Tag Archives: CO2

Gore and Hansen Wrong on Sea-Level Rise

Captain_Nemo_FSMCD1208This is a picture from a movie about Captain Nemo of 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea fame.  Well according to some real scientist, we won’t be needing to move into a submarine or build any underwater cities, which is what “alarmists” Al Gore and James Hansen would like you to believe will happen by the end of the century, caused, of course, by global warming and CO2.

According to Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth”, the sea could rise 20 feet.  Per James Hansen of GISS the sea will be rising more than 5 meters.  Here’s the quote from Hansen below…

As an example, let us say that ice sheet melting adds 1 centimetre to sea level for the decade 2005 to 2015, and that this doubles each decade until the West Antarctic ice sheet is largely depleted. This would yield a rise in sea level of more than 5 metres (16 feet) by 2095.

I picked up on this article from C3 today:  32 Ocean Scientists Trash The Gore and James Hansen Sea-Level Rise Predictions: The Myth Rejected. They link to a paper on CO2 Science. Per them…

The experts in seas/oceans estimate a potential 4.7 inch to 39 inch rise over 21st century – this is certainly a sea level rise range that humans can deal with, easily. And, most significantly, this is a range based on historical sea levels that actually occurred during past warmer periods. What does this tell us? The true experts are predicting a maximum sea level rise far below the non-expert opinions (propagandist myths) of fanatical warming activists, such as Gore and Hansen.

That is a far, far cry from 16 to 20 feet.  We’re talking less than 1/2 foot to a little over 3 feet.  Quite a difference form 15 to 20 feet or more!

To simplify what these scientist did, is they looked at past data from when the climate was similar and looked at what the actual sea-level rise then…

Turning to the IPCC — the most recent report of which predicts a global warming of somewhere between 1.1 and 6.3°C for the 21st century — the PALSEA group writes that “the last time that a global warming of comparable magnitude occurred was during the termination of the last glacial period,” which consisted of “a series of short, sharp steps on millennial to centennial timescales.” Hence, they looked at what is known about sea level change during the Bolling-Allerod and post-Younger Dryas/early Holocene periods, because they say “the magnitude and rate of warming during these periods are most closely analogous to the magnitude and rate of anthropogenic warming [that is predicted to occur] over the coming centuries;” and this comparison ruled out any type of exponentially increasing sea level response, pointing more towards an asymptotic response, where the sea level rise is high initially but gradually levels off.

Realistically, their study states it will take a lot longer than a century for any significant rise to occur.  Even the IPCC predicted only -0.01 to 0.17 m over the century.

Regardless which one you believe, either one easily proves that Gore and Hansen are full of alarmist bullshit designed to freak-out the average person so they’ll donate money to prevent it and move into caves with hot and cold running bats to save the earth.

Well, at least it’s one CO2 Insanity episode put to bed by a dose of reality.

Source: C3

Comments Off on Gore and Hansen Wrong on Sea-Level Rise

Filed under Co2 Insanity, Editor, Science

New Study CO2 Only 5-10% of Global Warming

Quickie from Climate Realists, seems CO2 isn’t that much of a problem per this  article

I think it’s an outright fabrication Kauppinen says.

Sounds like what a lot of people have been saying lately -Anthropogenic Global Warming is BS.

That explains why my BS Meter has been pegged since Climategate started.  CO2 Insanity the gift that keeps on giving.

Source: Climate Realists

Comments Off on New Study CO2 Only 5-10% of Global Warming

Filed under Climategate, Co2 Insanity

Not Even Ash Wednesday

Here’s a video of a volcanic eruption in Iceland on March 1, 2009.

It’s not even Ash Wednesday, but this volcano in Iceland is blowing it’s top.

Thousands of flights are grounded all over Northern Europe waiting for the ash to dissipate or head in another direction.

A geophysicist in Iceland warned the chaos caused by ash drifting from the volcano under the Eyjafjallajokull glacier about 75 miles east of Reykjavik could cause trouble for days or weeks. “It is likely that the production of ash will continue at a comparable level for some days or weeks. But where it disrupts travel, that depends on the weather,” said Einar Kjartansson, a geophysicist at the Icelandic Meteorological Office. “It depends how the wind carries the ash.”

What will be next?  Will The Goracle or Danny Glover call a press conference and blame it on global warming?  Will the government try to carbon tax the volcano for being naughty and spewing out CO2? Will Pachauri come out with a new report stating that the glaciers in Iceland will melt by 2035? Will the EPA come out with new rules regulating volcanoes?

I bet all that ash floating around may cause some global cooling, and cause some “warmer alarmists” heads to spin.

Perhaps we should consider getting The Goracle to sacrifice a virgin to appease the Volcano God.

Source:  Guardian.co.uk

1 Comment

Filed under Co2 Insanity, Science

Volcanos Hot – CO2 Not

mtetna01Per an article by John O’Sullivan on Suite 101 a new study proves volcanos are hot and CO2 is not!

Global warming and acid oceans have been blamed on greenhouse gases from human fossil fuels. Now growing evidence proves Mother Nature is the most likely cause.

Mother nature?  Not AGW?

A study by Australian geology researcher, Timothy Casey disproves the recent claims by alarmist environmentalists that man-made emissions of carbon dioxide have been causing ocean acidification.

Oops!  What? No acidification?

These disturbing claim has been perplexing geologists, among other researchers, that have failed to detect any increase in acidification in the word’s rivers, lakes, reservoirs and aquariums.

So CO2 is so selective it gets into the world’s oceans, but ignores lakes, streams, rivers, reservoirs, aquariums, not to mention my hot tub? Yeah right!

This study supports what we’re talking about now.

Researchers have looked again at the numbers obtained by oceanographers (i.e. Hillier & Watts (2007)) that surveyed 201,055 submarine volcanoes. From this they concluded an astounding total of 3,477,403 submarine volcanoes must reasonably exist worldwide. They based this finding on the earlier and well-respected observations of Batiza (1982) who found that at least 4 per cent of seamounts are active volcanoes.

As per the usual the IPCC conveniently ignores all these volcanos and cherry picks data to fit their AGW theory…

None of the more than 2,000 active submarine volcanoes have even been discussed in Kerrick (2001), a paper referred to by the IPCC and used to eliminate volcanoes as an important factor in Co2 output into the atmosphere.

Furthermore, Kerrick (2001) justifies the omission of mid oceanic ridge emissions by claiming that mid oceanic ridges discharge less Co2 than is consumed by mid oceanic ridge hydrothermal carbonate systems. There is no evidence to support such a conclusion.

There seems to be increasing volcanic activity, too.

Casey’s study looked at examples such as the Blue Lake in the crater of dormant volcano, Mount Gambier now acidifying due to volcanogenic CO2 input. It lies in the regional centre of the Limestone Coast in the South East of South Australia. It has now been found Mount Gambier is not quite so dormant as some alarmist studies suggested. If this fact was repeated world-wide then it would dispel concerns that human emitted greenhouse gases were the cause of rising levels of sea acidity. The real culprit seems to have been Nature all along.

(I will add that similar is occurring in the Mammoth Mountain area in California  There are areas where gases are seeping out of the ground and killing trees and other vegetation.  More evidence of CO2 venting into the atmosphere).

The conclusion is therefore becoming very clear that atmospheric carbon dioxide can not be the cause of oceanic acidification as we once thought.Thus we may fairly infer it is a non-problem.

In addition to this I have always wondered why they measure CO2 on Mauna Loa because it’s an active volcano.  I wonder how much this inflates the amount of CO2 they claim is in the atmosphere?

Yet another faux pas by the IPCC and their buddies.  The lies just keep on coming.

Source:  Suite 101

Comments Off on Volcanos Hot – CO2 Not

Filed under Co2 Insanity, Science


NASA Conveyor BeltAl Gore said the Gulf Stream was going to shut down but per several sources on the Internet it’s not shutting down, not slowing down, in fact it’s speeding up again. Sorry Al, looks like you lose again!

There are articles at these locations note the trend:

There is even a paper on this at:

I Googled “Gulf Stream Slowing 2009” and came up with some alarmist warmer type articles at the sites listed below for those into comedy.

You can get the point from the titles, but please review them.  It also appears that World Climate Report got it right with their article of August 22, 2007 titled “Ocean Circulation Slowdown: False Alarm.” Aren’t they one of the sites the warmers scream about being wrong and in cahoots with big oil or big coal or big natural gas or big something?  Hmmmmm……seems funny to me they got it right and a lot of warmer sites evidently didn’t (again).  Makes me wonder if some of them went to see The Day After Tomorrow and thought it was a documentary?

How many “gates” are we going to have before the general public, the government and the warmers wake up and smell the coffee.  I’ll reiterate that I certainly am not for polluting, wasting or destroying Mother Nature, but I would like some real science done by real scientists so that we can accurately assess situations on the globe without having the alarmist crowd screaming about every little thing.  You’d think they’d remember the story about “The Little Boy Who Cried Wolf” who yelled “wolf!” so many times that when one really did appear and he yelled “wolf!” he was ignored and got turned into a McWolfalds Happy Meal.  If the alarmist really keep this shrillness up some day we will really have a global emergency and no one’s going to believe them.

More CO2 Insanity.  When will it end?


Comments Off on Gulfstreamgate

Filed under Co2 Insanity, 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

California Jobs Initiative Petition – Stop CARB

ScreenHunter_01 Mar. 17 10.52Here is a link to the California Jobs Initiative Petition to get CARB (California Air Resources Board) to cease with the CO2 BS until the job market improves.  If you live in California and don’t want the state to be more screwed up than it already is please download, sign and send it in.  Get your friends to sign, too.  This will cost jobs in California, not create them.

You can thank AG Jerry Brown (aka: Governor Moonbeam) for the lovely title he came up with to make it sound like we’ll all die from smog if we sign it.

Here’s another link to the California Jobs Initiative website.

Here is a link that analyzes the effect of this bill from Environmental Valuation & Cost Benefit News. According to them…

In terms of employment, this output loss is equivalent to the loss of roughly half a million jobs for the state due to minimum ARB cost, 900,000 jobs loss due to costs to consumers, and 1.1 million jobs loss due to costs to small businesses. A loss of 1.1 million jobs represents over 3% of the total population of California.

We’ll be green and unemployed.  The Governator and the dolts at CARB don’t give a hoot if you starve or not, nor do many of the elected representatives in this state of confusion.

Source: Kill CARB Org

Comments Off on California Jobs Initiative Petition – Stop CARB

Filed under Co2 Insanity, Editor, Politics

"Beyond Doubt?"

Dr.-Megan-ClarkABC News in Australia reports here that CISRO says “Climatge chage is beyond doubt.”

The head of the CSIRO, Dr Megan Clark, says the evidence of global warming is unquestionable, and in Australia it is backed by years of robust research.

“Unquestionable?” ” Beyond doubt?”  Sounds pretty convincing, but I’m not biting.

“We know two things. We know that our CO2 has never risen so quickly. We are now starting to see CO2 and methane in the atmosphere at levels that we just haven’t seen for the past 800,000 years, possibly even 20 million years,” she said.

So, she only knows two things but she’s a know-it-all?  Here is a chart from Junk Science.com, you can again judge for yourself whether it’s reality or CO2 inasnity.  Looks like a downward trend to me.

Source: ABC News Australia

Frankly I think she’s basing her opinon on hysterical data and not historical data.

Comments Off on "Beyond Doubt?"

Filed under Editor


Rub-a-dub-dubThis is what the title of this website refers to.  This is the kind of insanity that is surrounding Global Warming.

Here is an interesting article about AGW and false advertising by the British Government.  According to Watts Up With That…

TWO government advertisements that use nursery rhymes to warn people of the dangers of climate change have been banned by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) for exaggerating the potential harm.

I find it rather amazing that they have not only stooped to lying, they have now hit a new low of using nursery rhymes as a tool.  While not touched upon in the article I have to wonder if this is another attempt at brainwashing children to believe falsehoods about AGW.

The ad should be good for bathtub sales, providing anyone believes them.

Source:  www.wattsupwiththat.com

Comments Off on Rub-a-dub-dub?

Filed under Editor