Climate Change Sanity

I guess if you polled Jim Jones’s Georgetown contingent about drinking poisoned Kool Ade they would all say it was a good idea.  In a similar vein,   if you polled 11 authors of the Summary Report for Policy Makers, a part of the  IPCC Report on Climate Change,  they would all agree that scary things are going to happen because of man-made global warming.  Reuters did just that and sends it out as NEWS!!!   And the 11, by gum,  were prepared to provide scary stories that would even outdo Al Gore.  

The Summary, by the way, was written to match political needs and was completed before completion of the scientific part of the IPCC Report.  In fact the science part had to be modified to match the already written Summary.  This should provide extra confidence that these 11 are dispassionate observers with no preconceived beliefs.

Read the Reuters poll here:     

The New York Times did a similar story.  The idea was to see if “tipping points” could be identified and defined.  Well we all know about tipping points because Prince Charles has one.  His tipping point happens about 100 months from now.  But then it is not too specific and I don’t guess a lot of the AGWers are jumping on the Prince’s bandwagon.    My favorite part of the NYT article is this quote:

“There are real tipping points out there, and they might be politically useful at first, but if you’re too specific about particular thresholds that’s a quick trip to lost credibility,” said Stephen H. Schneider, a climatologist at Stanford University who said he could point back to some overly precise climate predictions of his own in the 1970’s as evidence.”

So, the message is to say there are tipping points but don’t tie yourself down with specifics.   This good advice needs to be passed on to those who every now and then predict the end of the world.     

You can read the article  

A new scientific study was recently announced that found that global temperatures are not rising.  Well, we knew that but the authors of the study find this troubling because:

“This is nothing like anything we’ve seen since 1950,” Kyle Swanson of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee said. “Cooling events since then had firm causes, like eruptions or large-magnitude La Ninas. This current cooling doesn’t have one.”

Instead, Swanson and colleague Anastasios Tsonis think a series of climate processes have aligned, conspiring to chill the climate. In 1997 and 1998, the tropical Pacific Ocean warmed rapidly in what Swanson called a “super El Nino event.” It sent a shock wave through the oceans and atmosphere, jarring their circulation patterns into unison.

So they think they know why the Earth cooled before but they really don’t know what is causing this cooling except to speculate that “warming caused this cooling”.   But they are certain of one thing:

Swanson thinks the trend could continue for up to 30 years. But he warned that it’s just a hiccup, and that humans’ penchant for spewing greenhouse gases will certainly come back to haunt us.

“When the climate kicks back out of this state, we’ll have explosive warming,” Swanson said. “Thirty years of greenhouse gas radiative forcing will still be there and then bang, the warming will return and be very aggressive.” 

Now this sounds like statements from people that don’t really know what causes climate change.   And this change is so profound that the cooling may last for 30 years!!!! We can be certain, however, of what they do know.  They  know they will loose their gravy train of study money if this cooling continues.   

But more importantly,  this is the same crowd that is trying to get us agree to killing our economy based on their computer forecasts.  Computers forecasts that did not see this cooling coming.  These same computers that are predicting future catastrophes if we don’t drastically cut fossil fuel use.  How can anyone believe them?

The article cited in this blog can be found here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29469287/  

Carbon Emission Rules–Written by the EPA

The shaky economic situation in the US  seems to be persuading President Obama to back away from his  campaign pledge to have Cap and Trade legislation enacted to regulate CO2 emissions.  Opinion of the followers of the legislative bodies believe that such legislation could not be passed this year or maybe even next year.   And if the global climate  continues to experience a cooling phase,  maybe the country will escape the detrimental effect of such legislation.  Further, more and more of the  scientific gurus are arriving at the conclusion that CO2 restrictions are wrong-headed and the “consensus” is disappearing (if it ever existed).   So we skeptics can relax.  Wrong!!!  

In the Massachusetts v. EPA court case,   the Supremes said that the EPA had the authority to regulate CO2 if it was a danger to  the environment.  Bush’s EPA did not find that CO2 was a danger to the environment,  but the Obama EPA will find that it is a danger.  Obama’s nominee to head the EPA is Lisa Jackson.   She is on record as believing CO2 needs to be regulated.  

Once again the judicial branch has assumed the powers of the legislative branch.  The Court has taken the people out of deciding what should be done if anything about CO2.    The disaster that is known as the Kyoto Treaty has provided enough experience to show that in good times the signatories to that Treaty were unable to meet their commitments for CO2 reduction.  As the Europe moved forward this fall to set up the next Kyoto-like treaty forecast to be in effect by 2012,  they were unable to come to any agreement because they knew if would wreck their economies.  Germany was agreeable to almost any terms as long as their heavy manufacturing industry was excluded.  Fat chance that a new treaty would have any meaning if everyone got to exclude their heavy industry or their coal plants as most Eastern European Nations want to do.  And now with their economies in the tank like ours,  I will bet that no matter what the US might want to do,  thfty wont follow.

Its apparent that the legislators  who should decide to or not to “cap and trade” or “tax carbon” wont have the courage to do so as they can bet they will be voted out in the next election if they did.   But many of them see a way to get more control over your life by letting the EPA do their dirty work.   

One of the Republican House of Representatives wants to introduce legislation that will show that the Legislative Branch does not want CO2 to considered a “pollutant” which is endangering the climate.   We should all urge our Congressional representatives to get behind this move.  If the Democrats don’t they will be on record as favoring anything the EPA cooks up just as surely as if they had voted for it.

OBVIOUSLY THE AWGs ARE WORRIED.

Why do the proponents of manmade global warming feel it is necessary to shut down any discussion by the skeptics?   In Australia they considered taking away the citizenship of skeptics.  British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett publicly demands that media outlets refuse to grant “skeptics” space, on the grounds that they are just like Islamic terrorists.  Skeptics are receiving death treats.   Anyone that  speaks-up is obviously paid by the oil companies.  ETC.