posted March 26, 2012 07:49 PM            

It's nonsense to say there's more scientists who believe in man made global warming than those who have debunked the fraud. To make this kind of statement is simply to lie. Period.

But, lies, fraud, distored studies, manipulated temperature data, manipulated computer data and code and outright fraud is all they have.

Still waiting for that list of 31,000 scientists..from anywhere, who say man made global warming is real and is endangering earth.

Instead, all we get is smelly warmed over hot air straight out of the butt of those who stand to profit professionally and/or financially from trillions spent to abate a problem which doesn't exist....but no list!

The mountain of evidence that man made global warming is a total created hoax, fraud and con continues to get higher and higher.

Is this finally proof we're NOT causing global warming? The whole of the Earth heated up in medieval times without human CO2 emissions, says new study

Evidence was found in a rare mineral that records global temperatures
Warming was global and NOT limited to Europe
Throws doubt on orthodoxies around 'global warming'

By Ted Thornhill
PUBLISHED: 07:21 EST, 26 March 2012 | UPDATED: 07:55 EST, 26 March 2012

Current theories of the causes and impact of global warming have been thrown into question by a new study which shows that during medieval times the whole of the planet heated up.
It then cooled down naturally and there was even a 'mini ice age'.

A team of scientists led by geochemist Zunli Lu from Syracuse University in New York state, has found that contrary to the ‘consensus’, the ‘Medieval Warm Period’ approximately 500 to 1,000 years ago wasn’t just confined to Europe.

In fact, it extended all the way down to Antarctica – which means that the Earth has already experience global warming without the aid of human CO2 emissions.
Cold facts: Antarctica actually warmed up during medieval times, contrary to what climate scientists believe
At present the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) argues that the Medieval Warm Period was confined to Europe – therefore that the warming we’re experiencing now is a man-made phenomenon.
More...Australia's giant kangaroos were killed off by humans, not climate change, say researchers

However, Professor Lu has shown that this isn’t true – and the evidence lies with a rare mineral called ikaite, which forms in cold waters.

‘Ikaite is an icy version of limestone,’ said Lu. ‘The crystals are only stable under cold conditions and actually melt at room temperature.’ It turns out the water that holds the crystal structure together - called the hydration water - traps information about temperatures present when the crystals formed.

This finding by Lu's research team establishes, for the first time, ikaite as a reliable way to study past climate conditions. Evidence that the Earth heated up over a 1,000 years ago was found in a rare mineral called ikaite
The scientists studied ikaite crystals from sediment cores drilled off the coast of Antarctica. The sediment layers were deposited over 2,000 years.
The scientists were particularly interested in crystals found in layers deposited during the ‘Little Ice Age,’ approximately 300 to 500 years ago, and during the Medieval Warm Period before it.

Both climate events have been documented in Northern Europe, but studies have been inconclusive as to whether the conditions in Northern Europe extended to Antarctica.
Lu’s team found that in fact, they did.
They were able to deduce this by studying the amount of heavy oxygen isotopes found in the crystals.
During cool periods there are lots, during warm periods there aren’t.

‘We showed that the Northern European climate events influenced climate conditions in Antarctica,’ Lu says. ‘More importantly, we are extremely happy to figure out how to get a climate signal out of this peculiar mineral. A new proxy is always welcome when studying past climate changes.’

posted April 03, 2012 11:42 PM            

Turns out he's in the business of climate change. I guess some who post here never read beyond the headline of the articles they post.

Ummm, anyone can SAY they're a republican. Some in Congress SAY they're republicans but vote the demoscat line. They're only "republicans" when they're campaigning for election or reelection. Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Arlen Specter and Chuck Hagel spring readily to mind.

So, you found one (1) so called republican who claims to agree the the fraudsters of man made global warming.

BFD

posted April 05, 2012 04:46 PM            

As a climate scientist, I am quite familiar with the background facts that Prof Michael E. Mann (now at Penn State U) so shamelessly distorts in his new book The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines.

First, the scientific background:

Mann's claim to fame derives from his contentious (and now thoroughly discredited) "hockeystick" research papers (in Nature 1998 and Geophysical Research Letters 1999). His idiosyncratic analysis of proxy (non-thermometer) data from sources like tree rings, ice cores, ocean sediments, etc. did away with the well-documented Medieval Warm Period (MWP - 900-1200AD) and Little Ice Age (LIA - 1400-1800AD) -- documented by Prof. H.H. Lamb, the founding director of the Climate Research Unit of East Anglia U (CRU-EAU). Mann then asserted that the 20th century was the warmest in 1,000 years. His temperature graph, shaped like a hockeystick (on its side) immediately became the poster child of Al Gore and the IPCC, the U.N. science panel, to support their claim of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

Two Canadian statisticians, Steven McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, soon found serious errors in Mann's analysis; they even showed that random data fed into Mann's algorithm would produce "hockeysticks." To add insult to injury, while the 2001 IPCC report used Mann's result to bolster its AGW claim, the most recent 2007 IPCC report no longer relies on it. Mann still defends it -- sort of -- and so do some of his uncritical supporters. We have had no word yet from Al Gore.

In his book, Mann distorts the e-mail record from the "Climategate" leak; those e-mails have not been altered or edited in any way. They document a conspiracy among a clique of British and U.S. climate scientists to control what goes into IPCC reports, and to keep contrary views by skeptics from being published in recognized science journals by manipulating the peer-review process.

The most complete discussion of the Climategate e-mails can be found in The Hockeystick Illusion: Climategate and the Corruption of Science by Andrew W. Montford. A more technical discussion has been ongoing in McIntyre's blog at www.climateaudit.org.

Mike Mann also attempts to mislead readers by citing "facts." He does this by mixing up temperature level (measured in degrees C) with temperature trends (degC per decade) -- hoping no one would notice. While current levels are high (since the climate is still recovering from the LIA), the trend has been essentially zero for more than a decade -- in spite of rapidly rising CO2 concentrations.

In reading Mann's original papers, I noticed something very strange: his temperature record (blue curve in the IPCC report) based on proxy data suddenly stops in 1978 and is joined smoothly to the thermometer record from weather stations (red curve), which shows a steep rise in temperature. By contrast, atmospheric temperatures measured from weather satellites show only insignificant warming between 1978 and 1997 -- as do the independent data from weather balloons around the world.

Puzzled by this disparity, I e-mailed Mann (then at the U. of Virginia) and politely asked about his post-1978 proxy temperatures. All I got in return was a nasty reply -- which only served to confirm my suspicion that Mann was hiding the data because they disagreed with the widely accepted thermometer record, which had suggested the existence of global warming. I believe that this is the true meaning of the phrase "Mike's Nature trick," used in the leaked Climategate e-mails -- in conjunction with "hide the decline." It all suggests manipulation of crucial data.

Naturally, I am anxious to learn if Mann's suppressed post-1978 data show a warming. If they don't, then the U.N.-IPCC's case for AGW collapses -- and so do all policies to control the greenhouse gas CO2. These policies include emission trading ("cap & trade"), carbon sequestration from power plants, and various costly schemes for developing alternative, "green" forms of energy. We may have already wasted hundreds of billions of dollars -- for no good purpose. If so, then Mann and his supporters have much to answer for.

The Legal Phase

In 1999, Mann joined the U. of Virginia faculty as an assistant professor and left for Penn State six years later after failing to gain tenure. In fact, he was a member of my Department of Environmental Sciences, although we did not overlap.

In 2010, Virginia's newly elected Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli, following Virginia FATA (Fraud Against Taxpayer Act) law, issued a Civil Investigative Demand on the university for Mann's e-mails, work notes, and other documentation. The university, a state-supported institution, has resisted this demand, citing "academic freedom" and similar excuses. They have employed a private law firm and spent about $1 million so far.

I am quite disappointed by my university's opposition to releasing Mann's e-mails to Virginia's AG. Those e-mails could clear up the mystery of "Mike's Nature trick" and reveal hidden data. I am told that no objection was raised by UVa when Greenpeace requested the e-mails of skeptical faculty -- including mine -- under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). So much for the university's "principled defense" of academic freedom.

Virginia's Supreme Court has now turned down AG Cuccinelli's demand, based on a technicality in the interpretation of the Virginia law. But the American Tradition Institute is trying to extract Mann's e-mails from UVa, using the FOIA. Their chance for success is good -- particularly since not only does the university now admits that some 12,000 e-mails exist (previously claimed to have been deleted) -- but it has also released these e-mails to Michael Mann, even though he is no longer a faculty member.

As Tom Jackman reports (Wash Post, March 21):

The ATI case began quietly in January 2011, with a FOIA request to UVa for e-mails to and from Mann and 39 people, involving five grant programs. Seven months later, UVa produced almost 1,800 e-mails, but said it was withholding another 12,000, which they argued were not public record, or were exempt under Virginia FOIA law 2.2-3705.4(4). The case is scheduled for argument on April 16 in Manassas (in Prince William County, Virginia), in suburban Washington, DC. From there, the case will likely begin its ascent up the appeals court ladder and is poised to make law on how Virginia institutions may use FOIA to withhold from some and give to others. Not to mention create an international stink -- if Mann's e-mails show he has manipulated climate change data, an accusation for which he claims to have been cleared.

As Jackman further reports, Mann said his shared interest, with UVa, in his e-mails means that the e-mails can be released to him, but not to climate skeptics. The American Tradition Institute, the conservative group hoping to show that climate change scientists like Mann manipulated their data, argues that UVa can't give the e-mails to one person and not another. By giving the e-mails to Mann, the university has waived any exemptions it's claiming from the state Freedom of Information Act, ATI's lawyer David Schnare argues.

Schnare then cited a Virginia attorney general's opinion from 1983 that once a public body disseminates any record, "those records lose the exemption accorded by" FOIA. Federal case law appears to be clearer that "selective disclosure ... is offensive to the purposes underlying the FOIA and intolerable as a matter of policy."

Meanwhile, a new angle has developed in Vancouver, BC. Canadian climatologist Tim Ball jokingly wrote that "Mann should not be at Penn State but in a State Pen[itentiary]." Mann then improvidently sued Ball for libel. But this now leaves Mann open for the pre-trial discovery process, including a deposition under oath. We shall see how this case develops. Tim Ball has many ways to make his case in his defense. I am hoping he will focus on the suppressed post-1978 data. It would be fitting if Mann's data are used to destroy the IPCC's case for AGW.

One way or another, the truth will come out. And when it does, we will witness a major earthquake that will encompass IPCC scientists, politicians in America and Europe, and the U.N. Let's hope we don't have to wait too long for this to happen.

S. Fred Singer is professor emeritus at the University of Virginia and director of the Science & Environmental Policy Project. His specialty is atmospheric and space physics. An expert in remote sensing and satellites, he served as the founding director of the US Weather Satellite Service and, more recently, as vice chair of the US National Advisory Committee on Oceans & Atmosphere. He is a senior fellow of the Heartland Institute and the Independent Institute. In 2007, he founded and chaired NIPCC (Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change). For recent writings, see http://www.americanthinker.com/s_fred_singer/ and also Google Scholar. With about 2,000 other scientists who participated in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, including Michael Mann, he jointly received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007.

posted April 05, 2012 05:09 PM            

but you might stop and think a second, of all the innocent people who also believe this; and that many of the people PUSHING it ALSO believe it. they are not necessarily the crooks you make them out to be just because they agree with what has become the prevailing theory...

posted July 11, 2012 02:05 PM            

It's just amazing how one Marxist Socialist Progressive idiot could have his head up his ass on so many issues...like every single issue.

Amazing too that so many leftists are marching in lock-step with O'Bomber with their own heads up their a$ses.

Tree-rings prove climate was WARMER in Roman and Medieval times than it is now - and world has been cooling for 2,000 years
*Tree ring study gives first accurate climate reading back to 138BC
World has been slowly cooling for 2,000 years
*World was warmer in Roman and Medieval times than it is now
*Study of semi-fossilised trees in Finland
By Rob Waugh
11 July 2012

Rings in fossilised pine trees have proven that the world was much warmer than previously thought - and the earth has been slowly COOLING for 2,000 years.
Measurements stretching back to 138BC prove that the Earth is slowly cooling due to changes in the distance between the Earth and the sun.
The finding may force scientists to rethink current theories of the impact of global warming.

It is the first time that researchers have been able to accurately measure trends in global temperature over the last two millennia.
Over that time, the world has been getting cooler - and previous estimates, used as the basis for current climate science, are wrong.

posted July 11, 2012 02:10 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
O'Bomber says he wants to spend the next 4 years concentrating on "Global Warming"!

It's just amazing how one Marxist Socialist Progressive idiot could have his head up his ass on so many issues...like every single issue.

Amazing too that so many leftists are marching in lock-step with O'Bomber with their own heads up their a$ses.

[b]Tree-rings prove climate was WARMER in Roman and Medieval times than it is now - and world has been cooling for 2,000 years
*Tree ring study gives first accurate climate reading back to 138BC
World has been slowly cooling for 2,000 years
*World was warmer in Roman and Medieval times than it is now
*Study of semi-fossilised trees in Finland
By Rob Waugh
11 July 2012

Rings in fossilised pine trees have proven that the world was much warmer than previously thought - and the earth has been slowly COOLING for 2,000 years.
Measurements stretching back to 138BC prove that the Earth is slowly cooling due to changes in the distance between the Earth and the sun.
The finding may force scientists to rethink current theories of the impact of global warming.

It is the first time that researchers have been able to accurately measure trends in global temperature over the last two millennia.
Over that time, the world has been getting cooler - and previous estimates, used as the basis for current climate science, are wrong.

Their findings demonstrate that this trend involves a cooling of -0.3°C per millennium due to gradual changes to the position of the sun and an increase in the distance between the Earth and the sun.....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/science tech/article-2171973/Tree-ring-study-proves-climate-WARMER-Roman-Medieval-times-modern-industrial-age.html [/B]

---

It just gets worse!

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted July 11, 2012 02:27 PM            

also i am wondering how this is relevant when the graph cuts off at 2000 (and the line is on its way up there?)

posted July 11, 2012 07:19 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
More hockey stick horseshiiit which has been debunked over and over and even withdrawn from the UN IPCC reports.

Some people just never get the word...and they're all leftists...just like their Marxist Messiah, Barack Hussein O'Bomber.

---

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted July 12, 2012 09:18 PM            

You know ARCTIC PROXY RECORDS.

Then fail to mention these are not actual records but reconstructions...by guesswork.

posted July 13, 2012 12:30 PM            

quote:

---

Then fail to mention these are not actual records but reconstructions...by guesswork.

---

The global temperature has been measured for years. You don't need a reconstruction to point to the fact that things warmed over the last several years. This new study doesn't refute the warming we've experienced. That's the point you seem to be missing in all this. The presence of a previously warm period doesn't make our current situation less volitile or dangerous. For that matter, you could completely remove the "man-made theory" from the picture, and we'd still be left with the effects of this warming. It makes headlines daily. You're still chasing the conspiracy rather than focusing on the issue.

posted July 15, 2012 09:40 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:

[......Changes in the distance between the Earth and the sun.

---

That is incorrect. No offense you mix a true fact with the most id*otic explanation.

The earth receives heat from two sources internal and external.

per rock exogenic process are stronger, however the volume of rock in the core is so much more compared to the crust that internal process are the cause.

Earths cooling is a result of its core cooling its been cooling off since the day the earth was formed from a big molten ball.

The lighter cool material floated to the top forming the crust and heavier still burning, denser material to form the core.

The core is still burning and retaining some of that heat during the early earths creation.

Thats what makes the difference between a dead planet say mars that has lost all of its internal heat and is unable to have earthquakes or volcanoes vs earth.

Eventually, the internal core will cool completely and thats the end of earthquakes and volcanoes.

Nothing to do with distance.

Global warming is a gray area, I would generally sway away from a topic that isn't black or white.

Especially when people make foolish reasons to support or bash global warming.

I've heard foolish things said by both supporters and detesters.

However, enough of my rant and reflect on this point the earth is the only planet to have created its own atmosphere from volcanoes, it lost its early atmosphere from solar winds.

One could assume that the earth can create its own atmosphere and therefore destroy it.

Volcanoes have been proven to give off C02, which is one of the largest contributing factors.