We are a shoe-string operation. Unfortunately no BigOil funding! Help expose the hoax.

Donations:
Westpac BSB 035612, Account No. 239469


All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter

“Climate is and always has been variable. The only constant about climate is change; it changes continually.” ~Professor Tim Patterson

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis ~Professor Stewart Franks

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf

Saturday, August 23, 2014

Taking the "warming" out of Global Warming.

Didn't Tim Flannery say it would never rain again?
Image: The Australian
This blog reported on a recent address by Dr Jennifer Marohasy to the Sydney Institute on the "homogenisation" of Australia's  temperature data. (Link

Previously Jennifer had requested Verification of 2013 Temperature Record from the BoM after they had claimed that 2013 was the hottest year on record in Australia. (link)
The Australian Bureau of Meteorology takes a revisionist approach to history, changing the historical temperature record so that it accords with the theory of anthropogenic global warming. This process of homogenisation is explained in ‘Modelling Australian and global temperatures: what’s wrong? Bourke and Amberley as case studies’ (link)
On that night, the Executive Director of the Sydney Institute Gerard Henderson said that the Institute would give the Bureau of Meteorology's Manager of Climate Monitoring and Prediction, Dr David Jones an invitation for the Right of Reply. So far as this blogger knows, there has been no acceptance of that invitation.

The Environment Editor of the Australian has picked up the story
Heat is on over weather bureau ’homogenising’ temperature records
Global Cooling turns to warming 
Marohasy began researching the temperature records noted in historic

Monday, August 18, 2014

IPCC Wrong (yet again) - Professor Fred Singer


Fred Singer, American physicist and emeritus professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia, has written a piece for American Thinker with the title:


Climate Science Does Not Support IPCC Conclusions

where he addresses the two main science issues of general concern:

  1. future temperatures
  2. future sea level rise (SLR)
Global average surface temperature (GAST)
....the concern seems to be to remain below 2 deg. It should be recognized that this limit is entirely arbitrary. There is no established scientific basis for assigning special significance to it; it just happens to be the “Goldilocks” number. Here is what I mean: If one were to choose 0.5 deg, people will say “we’ve already seen that and nothing has happened.”  However, if we were to choose 5 deg, people will say, “we’ll never see that much warming -- hence of no significance.” That is why 2 deg may have become the alarmists’ choice. 
After discussing Climate Sensitivity (CS) and how,  according to the IPCC CS dropped from 4.5 to about 2.5 deg,  Professor Singer arrives at the conclusion:

Saturday, August 16, 2014

IPCC does not seek to tell the truth

PATRICK J. MICHAELS and PAUL C. "CHIP" KNAPPENBERGER have hit the nail on the head again with their latest column for the CATO institute.

A Clear Example of IPCC Ideology Trumping Fact

They get into it with the first two sentences:
When it comes to global warming, facts often take a back seat to fiction. This is especially true with proclamations coming from the White House
After listing a few groups pushing the AGW deception, they continue:
We have documented this low regard for the facts (some might say, deception) on many occasions, but recently we have uncovered  a particularly clear example where the IPCC’s ideology trumps the plain facts, giving the impression that climate models perform a lot better than they actually do. This is an important façade for the IPCC to keep up, for without the overheated climate model  projections of future climate change, the issue would be a lot less politically interesting (and government money could be used for other things … or simply not taken from taxpayers in the first place). 
What is the cost of this deception, this obfuscation?
 The IPCC is harming the public health and welfare of all humankind as it pressures governments to seek to limit energy choices instead of seeking ways to help expand energy availability (or, one would hope, just stay out of the market).
Everyone knows that global warming (as represented by the rise in the earth’s average surface temperature) has stopped for nearly two decades now. 
The article does some great analysis of "the science" and is worth a read - HERE - especially because, after their details they end with:
Taking the IPCC at its word is not a good idea.


Friday, August 15, 2014

Inconvenient Truth of Alarmists' failed predictions

Source: Living Green
Why do people still listen to the alarmist scientists? Their threats of doom and gloom have failed to materialise over and over again.


TIPPING POINT.
Take for example the threat of the tipping point. It has not happened in all the long long time of the world's existence. It didn't happen when atmospheric CO2 was at 7000 ppmv, so why would it happened with CO2 at four hundred ppmv?

That point alone should make the alarmists objects of ridicule.

97% CONSENSUS.
All alarmists who mention the consensus should be laughed out of the room, have their grants taken away. This false consensus has been exposed many times in many places.

Lawrence Solomon, back in 2010 wrote (link)
This number (97%) will prove a new embarrassment to the pundits and press who use it. 
See also the many links to 97% consensus on this blog.

TIM FLANNERY.
Look at Australia's Mammologist Tim Flannery. Andrew Bolt has exposed many of Flannery's flawed failed predictions: (link)
After all, Flannery once claimed the Arctic ice could melt completely away by, er, last year.
He claimed Sydney, Adelaide and Brisbane could be all out of water by, oops, a couple of years ago now.
Yet no matter how many dud predictions Flannery makes, almost no scientist ever corrects him.
It’s as if they don’t care how wrong he is in the warming cause.
Would you buy a used car climate prediction from this man?



GLOBAL CLIMATE MODELS.
I used to keep track of the weather predictions on a calendar, adding the next days predictions etc. It used to look like this

MON......TUES......WED......THURS......FRI.....SAT.....SUN....
Rain       Clearing    Fine       Showers     cold     showers  fine
             Rain       Clearing    Fine       Showers     Fine    showers
                           Rain       Clearing    Fine        chilly     Fine
etc etc

It's no wonder that the GCMs used to project future climate are just as disastrous.

95% OF CLIMATE MODELS AGREE: THE OBSERVATIONS MUST BE WRONG

NO SNOW.
How about Dr. David Viner, senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of University of East Anglia who said:  
Within a few years children just aren't going to know what snow is. Snowfall will be a very rare and exciting event. 
What happened? Just last winter: (link)

LONG-RANGE weather forecasters have warned that Britain should prepare for heavy and persistent snow for up to THREE MONTHS with winter 2013 set to be the worst in more than 60 years.
ICE FREE ARCTIC. 

How many times have you heard that the Arctic will be ice-free by.....

For instance, take this report from the Christian Science Monitor (Are THEY scientists?) from June 1972: (link)

Arctic specialist Bernt Balchen says a general warming trend over the North Pole is melting the polar ice cap and may produce an ice-free Arctic Ocean by the year 2,000.

The reality? (link) The Arctic wasn't ice-free in 2000. In fact, since then
Earth has gained 19,000 Manhattans of sea ice since this date last year, the largest increase on record. There is more sea ice now than there was on this date in 2002.

The alarmist's failures go on and on and still the MSM publish their next prediction of doom. 


When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?


Parasitic Power Producers

 

Another Issue of "Carbon Sense” prepared by The Carbon Sense Coalition
Please pass on. We rely on our supporters to spread the word.


www.carbon-sense.com

15 August 2014


Promoting Parasitic Power Producers

Wind and solar are parasitic power producers, unable to survive in a modern electricity grid without the back-up of stand-alone electricity generators such as hydro, coal, gas or nuclear. And like all parasites, they weaken their hosts, causing increased operating and transmission costs and reduced profits for all participants in the grid.

Without subsidies, few large wind/solar plants would be built; and without mandated targets, few would get connected to the grid.

Green zealots posing as energy engineers should be free to play with their green energy toys at their own expense, on their own properties, but the rest of us should not be saddled with their costs and unreliability.

We should stop promoting parasitic power producers. As a first step, all green energy subsidies and targets should be abolished.

The Miracle of Green Energy – by Steve Hunter  www.stevehunterillustrations.com.au
Viv Forbes,17th July 2014

Wednesday, August 13, 2014

The myth of the moderate Muslim part 2

by Anthony Cox

I have written about how Islam is not moderate and Muslims cannot be moderate if they practice their religion. The reason is simple; Islam offers a complete package; it prescribes its own legal system, its own economic, banking and trading system and social and political parameters. It is a contradiction in terms for Muslims to say they are law abiding if to be a Muslim means you must support laws other than the laws of the host nation.

Australia is a secular democracy. Our legal and political system is based on the separation of church and state. That separation is one of the great inventions of mankind. It allows people to worship their own religion without allowing any religion to force itself on the rest of society.

Islam does not support that separation. In every host nation Islam seeks to introduce aspects of its legal system, Sharia. They range from parallel marriage systems to halal certification which many food sources and outlets subscribe to and pay vast amounts of money to Islamic authorities.

In an ironic move Australia’s first Islamic politician Ed Husic was sworn into parliament using a Koran. The significance of that was entirely missed by Australia’s political and media classes. The fact that many of Australian politicians depend for their survival on Muslim votes is well known:



Himalayan Glaciers - The Truth



(UN) Skeptical (NON) Science writes (link)
Globally glaciers are losing ice at an extensive rate. There are still situations in which glaciers gain or lose ice more than typical for one region or another but the long term trends are all the same, and about 90% of glaciers are shrinking worldwide. 
A peer reviewed paper published in Current Science refutes this, at least as far as the Himalayan Glaciers are concerned. In CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 106, NO. 7, 10 APRIL 2014  (pdf)
The results of the present study indicate that most of the glaciers were in a steady state compared to the results of other studies carried out for the period prior to 2001. This period of monitoring almost corresponds to hiatus in global warming in the last decade.
The Paper:
Bahuguna, I.M., Rathore, B.P., Brahmbhatt, R., Sharma, M., Dhar, S., Randhawa, S.S., Kumar, K., Romshoo, S., Shah, R.D., Ganjoo, R.K. and Ajai. 2014. Are the Himalayan glaciers retreating? Current Science 106: 1008-1013.

CO2 SCIENCE reports (link)

What was done
With their curiosity thus piqued, Bahuguna et al. conducted a study "to find the change in the extent of Himalayan glaciers during the last decade using IRS LISS III images of 2000/01/02 and 2010/11." And in doing so, they say that "two thousand and eighteen glaciers representing climatically diverse terrains in the Himalaya were mapped and monitored," including the glaciers of the Karakoram, Himachal, Zanskar, Uttarakhand, Nepal and Sikkim regions.

What was learned
The all-India team of eleven researchers found that 1752 glaciers (86.8%) were observed having stable fronts (no change in the snout position and area of ablation zone), 248 (12.3%) exhibited retreat and 18 (0.9%) of them exhibited advancement of snout," such that "the net loss in 10,250.68 sq. km area of the 2018 glaciers put together was found to be 20.94 sq. km or 0.2% (±2.5% of 20.94 sq. km)."

Read More at CO2 SCIENCE