Change is what the climate does: January 2013

Thursday, January 31, 2013

What The POTUS Could Have Said

The President’s words as revised by: chris y at Watts Up With That

“We, the people, still believe that our obligations as Americans are not just to our desire for immediate entitlements, but to all posterity. We will respond to the threat of ballooning debt, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations. Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of economists, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging spending, and crippling interest payments on our debt, and powerful special interests demanding their share of my money. The path towards sustainable spending will be long and sometimes difficult. But America cannot resist this transition; we must lead it. We cannot allow other nations to enable our growing debt, as it crushes new jobs and new industries – we must claim the promise of a budget surplus and shrinking debt. That is how we will maintain our economic vitality, for it is economic prosperity that funds the preservation of our national treasure – our forests and waterways; our croplands and snowcapped peaks. That is how we will preserve our planet, commanded to our care by God. That’s what will lend meaning to the creed our fathers once declared.”

All fixed.

The POTUS needs to stop chasing the phantom of the atmosphere and focus on what he can control.

Extreme weather.occurred in the past when CO2 atmospheric concentration was lower. Reducing CO2 emissions is expensive and irrelevant.

Sunday, January 27, 2013

Ignorance of the POTUS

We should expect more from the President of the United States. The POTUS is often characterized as the leader of the free world. Should we not expect this leader to acknowledge reality and be guided by it?

In his inaugural address to launch his second term in office President Obama has ignored reality and indicated that he will aggressively target climate change in his second term. He said:

'We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations'

'Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, & crippling drought, & more powerful storms'

Ah, the children and future generations will be saved because we know how to control the climate. Can you hear Mother Nature chuckling in the background at that pompous assumption? Human can control the climate? Really? We can adapt and we can get out of the way of some manifestations of climate change but we know how to prevent a Superstorm Sandy? Really? Change is what the climate does. The POTUS subscribes to POGO Politics and thinks it is our fault and something must be done.

We must act because of the imaginary threat that a trace gas essential to life on Earth poses to all mankind. That is the implication of the words of the POTUS. And yet if you take time to examine history you will find out that forest fires are on the decrease even as CO2 increases its presence in the atmosphere. Devastating forest fires occurred in the past despite lower levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. You will find that contemporary droughts are not as severe as they have been in the past even as CO2 increases its presence in the atmosphere. And you will find that neither tornadoes nor hurricanes have become more frequent or more powerful even as CO2 increases its presence in the atmosphere. The correct conclusion to draw is that CO2 has nothing to do with these unwelcome but natural events

As human emissions of CO2 continue to rise severe weather is supposed to become more frequent and severe. The IPCC Srex report disagrees.

Mother Nature must have missed the memo as did the POTUS because the exact opposite is happening.

Here are reports of decreasing trends in:

Interestingly, as CO2 has increased in the atmosphere the failure of green policies has continued to rise as well.

The only voice that counts in science is that of Mother Nature and she is saying loud and clear that CO2 does not have much if anything to do with climate change. After all, if you have extreme weather in times of lower CO2 concentration and bad storms in times of higher CO2 atmospheric concentration then isn't the correct conclusion that CO2 has nought to do with it?

People are learning that CO2 has nothing to do with the temperature or the climate.

The evidence mounts as a new study shows that tropical storms have decreased in frequency since 1872. Weather was more variable and extreme in the past.

If we are a in warming world then why was snow cover at a record level in December 2012? As the world warms are we not supposed to see less snow and more rain in the winter? Why are 2012 winter temperatures so cold in a warming world?

The ignorance of this information on climate change emanating from the executive office is disturbing. It does not inspire confidence in the leader of the free world. It’s pathetic and it is not the first time. So much for the overwhelming judgement of science. Actually, it is overwhelming just not in the way the POTUS has been led to believe.

Climate changes continuously and possesses no weapon of mass destruction that threatens future generations. Just as the intelligence of WMDs in Iraq turned out to be a myth so too will history look back upon the current scare of man made climate change as an example of mass hysteria complemented with confirmation bias groupthink.

But was the presence of WMDs the real reason for the invasion of Iraq or was there something else afoot? Is the ‘threat of climate change’ meaning the threat of man made climate change the real reason for the actions taken to combat it?

“We’ve got to ride the global-warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” ~ Former Senator Tim Wirth

Compliments of the current POTUS the US debt increased almost 60% in the last 4 years. The feds need money. Can a green tax on fossil fuels be far behind? Are you more likely to acquiesce to a tax increase if they admit they spent all your money and need more or if you believe that the sky is falling and we need the tax to save ourselves and the world for our kids and future generations? Easy one to answer. Manufacture a crisis and get more money out of people. We can claim we saved the world for our kids and theirs. Then, in a show of how much we love them and how concerned we are for their welfare, we present them with the bill. What will it be then? Twenty trillion $? Thirty trillion $? Your guess is as good as mine.

Meanwhile POTUS cronies make out like bandits. We get poorer while the political 1% get richer. And all in the name of saving humanity. Perfect scam. Create a crisis, pursue policies which garner additional power and money into the hands of the federal government and its supporters then, when the crisis doesn’t arrive, claim success and sheepishly accept the kudos. You are a hero. Extreme weather doesn’t disappear or become less frequent but by the time anyone notices there will be another, more important, manufactured crisis on the horizon that must be attended to by the next accumulator of power. The game continues.

There is no climate crisis. There never was. We have been suckered. Extreme weather has always been with us. The ‘deniers’ were right all along and if we had listened to them our incomes might be higher and our taxes lower. It is a game designed to suck more out of us and leave us with less freedom with more power over our lives in the hands of the central government. Either by tax or higher cost energy or both we will pay. The game is all about power and money.

Can you hear Gomer? Well, golllly! Surprise! Surprise! Surprise!

And we fell for it again. Get ready for the next one. They will be back with another planet threatening crisis looking for more concentration of power and money in the hands of the few. A crisis - even one invented for the purpose.

Quote by Club of Rome: "In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill....All these dangers are caused by human intervention....and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself....believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is “a real one or….one invented for the purpose."

Pinky: what are we going to do tonight, Brain?
Brain: same thing we do every night, Pinky. Try to take over the world.

Global Governance - the ultimate goal. The truth will not be allowed to get in the way of it.

The sheeple will be blinded with fear and bathed in guilt for the benefit of the political 1%.

And now that Obama is ready to maintain the delusion of man made climate change and the delusion that humans can do something about it Greenpeace has an agenda for him. The Greenpeace plan is an example of how to destroy a country from within without firing a shot. You mislead the leaders into believing in a falsehood like CAGW. Then you encourage the leaders of the country to pursue policies that won’t solve the non-problem but will waste the capital and resources of the country in a misguided effort to address a phantom. The country destroys its energy infrastructure for you and slips into economic decline back toward the poverty which it had successfully conquered. Here is Greenpeace.

Put a final period on the end of 'No Keystone Pipeline' -- 'Accelerate the expansion of clean, safe renewable energy' -- 'Make carbon unaffordable' -- 'Save the Arctic' -- 'Support communities most impacted by climate change'

As the US shuffles off in pursuit of these unnecessary goals say hello to fuel poverty, lower living standards, more political power in the hands of the few and no change whatever in extreme weather. If our leaders elect to pursue these policies they will have slipped down the rabbit hole to visit Alice in Wonderland because they are not living above ground in the real world. Delusions, as we are about to find out, can be costly.

Combine the trillions that is advocated to be spent on climate change with the entitlement commitments ‘we’ make to each other and you have a recipe for fiscal disaster. Our future generations will be most grateful for our concern with their welfare.

Unless Obama can figure out how to control that big ball of fire that sometimes graces our skies we cannot control the climate.

Kool-aid anyone?

Friday, January 25, 2013

Snowjob

Taken verbatim from Steve Goddard. Links added by yours truly.

CO2 makes it too warm for snow
CO2 makes Greenland melt, which causes the Gulf Stream to collapse, which causes heavy snow
CO2 has caused the demise of the ski industry
CO2 caused the heavy snows, because CO2 makes everything more extreme
CO2 caused the lack of snow. It will only get worse
CO2 caused the Arctic to melt, which produces more heavy snow
CO2 causes a lack of snow, because CO2 makes everything more extreme
CO2 causes more snow, because it can’t snow when the weather is too cold
You are an anti-science flat-earther if you don’t believe all of the above.

CO2 is a truly magical gas. Is there anything it can’t do?

It is all so confusing to us laypeople. Glad the experts know what they are talking about.

Here is a compilation of other contradicting statements from the world of climate science on what is likely to happen. What is a layperson to believe? Settled science it ain't. Even the laity can draw that conclusion.

The above list is not meant to be exhaustive and other instances of the weather offering up contradictions to the politically preferred CAGW viewpoint could be presented. To mention just one that occurred in the spring of 2012 you will remember the early blooming cherry blossoms in Washington, D.C. The Huffington Post has blamed this on global warming.

However, in Japan, due to a particularly cold winter their famed cherry blossoms were late bloomers in the spring(2012). Is this the climate change canary for global cooling? HuffPo logic would seem to dictate this conclusion.

The warm 2012 US spring was offered as proof of manmade global warming by the hysterical MSM. Those who endured the Alaskan 2012 winter or the Swedish 2012 summer might beg to differ. Hot here, cold there. A temperature pattern not so rare.

From the ‘Department of It’s all so Confusing’ comes disagreement about whether to eat meat or not. James Hansen says no. Some warmists are naughty.

This just in. Carbon dioxide is allegedly making the Arctic both wetter and drier, and both are bad.

Never has the quotation from Richard Feynman been so appropriate:

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts"

As an intelligent human commenting on CAGW you cannot be unaware of these instances of confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance that Mother Nature offers up for our consideration. To pick one side as correct while ignoring the contradictory observations of others is to engage in willful self delusion. The science is obviously not settled and a debate is raging whether you wish to acknowledge it or not. Shouting that the sky is falling while Mother Nature herself is failing to behave according to the theory of CO2 induced global warming or to obey the predictions of the global climate models defies reason and the scientific method.

There must be another reason for this abominable human behaviour. It wouldn’t have anything to do with this, would it?

From the Club of Rome:

"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill....All these dangers are caused by human intervention....and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself....believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is “a real one or….one invented for the purpose."

One invented for the purpose. Does that sum it up?

They are backing the wrong horse. Change is what the climate does. There is nothing going on that hasn’t happened before and the human use of fossil fuels has nothing to do with climate change or severe weather.

When people are confronted with data that contradict the predictions of climate experts they begin to treat it like the caffeine is good/bad for you controversy. It looks to us like the experts do not know what they are talking about and we can safely ignore them.
The sky is not falling and to believe so is to enter the world of Harold Camping which scientists seem ever more prone to do. This does not do their reputations or that of science any good and causes a loss of esteem and an increase in cynicism among laypeople. Science can become a joke and that is dangerous. Scientists should not cry wolf. It is bad enough when reporters and politicians do it.

Joe Romm: "While we can’t avoid serious global warming at this point, we still have time to avoid “Armageddon” — the end times battle for humanity!"

Sounds like Harold Camping to me.

In view of my failure to succumb to the CAGW fear and guilt being peddled by people who ought to know better there will be no worry in my mind over my carbon footprint nor will my actions embrace the green mantra. When people tell me that the science is settled, there is a scientific consensus and the debate is over my skeptical radar goes on full alert and so should yours. To claim that severe weather that we are always experiencing around the world is unprecedented, unequivocal, accelerating and due to the human burning of fossil fuels is to ignore history. Our ancestors recorded instances of ‘bad’ weather (pdf) some more severe than that of modern times at levels of CO2 both lower and higher than what we experience today.

"The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.” ~Bertrand Russell