stopped.  Well here’s some suggestions.

Most often, Munchausen by proxy syndrome cases are resolved in one of three ways:

  1. the perpetrator is apprehended (Michael Mann vs. The State of Virginia announced today sounds fittingly correct).
  2. the perpetrator moves on to a new crisis when the original crisis gets old or the original crisis gets busted (like we have things popping up on the radar now such as ocean acidification a new problem so they can “save” us – not to mention control us, get their 15 minute of fame, plenty of grant money to continue perpetuating the fraud, and tax the snot our of us).
  3. the crisis “dies” because scientist and warmers finally realize their BS isn’t making and they cease to try to pull the wool over everyone’s eyes.

Perhaps we’re wrong by making all the efforts to bust the science by showing everyone the
“tricks”, data manipulation, missing data, unfounded science, data from magazines, peer-reviewed papers that are only peer-reviewed by fellow “warmer” scientists or non-scientists who happen to agree with their position.

I’d suggest we’d be better off getting the men in the white coats to grab these guys, put them in straight-jackets, and let the psychiatrists work on them until they admit their problems and get therapy.

Think about it.  What is going on with climategate is eerily similar.

Source: Me


Filed under Climategate, Co2 Insanity, Comedy Relief, Stranger than Truth

What came first Global Warming or El Niño?

El Nino globalssha_jas_2010

color bar El Nini pacificssha_jas_2010045_palette

NASA’s website has an interesting article titled Kelvin Wave Renews El Nino.  I find it interesting for many reasons, which prompts me to wonder what the deal is with El Niño?

  • “The climate pattern known as the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, or “ENSO” for short, is the biggest cause of large-scale climate variability in the tropics.” (It also causes a lot of changes elsewhere).
  • The series of globes showing the progression of the Kelvin waves has zero in the center and shows +/- 220 millimeters of wave height.  220 mm = 8.6 inches.  So that’s a plus/minus of 17.2 inches in sea level.  (NOAA also advises the sea level can actually be about 1/2 meter higher off Peru than it is off Indonesia, about the same amount).
  • It also causes large differences in the surface temparature of the ocean.

I also find it can:

  • Affect weather in the Atlantic causing warming.
  • Affect the weather on the West Coast of the US and Canada (remember all the whining about the lack of snow at the Olympics in Vancouver? Guess why?).
  • That El Nino is being attributed to AGW by some of the usual suspects, some who claim it’s increasing in frequency.
  • The biggest one we’ve had was 1982-83. (Living in California I sure do remember it rain-rain-rain and more rain).
  • Past El Nino Years back to the turn of the 20th century are 1902-03, 1905-06, 1911-12,914-15, 1918-19, 1923-24, 1925-26, 1930-31, 1932-33, 1939-40, 1941-42, 1951-52, 1953-1954, 1957-58, 1965-1966, 1969-70, 1972-73, 1976-77, 1982-83, 1986-87, 1991-92, 1995-95, 1997-98, 2002-03, 2006-07, and the current 2009-10.

I’m not writing this to impugne this latest data.  It’s very recent (January 15, 30 and February 15, 2010), and I’d doubt in this case there’s anything amiss with it.  It’s done with satellite data and there is no reason for NASA or NOAA to spin it.  They obviously lean to the “it’s caused by AGW” side and probably beleive this helps prove their case.

Per the title, what this article did was cause me to wonder about is cause and effect.  To link what prompted this in my mind, it’s the fact that we have the AGW people believing CO2 causes warming, but we also have proof that the CO2 doesn’t cause the warming, that it actually follows it.

I question claims that AGW is causing El Niñ0, based upon the “tricks”, lies, errors, e-mails, consensus, etc., that have been used to promote the AGW.  Sorry, but some scientists should look into the mirror to see why their credibility is shot in many people’s minds.  Past performance does count, ask any jury.

Is it not entirely possible that El Niño is causing some global warming and not the other way around? That it will soon lessen as it always has, and so will its effect upon the Earths’ climate?

I’ve read the arguments that we’re having El Niño upon El Niño and no cooling in between, that global warming is causing it to increase frequency, and that eventually, all we’ll have is one big year-round El Niño.   (Frankly I’m not so certain that would be a bad thing as it seems to bring a lot of rain to areas like California, that were desperatly in need of it and now have water storage up to about 86.5% of normal in a matter of a few months).

I have to question the theory of more frequency.  If you look at the data for the previous 127 years of El Niños in the chart below, you can see some large gaps and years when it’s been one after the other.   I’d suggest using the frequency of recent years is just cherry picking data to prove AGW  is real and that is it causing El Niño to increase.  Perhaps it’s kind of a hocky-stick for El Niño?


The article also promps me to question if the sea-level and sea-temperature data isn’t being misconstrued to assist in proving we have AGW?  To reiterate, I have no basis for this other than past bad scientific behavior, (climategate, Pachaurigate, glaciergate, the hockey-stick, NASA’s using CRU data because their own was a mess, etc), and an inquiring mind.

I can see where it would be tempting to use some of the higher El Niño caused sea-levels and higher ocean-temperatures,  to try and foster the idea that AGW is causing the oceans to warm, which is causing the glaciers and ice to melt, which is in turn causing the sea-levels to rise.  Kind of all ties in neatly in my mind.  It’s been done with temperature data, why not El Niño data?

Chicken or Egg?  You tell me.

Comments Off on What came first Global Warming or El Niño?

Filed under Editor, Science

British CO2 Insanity (It's only money!)

1 TrillionThis is more of the insanity the site’s title refers to, only this is the colossal, beyond belief type of insanity.

I have to laugh at this article from Telegraph.co.uk.  The author matter-of-factly writes about the monumental quantities of various kinds of power generating equipment that will have to be installed and completely ignores the staggering costs of it all.

Britain has some very lofty goals when it comes to reducing their carbon footprint.  If they’re to achieve the goals they have set…

Every car on the road will need to be electric and there will be solar panels on every home, 10,000 wind turbines onshore and 40 new nuclear power stations if the Government is to stand a chance of meeting strict climate change targets, engineers have warned.

The report assumed that the maximum level of renewable electricity will be installed including 9,600 wind turbines on land and a further 10,000 turbines at sea.  The Severn Barrage will have to go ahead as will as 1,000 miles of wave machines and further installations for tidal power.  Most of the country’s 25 milliion households will have to install solar papenls and scrap boilers in favour of heat pumps that take heat of of the air or the ground.

I did a little research on the Internet and arrived at the following figures using US Dollars. Hopefully my math is correct…

  • The average cost of a nuclear power plant at $10 billion.  They want 40 of them, so that’s about $400 billion.
  • There are about 17 million cars on the road in the UK.  NADA puts the average cost of a car in the US at $28,400.  (Couldn’t find one for the UK).  Using this figure, replacing all 17 million cars at $28,400 that totals $482.8 billion.  Based on electric car prices (Chevy Volt for example), I’d say that’s a conservative figure.
  • A good solar panel system for a house will run about $20,000.  Take the 25  million households in the UK and that totals up to another $500 billion.
  • Replacing boilers with heat pumps seems to be going for about $5,000 per house x 25 million = $1.25 billion.
  • One commercial scale wind turbine runs about $3.5 million installed.  Take that times 20,000 and you get $70 billion.
  • $650,000 per generator to manufacture.   Per the article they’ll need 1,000 miles of wave machines.  I have no clue how many per mile will be installed (can’t find anyting online), but if we just put one per mile that would be 1,000 of them.  Let’s say $1 million per installed and you have another $1 billion.  (Sounds cheap to me but since I can’t find any more info we’ll go with that).
  • Now for the low power coal or nuclear power plants, lets take coal.  A coal plant is about $1.83 billion for a regular one.  Add carbon capture to it and I’ll take a wild guess and say $3 billion.  They will need 40 of those, so that is another $120 billion.

This totals to a staggering $1.58 trillion,  rounded off.  I don’t think that will be all that’s involved, either.

If you switch to all electric cars, you have to add in the  cost of putting plugs in for car charging stations all over the UK.  You will also have the cost of removing or altering 9,271 gas stations, and the cost of scrapping 17 million cars.  They will have to be scrapped because they’ll basically be useless unless someone comes out with a nifty kit to convert from petrol to electric.

The main goal of this is to reduce carbon, right?  Now can you imagine the carbon footprint of converting 25 million houses to solar, switching 25 million boilers t0 heat pumps, building 17 million electric cars, building 40 nuclear power plants, building 40 coal power plants, building and installing charging stations all over the country, scrapping 17 million cars, scrapping 9,271 gas stations and building and installing 1,000 or so wave generated power plants?

Can you imagine the eyesore of 20,000 wind turbines and 1,000 wave generators?  Can you imagine the noise created by 20,000 wind turbines?  Not to mention that with all those wind machines I wonder how much longer birds would be left in Britain, as they’d all be chopped to pieces. Is this really going to lower the carbon footprint?  I certainly have to wonder if after all is said and done, and you take all this into consideration, that it might not actually increase the carbon footprint?

Let’s go global now.  Say the UK is about an average size country.  (I have no clue and I’m not about to figure it out if you want to, be my guest), and that $1.58 trillion per country would be about average.

Depending upon the resource, there are about 195 independent countries in the world today. Now we have UK sized ones, huge ones like the United States,  China, Russia, and small ones like Monaco, Switzerland, etc.

Take that $1.58 trillion, multiply it by 195 and that my friends, totals to about $308 trillion dollars! Based on what I see, if a government gets involved (and I don’t care what one, they’re all alike on spending) you could probably be realistic by at least doubling that to $616 trillion dollars. An insane sum indeed.

Is there that much money in the world?

Source:  Telegraph.uk.co

Comments Off on British CO2 Insanity (It's only money!)

Filed under Editor, Financial, Politics

WWF = World Wildlife Farce?

Merlin$60 Billion is a pretty big farce!  According to Christopher Booker’s recent column in Telegraph.co.uk that’s what they stand to make in a giant carbon credit scheme…talk about insanity!

If the world’s largest, richest environmental campaigning group, the WWF – formerly the World Wildlife Fund – announced that it was playing a leading role in a scheme to preserve an area of the Amazon rainforest twice the size of Switzerland, many people might applaud, thinking this was just the kind of cause the WWF was set up to promote. Amazonia has long been near the top of the list of the world’s environmental concerns, not just because it includes easily the largest and most bio-diverse area of rainforest on the planet, but because its billions of trees contain the world’s largest land-based store of CO2 – so any serious threat to the forest can be portrayed as a major contributor to global warming.

Sounds good, protecting a large area of the Amazon, but here’s the scheme…

The idea is that credits representing the CO2 locked into this particular area of jungle – so remote that it is not under any threat – should be sold on the international market, allowing thousands of companies in the developed world to buy their way out of having to restrict their carbon emissions. The net effect would simply be to make the WWF and its partners much richer while making no contribution to lowering overall CO2 emissions.

What a great way to make money from nothing.  Merlin the Magician would certainly be impressed as this is much more profitable than turning lead into gold.

Source: Telegraph.co.uk

Comments Off on WWF = World Wildlife Farce?

Filed under Editor, Financial