The good news is that we have the practical solutions at hand to dramatically reduce our carbon emissions, slow the pace of global warming, and pass on a healthier, safer world to future generations.
With your help, we can accomplish it.
Together, we can tackle global warming.
Now I am getting old… well is 45 old yet? …. maybe not but anyway it is older than I was yesterday and I can recall a time when I really believed that nobody and by ‘nobody’ I mean nobody in their right mind, would fall for the insane claims made by global warming “science”. They are really extreme claims. Well the were extreme claims until we had our heads saturated with propaganda from a 100 billion dollar industry. Now they are commonplace. Seriously folks, space science is expensive. Nasa is huge still, the US air force space program is huge, but we spend multiples of that space funding on global warming….. The money is hidden in so many corners that every time I’ve gotten started evaluating funding, I cannot begin to track it. The money supporting global warming alarmism is so massive, and so prevalent, that it would take millions of dollars simply to document it.
And every single penny is being spent for left-wing political causes.
You can’t count it. It is too big. You can’t even imagine all of it, because it doesn’t stop.
It is spent in droves on fake and fraudulent scientific study. It is spent on activism, meetings, travel, hotels, fake energy generation, advertising, vehicles, scientific conferences, equipment, computer centers, political campaigns and every conceivable method of self promotion imagined by anyone who ever considered the subject. The money is endless, as it is government money.
So then we have a group of alleged scientists. A union say, of concerned ones, who believe in an enlightened future for humanity. A future with no CO2 emission, a high fruit and vegetable diet, limited or no nuclear power generation, and fake energy solutions such as biofuel and wind for our future power needs. All based on unscientific reactionism and good feelings. Science does not support much of their conclusion, yet they are a union of concerned scientists and they are happy to conclude for us BUT the conclusions don’t match observation……..
That leaves me concerned.
How is it that so many scientists can gather together and sign their names to unscientific beliefs. The problem is so bad that you can find more scientific fact in a Mosque than you can in the opening quote above.
In fact, this world is so perverted that the Catholic religion is more grounded in science than the Union of Concerned Scientists……..and the Union of Concerned Scientists has greater faith. Shocking..no? Why can I claim their faith is greater than the Catholic religion? Because unlike religion, their claims are demonstrably false. Not moderately tweaked, or potentially subject to interpretation, demonstrably false!
Talk about an inverted perverted, yes is no, right is wrong world………. yet it is our world. You can dissemble every page of the UCS website and will find little beyond political conclusion, but this is ostensibly a climate blog so let’s just look at the climate change claims on the front page of UCS to examine the claims above.
Global warming is already having significant and harmful effects on our communities, our health, and our climate.
FACT: Main stream science holds that current global warming is minimal and difficult to measure by ground stations or even with modern satellite equipment. No attributable trends of any sort on communities, health, and extreme climate events have been positively attributed to temperature change.
Sea level rise is accelerating.
FACT: Sea level rise has been going on for centuries. It has not measurably accelerated, and increases in sea level may have recently reduced. The rate of change in sea level rise has not been successfully correlated to the very mild warming that thousands of land temperature stations have measured. Don’t believe it, check this wikipedia link.
The number of large wildfires is growing.
Now why this particular bit of nonsense would be attached to “climate change” is beyond reasonable, yet it is the third sentence in a 27 million dollar company’s global warming website. Shouldn’t we consider forest management as a primary driver before 0.8 degrees of warming? Shouldn’t we also consider the increased amount of forest we currently have, the lack of allowing smaller fires to occur, or what about the simple fact that 80 years ago we let forests burn without significant documentation. What does that do to the data. Well….. then there is the data.
A simple study found by a google search: http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2013/sierra-forest-fire-severity-10-01-2013.html
It found no trend of increasing fire severity in the Sierra Nevada management region in California over the past three decades. In fact, the study found that between 1984 and 2010, the amount of high-severity fire in the Sierra was lower than its natural level, before modern fire suppression.
An unscientific conclusion from the Union of Concerned Scientists? There are plenty of other papers which support this individual conclusion. We shouldn’t be surprised either as the concept that 0.8C would measurably increase “fires” is ludicrous on the face of it.
Dangerous heat waves are becoming more common.
Now you would think that someone like myself who believes in the warming effect of CO2, that I might be inclined to agree with this one. But heat waves are extreme weather events, not long term offsets from the mean temperature, and this claim is as bogus as the others. From the scientifically outrageous left-wing United States EPA —- heat waves.
Heat waves occurred with high frequency in the 1930s, and these remain the most severe heat waves in the U.S. historical record(see Figure 1). Many years of intense drought (the “Dust Bowl”) contributed to these heat waves by depleting soil moisture and reducing the moderating effects of evaporation.
This EPA statement is followed up with claims of increasing heat waves in recent years but still much less than in the pre-global warming years. The key here is again — attribution. If you cannot attribute heat waves to CO2 emission, you cannot get funding and you cannot make the claim that CO2 is causing heat waves. Nobody in science has been able to associate increased heat waves with CO2 based climate change. It doesn’t stop science from making the claim though does it?
Extreme storm events are increasing in many areas. More severe droughts are occurring in others.
Now look at the prevarication in this beauty of a statement. I can’t argue that extreme storms and droughts haven’t increased in “many areas” because I would have to check all of the areas. Scientifically and statistically, this statement is impossible to contradict. However…….it is GLOBAL WARMING…. we are supposed to be worried about right? The IPCC has warned that warming across the globe causes increased storms and droughts. YET again, the facts contradict the “scientists” claims.
More realistic calculations, based on the underlying physical principles8
that take into account changes in available energy, humidity and wind speed, suggest that there has been little change in drought over the past 60 years.
Now to be fair, there are literally thousands of pro-drought papers primarily based on models. Droughts are scary and a good indicator of regional financial impact. They make good headlines, yet like forest fires, there isn’t any observational data supporting a true link between drought and the mild global warming. Here is an example for Illinois:
And that leaves us with extreme storms:
Tropical cyclone accumulated cyclone energy (ACE) has exhibited strikingly large global interannual variability during the past 40‐years. In the pentad since 2006, Northern Hemisphere and global tropical cyclone ACE has decreased dramatically to the lowest levels since the late 1970s. Additionally, the global frequency of tropical cyclones has reached a historical low. Here evidence is presented demonstrating that considerable variability in tropical cyclone ACE is associated with the evolution of the character of observed large‐scale climate mechanisms including the El Niño Southern Oscillation and Pacific Decadal Oscillation. In contrast to record quiet North Pacific tropical cyclone activity in 2010, the North Atlantic basin remained very active by contributing almost one‐third of the overall calendar year global ACE.
So that is just the first paragraph. Not the whole thing but every sentence in the first paragraph on climate change from the union of concerned scientists is false information. My conclusion, and probably yours…… THESE ARE NOT SCIENTISTS.
I can continue with the rest of the next statements, but I don’t have enough time to contradict every paid moron on the planet. These people have a 27 plus million dollar annual budget, and unlike a simple business owner like myself, they have near zero cost for that budget. No real overhead and over 90% profit at zero tax. Their resources are equivalent to a functional and profitable 300 million dollar company (my estimate). Their product is climate alarmism. Yet they claim to be simple scientists who work the table as a side job. Make no mistake by their claims of unbiased scientific understanding, these people are most certainly swayed by the cash.
Now there are still plenty of left-leaning readers still who harbor all kinds of screwed up anti-common sense beliefs about society, taxes and fairness. I ask the following question: If the director of UCS woke up tomorrow and realized, as we all should, that the climate change branch of their organization was bunk, does anyone imagine that she would recommend any change in their public position?
If I woke up tomorrow and observations contradicted my conclusions, I absolutely would change my opinion. Unfortunately, or fortunately for most of us here, our opinions are based on science rather than the money colored faith of the “greens” and our beliefs are influenced by observation. With organizations like this, sweeping things like Climategate under the rug is a priority, sweeping failed climate models under the rug is an emergency.
Watch for it, today climate models are the next climate gate. They have to go as badly as the hockey stick.
The director of the Union for Concerned Scientists is waking up to the exact nightmare scenario that their company cannot absorb… Climate models have failed.
‘Twill be interesting over the next few years to see the response. Don’t get too excited though, killing a company that large isn’t something which can happen overnight and the UCS is a teenie-tiny branch of the whole Medusa. My certainty on this aspect is so great that I don’t believe the global warming industry would be killed by a full-fledged ice age. It would morph, but the seven headed beast would live on.