Tag: Environmentalism

Quote of the Day – Chicken Little Edition

KevinLeave a comment

This time it’s me, paraphrasing what I’ve seen in several places recently:

“Environmentalism” is all about CONTROL. You can tell because no matter what the dire warning is – “Climate Change” (née Anthropogenic Global Warming), Global Cooling (The coming Ice Age), the Population Bomb (which Ehrlich is still not ashamed of [read that – how can someone be so wrong for so long and still hold a professorship?]), Nuclear Winter, and to a lesser extent Silent Spring and the Ozone Hole – the solution is ALWAYS THE SAME: CONTROL OF OUR LIVES AND CONTROL OF OUR MONEY BY OUR “INTELLECTUAL SUPERIORS,” THE MORONS WE PUT IN PUBLIC OFFICE AND THE “EXPERTS” THEY APPOINT.

My Take on WarmerGate

KevinLeave a comment

My Take on WarmerGate

Van der Leun points to an excellent piece at Chicago Boyz, Scientists Are Not Software Engineers, which contains an outstanding visual representation of the issue, which I will reproduce here:

It’s hard to explain to non-programmers just how bad the code is but I will try. Suppose the code was a motorcycle. Based on the repeated statements that Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming was “settled science” you would expect that the computer code that helped settle the science would look like this…


…when in reality it looks like this:

Do read the whole piece.

I am reminded of this Sidney Harris cartoon from (I believe) the late 1960’s that I have had hanging on my office wall for literally years:

(Note: cartoon pulled due to requested $35 honorarium by artist. It can be seen here. It’s the “Then A Miracle Occurs” cartoon.)
As many have said, we’re supposed to rein in the entire economies of all the Western nations, cutting fossil fuel use by huge percentages and adversely affecting the standard of living of billions of people based on this? Man adds carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, “Then a miracle occurs!” and irreversible global warming kills us all?

I don’t fucking think so. We’ve played this “mankind kills Mother Gaia” game before, and the point of it is and has always been “Give up your rights or we all DIE!!“

No. They’ve gotten farther with this scam than any before, but NO. Not this time either.

I Wonder What Dr. Richard Lindzen Thinks of the CRU Hack

KevinLeave a comment

I Wonder What Dr. Richard Lindzen Thinks of the CRU Hack?

Ben of Carnaby Fudge linked to an EXCELLENT six-part YouTube series, the Competitive Enterprise Institute seminar on Global Warming alarmism. It was recorded recently, but before the hacked emails, data, and models were released on the web. Dr. Lindzen is the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT and has held that chair since 1983. In most circles that would make him a “primary source.”

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmGiiNQ0yHQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&&w=640&h=385]
Watch all six parts.

An Interesting Speech

KevinLeave a comment

S. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia, a distinguished research professor at George Mason University, and president of the Science and Environmental Policy Project, gave a speech at Hillsdale College in August of 2007. Printed in their periodical Imprimus (with some rather irritating misplaced hypens in the on-line version), I strongly recommend it to you. It’s on the topic of Anthropogenic Global Warming, or the lack thereof, and entitled Global Warming: Man-Made or Natural? Excerpt:

What about the fact—as cited by, among others, those who produced the IPCC report—that every major greenhouse computer model (there are two dozen or so) shows a large temperature increase due to human burning of fossil fuels? Fortunately, there is a scientific way of testing these models to see whether current warming is due to a man-made greenhouse effect. It involves comparing the actual or observed pattern of warming with the warming pattern predicted by or calculated from the models. Essentially, we try to see if the “fingerprints” match—”fingerprints” meaning the rates of warming at different latitudes and altitudes.

For instance, theoretically, greenhouse warming in the tropics should register at increasingly high rates as one moves from the surface of the earth up into the atmosphere, peaking at about six miles above the earth’s surface. At that point, the level should be greater than at the surface by about a factor of three and quite pronounced, according to all the computer models. In reality, however, there is no increase at all. In fact, the data from balloon-borne radiosondes show the very opposite: a slight decrease in warming over the equator.

The fact that the observed and predicted patterns of warming don’t match indicates that the man-made greenhouse contribution to current temperature change is insignificant. This fact emerges from data and graphs collected in the Climate Change Science Program Re-port 1.1, published by the federal government in April 2006 (see www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap1-1/finalreport/default.htm). It is remarkable and puzzling that few have noticed this disparity between observed and predicted patterns of warming and drawn the obvious scientific conclusion.

And this:

You will note that this has been a rational discussion. We asked the important question of whether there is appreciable man-made warming today. We presented evidence that indicates there is not, thereby suggesting that attempts by governments to control green-house-gas emissions are pointless and unwise. Nevertheless, we have state governors calling for CO2 emissions limits on cars; we have city mayors calling for mandatory CO2 controls; we have the Supreme Court declaring CO2 a pollutant that may have to be regulated; we have every industrialized nation (with the exception of the U.S. and Australia) signed on to the Kyoto Protocol; and we have ongoing international demands for even more stringent controls when Kyoto expires in 2012. What’s going on here?

What, indeed?

Read the whole thing, and the piece where I found the link in comments.