The demand for scary scenarios to prop up failing global warming arguments has apparently led two scientists at the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (PMEL), which is part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), to ignore 80 years of 20th Century ocean pH data as measured with glass electrode pH (GEPH) meters that include over 2 million records of ocean pH levels. These data do not line up with the PMEL team's computer modeling, a strong indicator that the model, for which its creator Dr. Richard Feely, has won a $100,000 Heinz Family Foundation award, is likely worthless scientifically (though clearly of great value politically). Just as with the Michael Mann hockey stick scam, this Feely scam needs to be exposed and discredited as junk science and its arrogant perpetrators forced to accept true peer review.
A new briefing paper by Dr. Indur Goklany examines the World Health Organization’s recent report on climate change and finds that its estimates of future mortality from global warming are grossly exaggerated. “Because of its willful exaggerations,” says Goklany, “the WHO study risks scaring people into taking ill-considered costly actions to limit greenhouse gases rather than focusing on higher priority global health issues such as hunger, malaria, and diarrhoeal diseases, which can be addressed at a fraction of the cost.”
The EPA has virtually rewritten the Clean Air Act to suit its own ends, and while a divided Congress refuses to act to rein in the agency, the Supreme Court had a shot and even admitted that the agency had overstepped its boundaries, but still let the EPA embark on a mad race to destroy the nation's foundational energy sources -- coal, oil, and natural gas. Even worse, new EPA regulations, which will cost the U.S. economy nearly $3 trillion and innumerable job losses, are backed by "secret science" that the EPA will not even share with Congress.
Global warming as policy is enriching the few at the expense of the many -- and doing nothing to improve the environment or lower global temperatures. So CFACT advisor Dr. Larry Bell suggests we find a way to tax those who are profiting from this distortion of science.
Leading European scientists are now predicting a long-term cooling trend will follow the past 17 years of relatively stable worldwide temperatures. Dr. Fritz Varentholt expects the world to get cooler in the future for three reasons: (1) we are or soon will be beginning on the downward flank of the Sun’s Gleissberg and Suess cycles; (2) solar activity during the next cycle may extend our current very weak one; and (3) ocean cycles will be in cooling phases over the next decades as well.
A brand-new study, reported in "Science" magazine, says the current climate models are “bloated with data,” but still cannot represent such huge variables as clouds and shifts in ocean currents. Statisticians are recommending a re-start. At the same time, other new studies are revealing that the sun has an even bigger role in climate than the current climate models understand. None of this makes any difference to ideologues -- or apparently to the Supreme Court, even though these new findings wholly refute the EPA's reliance on computer modeling to justify onerous regulations on carbon dioxide.
Alan Caruba gives a huge plug to Heartland Institute and its 9th International Conference on Climate Change -- which convenes July 7-9 in Las Vegas. Bet you won't hear much about this even on the nightly news.
In his new book, The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science, Canadian climatologist Tim Ball says his profession has been hijacked by a perverse political agenda whose chief backers have as their goal the de-industrialization of America. Maurice Strong, for example, has said that the only hope for the planet that the industrialized nations collapse, and that his job was to bring about this collapse. And the Club of Rome agreed that, "The real enemy then is humanity itself." No wonder times are hard!
Join CFACT and Climate Depot and debunk the global warming scare at the Ninth International Conference on Climate Change. July 7-9 in Vegas, baby!
The Obama Administration in 2013 alone imposed $1.86 trillion in new annual regulatory compliance costs for U.S. businesses and families, almost guaranteeing a flat economy at best. While only a few Americans consider environmental issues to be urgent, the EPA and the White House are doubling down on power generation, forcing prices upward and pressing for the shutdown of 40% of the U.S. energy base. All of this using "scientific research" (a) they they cannot even find, (b) that is "peer reviewed" only by cronies, or (c) that is tainted by massive contributions to advocacy groups like the American Lung Association. CFACT's Paul Driessen urges state and federal lawmakers and executives, and citizen and scientific groups, to take legal action and other steps to reverse this pattern of wanton disregard for the U.S. economiuc
The facts keep putting the lie to the global warming campaign's attempts to scare the world over Antarctica.
Marita Noon excoriates the Obama Administration for its stonewalling on Freedom of Information Act requests -- and for its chutzpah in ignoring the law in using the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Clean Air Act to restrict access to public and private lands for farming, ranching, and energy development, and reduce the availability of affordable electricity—making essential food and power costs ever-increasing. To stop this unlawful onslaught, Noon urges citizens to utilize the Information Quality Act
"What is perhaps most worrying is the increased tendency of pseudo-science in climate research." Which is more troubling, that Dr. Lennart Bengtsson was bullied and slandered, or that the warming crowd suppressed publication of his conclusion that climate computer models are inaccurate? If temperature observations show climate sensitivity to CO2 to be far less than is programmed into the models, does this not demand scientific publication?
The continuing drama of a President willing to push climate alarmism continues with the release of a report, the National Climate Assessment. It is a repeat of all the inaccuracies that have been generated by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
EPA assumes zero benefits from the burning of fossil fuels while proclaiming heavy costs from increased carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. Now, as Greens push for increasing the alleged "social cost of carbon" from the current 36/ton (up from $22/ton back in 2010) to an astonishing $43/ton, Roger Bezdek and Paul Driessen show that EPA is violating federal law (including Executive Order 12866) by ignoring the massive benefits to society (some $70 trillion in the U.S. alone) from fossil fuels use.