Prof.Dr. John Christy Lays out the Facts. CAGW a Farce.

Gee! sun still shining, crops still growing, still raining and still here. What CAGW !!

There is nothing more satisfying than witnessing the truth being finally told to the Senate inquiry by John Christy. Nothing warms the heart more, one wonders if his stellar advice will be taken on board or just tossed over the side as they have done in the past. To those supporting the CAGW theories, this could put an end to their "snout in the trough" of public funding drying up so it will be interesting to see how many of those thieves and liars respond.

The one who howls the loadest would have the most to loose...

Video: John Christy’s stellar testimony today – ‘The recent anomalous weather can’t be blamed on carbon dioxide.’

Posted on August 1, 2012 by Anthony Watts

From The Senate EPW Jim Inhofe Press Office, well worth your time to watch.

Dr. John Christy, Alabama’s State Climatologist, Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville testified before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works hearing on global warming and stated:
“During the heat wave of late June and early July, high temperature extremes became newsworthy. Claims that there were thousands of records broken each day and that “this is what global warming looks like” got a lot of attention.
However, these headlines were not based on climate science. As shown in Figure 1.3 of my testimony it is scientifically more accurate to say that this is what Mother Nature looks like, since events even worse than these have happened in the past before greenhouse gases were increasing like they are today.

Now, it gives some people great comfort to offer a quick and easy answer when the weather strays from the average rather than to struggle with the real truth, which is, we don’t know enough about the climate to even predict events like this.
A climatologist looking at this heat wave would not be alarmed because the number of daily high temperature records set in the most recent decade was only about half the number set in the 1930s as shown in my written testimony. I suppose most people have forgotten that Oklahoma set a new record low temperature just last year of 31 below. And in the past two years, towns from Alaska to my home state of California established records for snowfall. The recent anomalous weather can’t be blamed on carbon dioxide.
See also his written testimony here

Global Warming: The Farce. Temperature Stations Wrong.

Follow the distortions, the lies, the mis-information and the people involved.

It does not matter how big the lies are or how many people are involved in the fraud. The truth will eventually out those who have maliciously and intendedly deceived the public and they should be facing charges for their deliberate deceptions.

There is now no excuse for the "Global Warming" hysteria to even exist, for anyone to utter those same lies and exaggerations, as they have been for so long. It is now way too embarrassing for anyone to utter the AGW lies as it will single them out as being part of that conspiracy as well as being part of the team that was solely interested in filling their pockets with taxpayer's loot, under false pretenses. They should be roundly ashamed and bought to justice. The entire saga is a total and complete disgrace to all involved.

New study shows half of the global warming in the USA is artificial

Posted on July 29, 2012 by Anthony Watts

 

PRESS RELEASE – U.S. Temperature trends show a spurious doubling due to NOAA station siting problems and post measurement adjustments.

Chico, CA July 29^th, 2012 – 12 PM PDT – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
A comparison and summary of trends is shown from the paper. Acceptably placed thermometers away from common urban influences read much cooler nationwide:

A reanalysis of U.S. surface station temperatures has been performed using the recently WMO-approved Siting Classification System devised by METEO-France’s Michel Leroy. The new siting classification more accurately characterizes the quality of the location in terms of monitoring long-term spatially representative surface temperature trends. The new analysis demonstrates that reported 1979-2008 U.S. temperature trends are spuriously doubled, with 92% of that over-estimation resulting from erroneous NOAA adjustments of well-sited stations upward. The paper is the first to use the updated siting system which addresses USHCN siting issues and data adjustments.
The new improved assessment, for the years 1979 to 2008, yields a trend of +0.155C per decade from the high quality sites, a +0.248 C per decade trend for poorly sited locations, and a trend of +0.309 C per decade after NOAA adjusts the data. This issue of station siting quality is expected to be an issue with respect to the monitoring of land surface temperature throughout the Global Historical Climate Network and in the BEST network.
Today, a new paper has been released that is the culmination of knowledge gleaned from five years of work by Anthony Watts and the many volunteers and contributors to the SurfaceStations project started in 2007.

The Cooling Planet and the CO2 Reduction.

As the Global Warming hysteria increases to a crescendo, it appears that all their fake and false claims are all but exposed, once again.

Amazing Shale: US CO2 Emissions Plummet Towards 1990 Levels

by John Hanger (via The GWPF)
America’s carbon emissions may drop back close to 1990 levels this year. That result would have been thought impossible, even at the end of 2011. But the shale gas revolution makes a reality of many things recently thought impossible. Shale gas production has slashed carbon emissions and saved consumers more than $100 billion per year. Truly astonishing!
For US energy-related carbon emissions, fuel switching to gas is back to the future.  After the first quarter, the USA’s 2012 emissions are falling sharply again and may drop to 1990 levels, or just slightly above that important milestone, according to data in EIA’s latest Monthly Energy Review.

 As you can see on the above graph, Shale is the most affective alternative to the ever decreasing level of all those nasty CO2 molecules that the environmentalists have been blaming all along. It would appear that not only are levels decreasing but we won't be barbequed in our sleep overnight. Is that not great. Catastrophic Global hysterics would sensibly be a claim of the past and all those models that have been claiming otherwise are just another joke.

Too bad the CAGW Labour Government in Australia have not got the message yet as they have just introduced the highest "Carbon" tax on the Planet which will do absolutely NOTHING to cool the planet. It appears to be cooling down itself as the SUN goes into a cold period and will do until at least 2035.

The Sun has changed its character

Posted on July 2, 2012 by Anthony Watts

Guest post by David Archibald
A number of solar parameters are weak, and none is weaker than the Ap Index:

Lord Leach, Nature, WUWT and Skeptical Science (SS)

Climate Fraud is the total and complete scam that has so far cost taxpayers BILLIONS for no benefit.

There are a few things that appear to be changing in regards to the AGW hysterical rantings. When one has a look at the calibre of people involved in exposing this fraud has definitely expanded as we see here -

Lord Leach of Fairford weighs in on Nature’s ‘denier’ gaffe

Posted on June 20, 2012 by Anthony Watts

I’ve still not received any reply from Nature Climate Change editor Rory Howlett to my query about why he allowed the term “deniers” in scientific literature (Bain et al), and neither has Bishop Hill to my knowledge. Lord Leach however, has weighed in, and has sent me his letter for publication here with permission. – Anthony

It appears that the compulsive liars in the AGW fraud are reaching desperation level as they are now and have been in the past, naming or calling anyone who fails to follow their lockstep a "denier", akin to being a "Holocaust" denier. Even though there is ofcourse now comparison to that claim, they use it as a put down to discourage any competing or challenges to their completely incorrect model based assumptions. The weather bureau has problems predicting tomorrow's weather let alone next week or next year or next century that those claiments swear black and blue is 100% true, as far as they concerned, with no margin of error.

They are of the opinion that everyone else besides themselves are uter and complete morons and only they have the insight to predict the future weather just like a sooth sayer or magic glass ball viewers claim they do. It has been demonstrated that the temperature gauges have been placed in the wrong place (in front air con duct and on top of tarmac, at airports) as WUWT site owner has already demonstrated via a peer reviewed study. That result has already darkened their claim dramatically plus they have also been shown to include questionable assumptive information in their models as well. One AGW study used one single tree ring study when 1400 were available because it fitted their deceitful and dishonest claims.
 

Dear Dr Howlett,
The use of the term “denier” does your journal a disservice, both for its vagueness and for its insulting overtone.  
What does a “denier” deny? Certainly not Climate Change: nor global warming since records began in the late 19th century: nor the likelihood of human influence on temperatures. What, then?
A “denier” denies certainty on a complex and still young scientific subject. A “denier” questions assumptions about the near irrelevance of solar, oceanic and other non-anthropogenic influences on temperature. A “denier” prefers evidence to model projections. A “denier” tests alarming predictions against actual observations. In short, a “denier” exhibits the symptoms of a genuine seeker after scientific truth.
I wish the same could be said of “consensus” writers – or that they showed the same restraint and courtesy towards different opinions shown by sceptics such as Watts Up With That
Yours sincerely
Rodney Leach
Lord Leach of Fairford

There are also deceitful sites like Skeptical Science (SS) which is run by a CAGW fanatical and compulsive liar, who makes endless claims regarding that fraud, only to be constatntly demonstrated for the compulsive sharlatan they are like. Paid stoolies,payed to spread the lies, as every one of those frauds are. There is no evidence that everyone will BBQ in their beds over nigh or the next week or the next century, as it has been all made up using false and questionable information and even if it does warm a degree or two, the world would benefit from it. But the fraud continues.

The Global Warming Scam.
Global Warming Commentary.

Lord Leach and Nature "Denier" Name Calling Gaffe..

Baghdad Bob even agrees, "the argument is settled".

I have always wondered why the AGW hysterical crowd always wallowed in name calling rather than stating actual facts, specific to the argument. One wonders why anyone would call someone a denier, denier, when in actual fact they had nothing else to offer in relation to the argument at hand. It demonstrates a childish and immature response, where one would scream "liar,liar,liar" when someone told the truth and one wanted to at least challenge that truth with something besides a shame faced response or a stance of guilty, like looking at the floor while trying to hide one's obvious guilt.
Shameless editors of magazines and warmist scientists alike, suffer from this same reactive response. Instead of proffering a verifiable response or arguing their stance, they resort to name calling, Mann and others of his ilk are masters of it. They have inturn bought science into ill repute, destroyed it's once great reputation and dosed it with kerosene and applied a match. For the sheer purpose of pushing their own religious doctrine while making a considerable amount of money in the process. Lying about AGW is very profitable as they can clearly demonstrate.

But they continue on their childish path and would do endlessly if there were not some people who wander on a higher moral ground, who rise above the name calling and finally call them to account. About time they did as well.

An introduction here by Anthony Watts, wondering the same thing as I - (follow the link for more of the article).

Lord Leach of Fairford weighs in on Nature’s ‘denier’ gaffe

Posted on June 20, 2012 by Anthony Watts

I’ve still not received any reply from Nature Climate Change editor Rory Howlett to my query about why he allowed the term “deniers” in scientific literature (Bain et al), and neither has Bishop Hill to my knowledge. Lord Leach however, has weighed in, and has sent me his letter for publication here with permission. – Anthony
=========================================================

Dear Dr Howlett,
The use of the term “denier” does your journal a disservice, both for its vagueness and for its insulting overtone.  
What does a “denier” deny? Certainly not Climate Change: nor global warming since records began in the late 19th century: nor the likelihood of human influence on temperatures. What, then?
A “denier” denies certainty on a complex and still young scientific subject. A “denier” questions assumptions about the near irrelevance of solar, oceanic and other non-anthropogenic influences on temperature. A “denier” prefers evidence to model projections. A “denier” tests alarming predictions against actual observations. In short, a “denier” exhibits the symptoms of a genuine seeker after scientific truth.
I wish the same could be said of “consensus” writers – or that they showed the same restraint and courtesy towards different opinions shown by sceptics such as Watts Up With That
Yours sincerely
Rodney Leach
Lord Leach of Fairford