U.S. Supreme Court Recommends Freeman Dyson

Global Warming, 21 June 2011

Sam Katzman

Supreme Skeptics

Changing Tides: Research Center Under Fire for 'Adjusted' Sea-Level Data

Is climate change raising sea levels, as Al Gore has argued -- or are climate scientists doctoring the data?

The University of Colorado’s Sea Level Research Group decided in May to add 0.3 millimeters -- or about the thickness of a fingernail -- every year to its actual measurements of sea levels, sparking criticism from experts who called it an attempt to exaggerate the effects of global warming.

"Gatekeepers of our sea level data are manufacturing a fictitious sea level rise that is not occurring," said James M. Taylor, a lawyer who focuses on environmental issues for the Heartland Institute.

Steve Nerem, the director of the widely relied-upon research center, told that his group added the 0.3 millimeters per year to the actual sea level measurements because land masses, still rebounding from the ice age, are rising and increasing the amount of water that oceans can hold.

Methane: myths & misrepresentations

by Barry Brill

May 18, 2011

The New Zealand Government is the first to legislate financial penalties on natural gas (methane or CH4) emanating from ruminant animals.

The claimed justification is that the ETS levy is an “insurance policy” against the possibility that methane might contribute to a future of dangerous global warming, as the IPCC has theorized.

But, as with any insurance, it should not be taken out unless the premium is reasonably commensurate with the risk being hedged. The obvious problem is that nobody can quantify the value at risk, or the cost of the premium, or the the scope of the coverage, or the likelihood of the event. This article deals only with the last of these.

The IPCC believes dangerous global warming might occur if the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases, expressed in carbon-dioxide-equivalents (CO2e), were to exceed 450 parts per million. CO2 volumes are currently about 390ppm.

Carbon — demonized by climate propaganda 

Joanne Nova

The PR machine has spent twenty years pretending to be scientific while they push poll the phrase “carbon is pollution”  (Don’t you want to stop pollution?) But turn the polling inside out and the nonsense is exposed. Stephen Harper takes the PR team’s theme to its logical conclusion and uses it against them.


Forget plate tectonics and continental drift. A trace gas in the atmosphere can reshape the Earth, at least, that’s apparently how many people see it. A new survey shows that over a third of the population think that climate change induces not just tsunamis, but even volcanic eruptions. Worse, 37% of people are so convinced carbon is pollution that they think it would be a worthwhile aim to reduce the carbon content of their body. (The ultimate diet, you might say).

World's Oldest Temperature Record: No Significant Warming Since 1995, Cooling Instead

The Central England Temperature (CET) database is the world's oldest instrumental temperature record. Its temperature data has been used in hundreds of peer-reviewed studies because of its uniqueness and accuracy. It also has the advantage of never being manipulated.

Shale Gas Shock Challenges Climate and Energy Policies 

London, 4 May - The Global Warming Policy Foundation today publishes a detailed report about the shale gas revolution and its likely implications for UK and international climate policy.

The report The Shale Gas Shock, written by Matt Ridley and with a foreword by Professor Freeman Dyson, finds that shale gas:

  • is not only abundant but relatively cheap and therefore promises to take market share from nuclear, coal and renewable energy and to replace oil in some transport and industrial uses, over coming decades.
  • will help to keep the price of nitrogen fertiliser low and hence keep food prices down, other things being equal.
  • is unlikely to be a major source of pollution or methane emissions, but in contrast promises to reduce pollution and accelerate the decarbonisation of the world economy.

Matt Ridley, the author of the GWPF report, said:

"Abundant and relatively cheap shale gas promises to lower the cost of gas relative to oil, coal and renewables. It indefinitely postpones the exhaustion of fossil fuels and makes reducing emissions of carbon dioxide possible without raising energy prices."

Water vapour caused one-third of global warming in 1990s, study reveals 

Experts say their research does not undermine the scientific consensus on man-made climate change, but call for 'closer examination' of the way computer models consider water vapour  by David Adam  29 January 2011


Scientists have underestimated the role that water vapour plays in determining global temperature changes, according to a new study that could fuel further attacks on the science of climate change.

The research, led by one of the world's top climate scientists, suggests that almost one-third of the global warming recorded during the 1990s was due to an increase in water vapour in the high atmosphere, not human emissions of greenhouse gases. A subsequent decline in water vapour after 2000 could explain a recent slowdown in global temperature rise, the scientists add.

The experts say their research does not undermine the scientific consensus that emissions of greenhouse gases from human activity drive global warming, but they call for "closer examination" of the way climate computer models consider water vapour.

Climate models go cold

Financial Post: by David Evans

8 April 2011 

The debate about global warming has reached ridiculous proportions and is full of micro-thin half-truths and misunderstandings. I am a scientist who was on the carbon gravy train, understands the evidence, was once an alarmist, but am now a sceptic. Watching this issue unfold has been amusing but, lately, worrying. This issue is tearing society apart, making fools out of our politicians.
Let's set a few things straight. The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s. But the gravy train was too big, with too many jobs, industries, trading profits, political careers, and the possibility of world government and total control riding on the outcome. So rather than admit they were wrong, the governments, and their tame climate scientists, now outrageously maintain the fiction that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant.

Climate non-issue in a cold,spring election

Financial Post:  by Terence Corcoran  21 April 2011

Science a shambles, politicians mostly dodge global warming scare

Health care, coalitions, corporate taxes. Where’s the looming climate disaster, the threat of the centuries, the end of life as we know it, the meltdown of all meltdowns? It is nowhere in this Canadian election, a non-issue — and for good reason.

That good reason is not the fact that the election is taking place during a cold spring — although if it were a hot spring it’s almost certain somebody would be waving the climate flag and calling for action.

Climate issues and carbon controls are non-issues because the science is a shambles and voters do not see global warming as an imminent threat to their welfare or even the welfare of next generations. They want jobs, they want good government, they want health care policy that will make them healthy rather than schemes that get politicians re-elected.

As for climate change, it is hard to get worked up when faced with a steady drip, drip of scientific evidence that undermines the claims of the official UN climate machine. Rising sea levels? Not happening. Millions of refugees fleeing afflicted areas? Not happening. Rising temperatures? Hard to nail down and incite alarm over when local conditions seem cooler rather than hotter.

The list of such reversals and backtracks is getting longer, as are the noses of assorted climate modellers and scientists who have been spreading climate alarm for decades.

Syndicate content