Global warming prophet: we exagerated

The online news channel msnbc.com has interviewed Lovelock and he is now admitting that has was being ‘alarmist’ about climate change and ‘extrapolating too far’. Ideally, he says, “I would be a little more cautious - but then that would have spoilt the book”.

I found this section particularly interesting: "In the late 1980s and early 1990s it was routinely predicted that ‘within 25 years’ (i.e. by now) we would be living in an unrecognisable world, southern Europe scorched, the Arctic melting, seas engulfing major cities such as New York and London, poverty and misery on the rise."

Because this is EXACTLY why I've been so suspicious of the claims that the global warming lobby having been coming out with. 

Global warming skeptic? You must be sick

An Oregon university professor claims that those who don't believe in man-made global warming are sick and need to be treated for their beliefs.

Comparing this scepticism to racism is idiotic. Another lefty woman using her expensive (although likely useless) education to try to push us into a dystopian future, where free-speech and thought are even more curtailed and punished than they are now. 

More BBC Bias

BBC have paid over £70,000 to man-hating lefty, Steve Jones to advice them on their science coverage. And one of his pieces of advice is to give less airtime to those skeptical of man-made global warming.

(See more about him HERE)

As ever, the initial instinct of the left is to censor debate, rather than engage with it. Is that really the way that science is supposed to work, though, Steve Jones? If the case for man-made global-warming skepticism is so weak, why not counter it with facts and reasoned scientific argument?

'climate expert' now admits: theres been no warming since 1995

'climate expert' now admits: theres been no warming since 1995

More climategate news

The IPCC (is) an institution now so discredited and scientifically corrupted that only those determined to shut their eyes could possibly defend it.

Controversial climate change boss used car AND driver to travel one mile to office... (but says YOU should use public transport)

More bad 'climate change' science

The world's leading climate change scientists have been caught out making unfounded claims about global warming for the second time in just over a week.

More man-made global warming skepticism

One of the world's leading climate modelers has conceded that the Earth has not warmed for nearly a decade and that we are likely entering "one or even two decades during which temperatures will cool".

James Randi: some 32,000 scientists, 9,000 of them PhDs, have signed The Petition Project statement proclaiming that Man is not necessarily the chief cause of warming, that the phenomenon may not exist at all, and that, in any case, warming would not be disastrous.

The timeline of climategate

Climate change is more about belief than science

Peter Cochrane (ex head of research at British Telecom): Over the past decade I have watched 'global warming' mutate into a belief system bigger than Christianity and Islam combined. Considered debate appears to have stopped a long time ago and only dogma and belief seem to remain.

"my complaint of the climatologists modelling of the planet rests at several levels.

1. Their models appear to be partial, incomplete if you will, and do not accurately reflect the actual planet-wide system. This is not good news given that weather and sea systems are not only non-linear, they are chaotic too. Any minor omissions from a non-linear model are likely to have a very big impact - e.g. the 'butterfly wings' effect. But the models have very big omissions - and so we might expect some big errors!
2. As far as I can see there has been no effective raw material or model sharing or corroboration at the base level of model design, construction and testing. In fact, this has been resisted and there has not been a process of mutually 'looking under the hood'. As far as I am aware, and I could be wrong, nothing meaningful has been published in this regard.
3. Most communication between the various teams and groups has been focused on achieving corroboration and agreement in the conclusions. This is a dangerous ethos that can often lead to a collective myopia that produces the results you wanted in the first place.
4. The long-term source data comes from ice cores, tree rings and sedimentary layers - all of which are notoriously difficult to interpret. Add to this a very short period (250 years or so) of instrumented, and more accurate data, plus the lack of comprehensive global coverage, and it is clear that the opportunity for error is very high!
5. Modelling to date assumes some linear, or linear-ish, relationship between temperature and greenhouse gases. So, reduce the gases and the temperature will also reduce is an obvious conclusion. However, the reality is that the system is non-linear and it could well be bi-stable. That is, it could have flipped into a new state, or at least exhibit hysteresis. In which case greenhouse gas production could continue no matter what - after all the planet generates far more greenhouse gas than we do, and warming runaway could be real."

More on climategate

Leading British scientists at the University of East Anglia, who were accused of manipulating climate change data - dubbed Climategate - have agreed to publish their figures in full.

Of course, one of the touchstones of proper science is supposed to be that scientists publish their data openly for examination, and for other scientists to try to replicate. Yes, much of the activity that is going on in the world under the banner of science is not open, but this is because its either military research or research by commercial companies who are hoping to discover information that they can protect. Yet why on earth should such university departments - supposedly studying a subject that will affect us all - keep their data secret?

Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our time

The inconvenient truths Mr Gore and his fanatical friends DIDN'T tell you about climate change

Climategate

A leakage of files and emails from scientists who support human-created global warming theory shows evidence of conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.

NASA scientist and Nobel prize-winning global warming skeptics

The retired scientist formerly in charge of key NASA climate programs has come out as a sceptic.

Dr John Theon, the retired scientist formerly in charge of key NASA climate programs who supervised James Hansen -- the activist-scientist who helped give the manmade global warming hypothesis centre prominent media attention -- has come out as a skeptic about man-made global warming. "My own belief concerning anthropogenic climate change is that the models do not realistically simulate the climate system because there are many very important sub-grid scale processes that the models either replicate poorly or completely omit," he said. "Furthermore, some scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results. In doing so, they neither explain what they have modified in the observations, nor explain how they did it. "They have resisted making their work transparent so that it can be replicated independently by other scientists. This is clearly contrary to how science should be done. Thus there is no rational justification for using climate model forecasts to determine public policy."

Also, please take a look at this video of a talk given by Nobel-prize winning biochemist Kary Mullis, on how he started in science, what the scientific method is, why its so important, and then why man-made global warming hasn't been proven!

Is New Scientist anti-male?

Is climate change a feminist issue?

and

Are men to blame for global warming?

Campaign to sue Al Gore gains support

Campaign to sue Al Gore gains support

One commenter posted: "Al Gore is not only a snake oil saleman, from what I understand he has interest in carbon trading comnpanies... so he has a monetary interest in engaging in his alarmism. I'm no lawyer but I think he could be taken to court for fraud in that instance."

Bellamy on global warming

Botanist, David Bellamy: Global warming - at least the modern nightmare version - is a myth. I am sure of it and so are a growing number of scientists. But what is really worrying is that the world's politicians and policy makers are not. As a result of their ignorance, the world's economy may be about to divert billions, nay trillions of pounds, dollars and roubles into solving a problem that actually doesn't exist. The waste of economic resources is incalculable and tragic.

David Bellamy used to be on British TV all the time. But since he voiced anti-European-Union opinions he has basically disappeared from view. Any connection? Or is it just that TV producers feel that he is too old?

What is known for sure is that several societies, including 'Plantlife' and 'The Royal Society of Wildlife Trusts' have disassociated themselves from him because of his skeptical attitude over the idea of man-made global warming.

The issue, as ever, is not so much whether David Bellamy is right or wrong on any of his points, but rather than people should be allowed to openly debate the subject. It should be decided on the merits of the science, and not just because we are told it is true.

Global power grab

I think its pretty obvious that we are heading into a period in history in which those at the tops of the hierarchies of power in governments and multi-nationals are itching to consolidate their power on a global scale. In other words, they wish to move us towards global governance. You can see this as a conspiracy theory, or you can just see this as a tendency towards something the power elites through history have always thirsted for: empire. Only this time its more serious than ever as their sights are literally on the whole globe, and, theoretically at least, they could employ some pretty nasty technologies to this end.

Theres a lot that could be said about this (particularly how those in power love things like feminism and political correctness as they weaken the family and opposition from ordinary men). However, today I just want to flag up a particular ploy they are using, so y'all can be more aware of it, and not be taken in by it.

Basically, they will increasingly make the following argument:

The global problem of climate change requires global solutions.

And by this, they mean an ever increasing tax burden and consolidation of power into their hands.

Another eminent scientist comes out against global warming

Freeman Dyson: all the fuss about global warming is grossly exaggerated.