Archive for March, 2014

No global warming for 17 years 6 months

Tuesday, March 4th, 2014

Source: SPPI

click to enlarge

click to enlarge

by Christopher Monckton

1: This graph is highly topical. It is right up to date. Remote Sensing Systems, Inc. (RSS) is one of the two satellite-based datasets (the other is the University of Alabama at Huntsville (UAH). And RSS is one of the five standard global temperature datasets, which include the two satellite datasets and the three terrestrial datasets – Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS); the Hadley Centre/CRU dataset, version 4 (HadCRUT4); and the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). As this month, RSS is usually the first to report, and its latest monthly value, for February 2014, became available just hours ago. As far as I know, no one else yet has a graph including this hot-off-the-press data point. (more…)

Will the Supreme Court permit EPA climate fraud?

Tuesday, March 4th, 2014

Source: SPPIPool in front of the Supreme Court. Washington, D.C.

OPINION

If it does, the impacts on our lives, livelihoods, liberties and living standards will be enormous  

BY Paul Driessen

The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency. The case will determine how far EPA can extend its regulatory overreach, to control ?climate changing? carbon dioxide from power plants and other facilities ? by ignoring the Constitution?s ?separation of powers? provisions, rewriting clear language in the Clean Air Act, and disregarding laws that require the agency to consider both the costs and benefits of its regulations and what it is regulating.

Put more bluntly, the Court will decide whether EPA may deceive and defraud the American people, by implementing regulations that have no basis in honest science and will be ruinous to our economy. It is the most important energy, economic and environmental case to come before the Court it in decades. (more…)

Cartoon

Tuesday, March 4th, 2014

Source: Steve Huntera- science money

 

New Global Warming Report a Disgrace

Monday, March 3rd, 2014

Source: PJ Mediacrazy2

Royal Society/National Academy of Sciences propaganda would enrage Newton.

The report ?Climate Change: Evidence & Causes,? which was released on Thursday by the Royal Society (RS) and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS), does a serious disservice to science and society. Rather than using the conditional language of real science, it engages in what amounts to propaganda, making absolute assertions concerning topics about which we have little knowledge.

For example, the report proclaims, ?Continued emissions of these gases [carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases] will cause further climate change, including substantial increases in global average surface temperature and important changes in regional climate.? (more…)

Skeptics Smeared As Holocaust Deniers, ADL Silent

Monday, March 3rd, 2014

Source: Popular technology

Inappropriate Comparisons Trivialize the Holocaust” – Abraham Foxman, ADL Director

While the ADL moved quickly to denounce Dr. Spencer, it appears unwilling to defend him and other climate skeptics from reprehensible analogies to “Holocaust deniers”.

Ellen Goodman

Let’s just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers.

– Ellen Goodman, Boston Globe (2007) (more…)

New Paper at SPPI: Natural Resource Adaptation – Protecting Resources and Economies

Saturday, March 1st, 2014

Source: SPPImoore_protecting

by Patrick Moore

There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth?s atmosphere over the past 100 years. If there were such a proof it would be written down for all to see. No actual proof, as it is understood in science, exists.

 

 

New SPPI Paper: Global Cooling

Saturday, March 1st, 2014

Source:  SPPIglobal_cooling

The hypothesis that human emissions of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), are causing, or will be causing, dangerous global warming, has been severely criticized on scientific grounds. The critical literature is substantial, not only peer-reviewed scientific papers, but also several substantial scientific books (to mention just a few: Idso and Singer, 2009; Idso, Carter and Singer, 2013a; Carter, 2010; Plimer, 2009).