Who Needs a Presidential Committee on Climate Security?

If you have listened carefully to President Trump, you know that he regards Climate Change as a hoax. To evaluate his view properly requires us to look back to 1992 and the United Nations Earth Conference in Rio de Janeiro. The conference was headed up by a high school dropout from Canada, Maurice Strong, an adviser to Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the UN at the time. Some would say that this was the beginning of man-made Climate Change as an international, global concern.

It was documented in the Framework Convention on Climate Change or FCCC. Other documents like the Biodiversity Convention and Agenda 21 were developed and introduced at the convention using the FCCC as justification. In a nutshell, the entire planet would be transformed, under the control of the UN, because of a thing called
Climate Change. Since its early beginnings, the UN’s scientists have not only evaluated the problem, but they also defined the government policy to resolve it. That is extremely unusual in science. As Dr. Judith Curry noted in a recent interview, “the policy cart is leading the scientific horse.”
The Biodiversity and Agenda 21 documents have a lot in common with Ocasio Cortez’s New Green Deal. So you can see where the originators of Climate Change were coming from. They were Socialists. Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism. Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the 1992 Rio Earth Conference, was famous for saying, “ Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the
industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring this about?”

One can legitimately question science that is based on such a beginning. It is noteworthy that Maurice Strong founded the Chicago Climate Exchange after leaving the UN and became a very rich person selling indulgences related to a policy he helped create. He then moved to China where his money was very welcome. A minor detail was that the US government indicted Strong for his part in the UN Oil For Food Scandal.
Every 5 years, or so, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Publishes a “scientific” document called an Assessment Report. Scientists from around the planet develop an incredible scientific document that most find to be substantially valid. Then the UN develops the Summary for Policymakers written by policy makers from the member nations. Once that document is approved, the entire Assessment report is gone over, word by word, so that none of the actual science conflicts with the Summary for Policymakers. They actually change the science to agree with the policy. I repeat, “The policy cart is leading the scientific horse.” This is not science. This is politics.

President Trump has every right to question such a system that has a pedigree like this. The PCCS is the first opportunity to evaluate the climate dogma, and with a foundation as I have described, it is long overdue. If you agree that an PCCS investigation is in order, tell the Whitehouse at 202-456-1111 or email here. And do it today.

 

Read Full Post »

Can you spot the cold periods?

As many of you are aware, October is supposedly the peak of the current sunspot cycle. While some feel that science has no answers for the upcoming activity predictions, I would strongly disagree. Even beyond that, many feel that the Sun is a not a strong determiner of Earth’s climate. I am afraid I would nave to disagree with that too. So, looking at the historical solar activity today, I thought you might find it amusing, as well illustrative, to put aside your daily work specialties and try your hand at heliophysics, which is the study of the Sun. Many claim that sunspot number and temperature have a strong correlation. That is not to say that a high sunspot number will immediately result in a high temperature, but rather a continued high sunspot activity will stimulate a warming trend, keeping in mind the damping effect of the world’s oceans. Understanding this simple statement puts you ahead of many of the so-called climate scientists.

Here is a graph of the the historical sunspot activity of the Sun from NASA’s David Hathaway. Look at the chart and see the ebb and flow of the solar magnetic activity, which is a function of the Sunspot number recorded here.

Mr. Hathaway has not always been in keeping with the solar guys I follow but eventually seems to come to a similar conclusion. I understand he is a pretty good guy following a series of mathematical methods which may not always give the best answers. For instance, he originally predicted the Solar cycle 24 to be really big, but he eventually got it right.

Anyway, what I am looking for you to do is find a possible cause of some of the past climate events. Here is a chart that goes back to 1700. Can you spot the cold periods? The key to the answers follows almost immediately so don’t cheat yourself.

Here are the identified named cold periods.

Key to quiz answers, Wikipedia

Can you also see the period preceding the current warming period when the same scientists hawking man made global warming were claiming man was causing an upcoming ice age? Those of sufficient vintage should remember that hype that obviously did not come true.

So, how did you do? You should have been able to spot the Maunder and Dalton Minimums. You should have also seen the “eminent”, (not), ice age in the 1970’s.

If you got 2 of the three, good job! If you got all three pat yourself on the back. Not named was a long medium cool period around 1900. If you got that it is a bonus.

In between the cold periods are some warmer times that scientists claimed were our fault as well as the cold periods. There have been 5 of these climate scams since the 1890’s beginning with a warming. Nothing new here! All of them were discredited within 10 years when the predicted outcomes refused to happen. But, of course, we are far more intelligent now.

The next cycle is expected, according to a recent estimation, to top out at Sunspot=7! What are the chances that we can expect cool temperatures? I would proffer that the chances might be pretty good. Next time you see an IPCC scientist, tell them the news. They will appreciate it, I’m sure.

Read Full Post »

Catastrophic Predictions of Temperature, Storms and Sea Level for the Next Century

 With predictions of the end of the world which failed to materialize, as well as other “catastrophisms” from those who have the obligation to give us a fair, unbiased view of what we can expect from the future, I have decided to take on the task of telling the world what we can expect based on an alternative view of science than has been presented in the main stream media. No, I will not blame mankind, nor will I blame cows. I will neither fault the oceans nor the sea ice. Glaciers may have a part but nothing like what you have been hearing. It is the Sun that will be the focus of my predictions with all its vagaries. One caveat is that given the doomsayers of alarmist climate change, there will be an impact from a small group that will affect mankind. This group will include all those who have concocted and proliferated the scam of Dangerous Alarmist Warming Globally or DAWG. This is an acronym synonymous with a colloquial term for a dog, and a dog of a hypothesis it certainly is. Now I must caution the readers to not make the assumption that is a derogatory statement. I really love my dog, Marley, a yellow lab that was named just prior to the release of the book, Marley and Me. It should be noted that she is not a believer in DAWG.

All kidding aside, this is a serious prediction of the state of the climate and how man will handle it. Aside from being entirely natural, it will not be a pleasant experience.

Beginning at the present time, with the Sun heading into a cool, low activity cycle based on the solar inertial motion (SIM) we can expect a minimum of 25 years with progressive cooling interrupted by the occasional ENSO event. If ENSO events do occur there may be a muting of the cooling due to the “heat shock” from the El Nino warming. Not having the abilities of Theodore Lanscheidt, I will not predict the likely occurrence of ENSO events, although the stimulus of such events should be similar to those in the past 221 years. Part of my premise is the repeat of the last 221year solar cycle that has driven our climate over the past 420 years, at least.

The basic climate prediction is based on the repeat of the past in 221 year increments since 1600AD. That would indicate that we would see a cool period extending to about 2045 with a Dalton style minimum peaking around 2035. The recovery from that will be brief with a Maunder style minimum following. Further, Sporer and Wolf like minimums will follow in close succession. In total, the cooling cycles will cover the next 95 to 100 years. It would be expected that the temperatures would fall in the neighborhood of 1 to 2 degrees Celsius cooling on average.

The majority of the cooling will be the result of additional clouds from augmented solar wind and Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCR’s) hitting our solar system based on Svenmark’s hypothesis relating to reduced magnetic field intensity from the Sun. Contrary to the DAWG hypothesis, the additional percentage of water vapor in the atmosphere will not add to warming but will further shield us from the already diminished solar radiation from an inactive Sun in a negative feedback.

As a result of these changes we can expect a number of climate related effects to our planet that will be more observable than any of the 20^th century warming. The obvious change will be a cooling and resultant colder winters to be accompanied by intensive snow activity progressing to the southern United States and similar latitudes across the planet. Winters will have snow persisting into July in the northern US. It was reported this morning that snow piles are still 10ft tall in a shopping plaza in Connecticut on this date May 22, 2011. It is not pretty but is solid ice. Could this be the beginning of the next glaciation? We’ll have to call it the Kohl’s Glaciation after the store adjacent to the parking lot.

Arctic sea Ice, which is already exhibiting a growing multi-year ice extent will be increasing almost exponentially within 25 years with a slowing beginning around 30 to 35 years from present. As sea ice begins to take over Alaska and Canada, as well as similar latitudes globally, glaciation will begin. Snow cover will persist in these regions year round and not just permafrost. There will be perennial ice developing on land. After a short respite, the ice accumulation will continue to grow until at least 2110 and maybe beyond.

For the areas inhabited by the vast majority of mankind, growing seasons will become shorter limiting the types of food crops that may be grown. One may expect that cold weather favorites like turnips may become a staple for our dinner tables. I like turnips.

Snow depth accumulations will continue to increase straining the snow budgets of local municipalities and states, especially in the mid-states US and north. Where to put the snow will tax the ingenuity of snow removal experts.

In keeping with the cooling, the world will need huge quantities of inexpensive energy. The idea of low CO2 fuels will be of no consequence when freezing to death is the only other option and the world will be grateful for any warming. The problem is that there will likely be insufficient energy at any cost if the current fad of DAWG inspired regulations continue. The USA is smart to have avoided committing to mandated CO2 reductions. The problem is that 10 northeastern states and California (as well as some others) have entered into a cap and trade system of energy taxation and a commitment to reduce CO2 emissions by in excess of 80% by 2050. This is technically impossible without creating generation difficulties and electrical supply interruptions. This will contribute to a higher mortality rate with exceptions for highly creative individuals who use unusual methods to retain and produce heat. Forests will be cut down and smoke will permeate the atmosphere from uncontrolled home fires. This will probably lead to more homes consumed by fires from poorly maintained wood burning stoves with residents unable to afford proper precautions like flue maintenance. Costs associated with increasing cold will skyrocket with businesses unable to afford the costs. The same will be true of the majority of the population.

Food shortages will be global, exacerbated by ethanol production that will not be curtailed in time to avoid the worst consequences. Combined with shorter growing seasons and limited latitudes where crops may grow the situation will quickly become critical. Starvation may not only affect the poorest but the wealthy as well. You cannot underestimate the commitment of a starving man intent on feeding his family. No amount of security will be able to protect food storage areas. Oddly enough, areas like Africa and South America may actually be better off than some but should not depend on handouts from the large developed countries. Their self-sufficiency may be their salvation.

Lastly, SLR will turn into Sea Level Lowering (SLL). As has been noted by some of the more astute scientists, SLR is mostly thermosteric, being a function of rising ocean temperatures. In the current Ocean Heat Content (OHC) charts there has been a temporary stasis of the level being measured. As the temperatures continue to drop, so will OHC as will the sea level introducing a new phrase, SLL. SLL will not be catastrophic and entirely beneficial. Although storms may increase as a result of the colder weather, there will be a benefit in the oxygenation of the oceans due to the storm agitation. Additionally, lower sea level will mean storm surges will have a reduced impact on coastal development. See, it is not all bad.

Although I suspect this is a likely scenario for the future, we could minimize the worst effects. We should stop the expenditure of $Billions on DAWG-gy programs. We should put the DAWG supporters on un-employment including the scientists, politicians and the leaders of so-called environmental organizations that complete the money loop. We should develop all sources of energy regardless of side effects. Technology should concentrate on reducing any adverse consequences. Cold hardy, short growing season crops need to be developed. Ice transport vehicles could operate on minimal energy given the low resistance to forward motion.

If this sounds like catastrophic global warming, you may be correct. The difference is that cold is a lot more severe than the warmest weather imaginable. Will this scenario happen? Let me know when you get to where I am going. It should be an interesting tale.

Read Full Post »

EPA to curb CO2 in face of global freeze

One would have thought that the world’s scientific community would have the good sense to look out the window and see what is happening out there but you would be wrong. The world has gone mad over the prospect of reducing the planets CO2 output, and the US portion by some 85%-95%. That was the cited goal at the recent COP-16 in Cancun. They said, “the last thing we need right now is another US” and the US EPA is following in lockstep with those who really want to shut our industrial complex down for good. I hope all you global warming holdouts are prepared to scrap your TV’s, computers, SUV’s, oil and gas-fired heating systems and incandescent light bulbs because they will be coming for them any day now. If you think this is fanciful, multiply your current electric bill by .05 and that is what you will be living on per month.  When the Sun goes down you will either be reading by LED lights or you might just go to bed till the Sun rises. Don’t forget your extra blankets and drain your pipes because there will be no energy to keep them from freezing.

The crazy part of all this is the world is facing the coldest winter in 100 years and some say in 1000 years. Even Australia is getting snow and it is their summer. The warmers are scrambling to explain the apparent conundrum and have recently abandoned their previous prediction of a mild winter and have announced that models have determined that global warming means colder winters. All the models previously said mild winters would be a sign of warming. According to a story out of  Germany here,  there is some confusion amongst the faithful. They can’t get the story straight.

As far as the EPA is concerned, everything is right on track for a 4 degree rise in 2100 and nothing will stop it except stopping the US in its tracks. They have announced they are going to take over the Texas CO2 emissions permitting system because Texas has been reluctant to take action. GOOD FOR TEXAS!!!!!

Folks, what I have been preaching for years is happening and the AGW folks are in a panic to take advantage of the situation before the tea party folks take over in Congress. When the full effect of the consequences of the actions being taken is visible to the population, there won’t be many AGW supporters in the world. Problem is it may be too late. If it is I will just sit back and laugh at those who were foolish enough to buy into all this nonsense.  I will survive but it will not be easy. Some aren’t going to make it. When energy is unavailable, if you are not prepared for a primitive lifestyle, you might not make it.

Who will help you?

There won’t be any help.

Some helpful facts:

Obama says he wants to drive the coal industry out of existence. I saw the video.

Obama says electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket. I saw that too.

Coal supplies 50% of our power in the US.

Coal generators are base power, wind and solar are not. They cannot replace coal ever!

With 50% of our base generating power gone, power outages will be much like Iraq.

In Britain where they have been doing this for more than a decade, folks are going to the mall and riding in buses all day to stay warm. They are burning books to heat their homes/apartments. The death toll is rising. You say that can’t happen here? Just watch and do nothing. If that is unacceptable, try reading this paper from an AGW scientist who changed his position. I attended a presentation by him a couple of years ago and he makes a lot of sense. My point is simple. If you want to leave the kind of world we have now, with its admitted problems, to your 5 to 10-year-old children, You need to do something to stop this nonsense. You must educate yourself and stop listening to those who are profiting from this scam. If you do nothing, your children might as well be living in Bolivia or Brazil. The US and the rest of the world will be a cold, scary place. If that’s OK with you, just keep on thinking the way you are but don’t blame me for the mess we find ourselves. The way that will happen is for “good men to do nothing”. DO SOMETHING!

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

Read Full Post »

James Hansen, how low can you go?

In an email from the desk of James Hansen of the Goddard Institute of Space Studies, there was an interview by  Bill McKibben, co-founder and  global organizer of 350.org.  Hansen, in the introduction cited McKibben’s organization as having demonstrated the most effective leadership in the public struggle for climate justice. Climate Justice?  Has a crime been committed? Sorry I missed that. Perhaps it was the advocacy that Hansen has promoted while being in the employ of the government.

He goes on to discuss the efforts by legitimate scientists, whose only crime is to disagree with him, referring to them as “swift boaters”. I read the book which was the story of the real John Kerry in Vietnam and it was the most heavily footnoted book I have read outside of a college textbook. The references were unimpeachable, mostly government records. For Hansen to at once denigrate these fine heroes of an unpopular war and by the same brush, legitimate scientists, is about as low as you can go. It should be noted that Dr. Hansen was John Kerry’s climate guru in his unsuccessful bid to be President. Hansen received something like $750,000 for his efforts from the Heinz Foundation.

One of Hansen’s comments,

If we let warming continue to the point  of rapid ice sheet collapse, all hell will break loose.

Of course ice sheets are floating so levels of the sea won’t rise. The albedo might be lowered but clouds would likely cover that as has been observed.

There was a real hoax, for sure perpetrated on the public by people who prefer business-as usual. People who concocted a misinformation campaign. They want the public to think that the science is suspect. Doubt is all they need. Their tactics included swift-boating and character assassination, using emails stolen from scientists computers. They did an effective job. Now policy makers continue to sit on their hands, leaving fossil fuel subsidies in place, allowing fuel companies to call the tune-and the devil with young people and nature.

  Those are pretty strong words James. Especially since there is not one shred of evidence to support even one word. Again calling the scientists swift-boaters, accusing them of character assassination and stealing Emails. I never saw any of the skeptic scientists assassinate anyone’s character and there is no evidence that the release was anything but an inside job by an individual that perhaps developed a conscience. What no one mentions are the files that were in the pirated information. If you think the emails were a bombshell, the files constituted global nuclear annihilation. They were interesting reading. You can find my stories on these under my Examiner articles under National Environmental Policy Examiner

 

 

 

 

Hansen goes on to discuss the 2035 deadline for Himalayan glacier melting but forgot to mention that a key author was well aware of the problem but failed to call it to the attention of outsiders because, ostensibly, of its importance to the whole picture they were painting. Hansen then goes on to foster the impression of drinking water disappearing based on the same old sad tale that got them into trouble in the first place. He further states that glaciers melting confirms global warming. Duh? That is what happens in interglacial periods. Truth is the total ice mass balance in the planet has remained nearly constant since measurements began. He can pick any local situation but we should look at the big picture. Isn’t that what you have claimed Dr. Hansen?

He then goes into a long rather boring discussion on CO2 concentrations based on the discredited Vostok/ Law dome ice core measurements. There has been no paper written that compares the CO2 levels found in ice cores (especially grossly deteriorated ones) with the air concentration at the time the ice was formed. That is an unproven hypothesis, just like anthropogenic global warming with all its unproven hypothetical positive feedbacks. Several scientists have suggested that CO2 may actually cool the Earth through increased transpiration in plant life. So the sign of the change is not known.

He then discusses his potential court case and the possibility of a year in jail. My take on that, “No comment.” I won’t go that low.

Now if Dr. Hansen would care to debate a sceptic scientist and play fair, I’d be happy to arrange that. I would have many takers on that offer. Lord Monkton has already accepted on a previous occasion.

Dr. Hansen, I can accept that you believe in what you are doing. As a scientist you should accept that reasonable scientists might disagree with you. There is no call to denigrate them and call them names accusing them of  all manner of evil intentions. If I have mischaracterized any of the points in this article, please allow me to correct them. I am just calling this as I see it and it doesn’t come off looking too fine.

Read Full Post »

The Chicago Climate Exchange closes-Sign of demise of AGW?

From London’s Sunday Telegraph we get the following quote,

Nothing more poignantly reflects the collapse of the great global warming scare than the decision of the Chicago Carbon Exchange, the largest in the world, to stop trading in “carbon” – buying and selling the right of businesses to continue emitting CO2. Despite a series of unconvincing attempts to clear the Climategate scientists, it has become clear that the 20-year-old climate scare is dying on its feet. — Christopher Booker, The Sunday Telegraph, 14 November 2010

For those who have read my Examiner articles, you know well the radical antics of the founders of the Chicago Climate Exchange. For those of you who are not familiar with this group, one of the founders was a fellow named Maurice Strong. Strong is a former advisor to Kofi Annan, the former Secretary General of the UN. Strong wrote much of the Kyoto Protocol and included the sale of carbon credits in the text. After being implicated in the UN oil for food scam he moved to China to avoid possible prosecution in the US and served on the board of directors for the Exchange (CCX). He was tied very closely with Al Gore who nominated Strong for a position on the World bank. Gore’s company, Generation Investment Management, worked closely with CCX. That CCX has now given up on the Cap and Trade scam, my description, was cited by Booker as a sure sign of the collapse of man-made global warming as a cause.

it was claimed that the Chicago Exchange would be at the centre of a global market worth $10 trillion a year, and that “carbon” would be among the most valuable commodities on earth

Strong had become a multi-billionaire and stood to become even richer had the US passed Cape and Trade. We didn’t, and thank God for that!

Today, after the collapse of Copenhagen and the cap and trade bill, the carbon price, at five cents a ton, is as low as it can get without being worthless.

It doesn’t get any worse for the AGW crowd than that. But AGW hype couldn’t be any worse for us either. Mr Booker discusses the folly of replacing coal-fired plants and nuclear power with wind mills and solar cells. Britain has some overly expensive subsidies for both solar and wind as does the USA and it isn’t doing any more good there than it does for us. It is a feel good thing that is about as effective as Don Quixote tilting at windmills. It appears equally as ludicrous. 

Booker goes on to discuss some of the implications, primarily for Britain, of AGW’s fall from grace but laments that the MP’s don’t get it. That’s OK Mr. Booker, our elected officials don’t get it either. Perhaps with the new influx of Tea Party candidates, recently elected, that will change.

Read Full Post »

Alert! Alert! Catastrophic Global Cooling!

I have never thought that global warming was all that much of a catastrophe in progress. The likelihood of continued warming was slim to none in my opinion for what it’s worth which isn’t much. As it turns out the latest news on the Earth’s fever is encouraging if you had been fearful of global warming. In the past year alone, it is estimated, an abrupt drop in temperature has nearly reversed 100 years of warming. That is significant! Here is but one of 4 charts that I have seen in the past week or so:

UK’s Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature anomaly (HadCRUT) Dr. Phil Jones:

 If you think that a drop like this is going to stop as abruptly as it started, you belong in the stock market. All you have to do is look at the Sun to see that it has taken a bit of a snooze. This site gives you all the information you need to see what is happening with the sun. Sunspot numbers have been in the 150 range over the past few years until recently, when it began to go low. What this means is we are in a solar minimum. Solar cycle 23, which gave us the warming of the 90’s, is winding down but is not over. The first reverse polarity high latitude sunspot that would be indicative of solar cycle 24, occurred Jan. 4th 2008. But that is not a beginning. That probably won’t happen until the summer. And it may not happen until next summer in 2009. In either case, we are due for some chilly weather. Much colder than now. The only question I have is how cold and for how long. So, what are the consequences?

The most obvious problem the world will face is that it will be cold. Duh? Sorry about that, but cold is the most significant issue involved. Heat waves may kill some of the weaker of us but extreme cold can kill the strongest as well. Cold will require more fuel to heat our homes and other buildings. We barely have enough now and there is a reluctance to find more, at least in the USA. I am mainly talking about oil, but the same goes for nuclear energy, natural gas and coal. Drilling off shore may be possible but if there is too much ice in Alaska, ANWR may soon be inaccessible. The world needs a reliable source of cheap energy and it needs it now. CO2 will not be a consideration. Any warming from fossil fuel burning will be a benefit. It is incumbent on the world’s governments to make immediate plans to harvest all the energy supplies available. But will that be enough?

A primary result of global warming was supposed to be increased storm intensity. From what I have read that was never the case. Unfortunately, it is true for a cooler world. Storm intensity should increase dramatically. Fortunately we are better prepared to accommodate such intense weather.

 As for the other GW result, increasing sea level, that should reverse in that the melting glaciers won’t be melting anytime soon. There is , however, a related consequence to that effect. There is likely to be a shortage of water due to extensive ice formation. Desertification will begin in those same places that were deserts during the last ice age. There may actually be more land available for human habitation except for those areas that are taken by glacial activity.

As far as food is concerned, that will be a huge problem Growing seasons will be shortened in most parts of the planet. Many areas currently being farmed may be entirely unsuitable. And that nasty CO2, it will get sucked up by the oceans. There will be little available for plant food that is responsible for our current lush vegetation.  To enhance our food supply we may have to build huge expanses of greenhouses and supply them with CO2. Aquaculture may become more common if we can solve the mercury pollution problem that is not being helped by the use of Compact fluorescent light bulbs that contain 5 mgs per bulb. Now there is an environmental disaster just waiting. Food production will be a major problem.

Is this alarmist? You bet. Is it more likely than the fanciful tales of the AGW crowd? You bet. Can we do anything about it. You bet. You say”Have you gone crazy Kirt?” No, not yet. We can adapt to the changes. We can use our ingenuity. We can make use of our resources. We can build an infrastructure that is energy efficient. Not to stop CO2. Forget that! We need to make the most efficient use of what we have to last for the 20, 50, 100, or even 100,000 years before the Sun decides to warm our planet.

Maybe we can sprinkle carbon pixie dust on the ice caps to melt them. But the first thing we have to do is stop spending money on global warming. And I mean right now!!!!!

Read Full Post »

To Understand AGW You Have to Follow the Money

Everybody knows about Al Gore and his alarmist claims concerning the effects of man-made global warming but what is in it for him? He says it is a moral issue. Perhaps. He says the Earth has a fever. Very slight and dropping. He says he buys carbon offsets to pay for his indulgences. His huge house, swimming pool and of course his jet. Oh really! There is no question here. He does not buy these offsets. The Company he founded in the UK with offices in London and Washington D.C. furnishes the offsets to its employees. Generation Investment Management is set up to take advantage of green technology and the need for companies to go green. They buy carbon credits. Gore stands to make millions on the heels of ever stricter CO2 regulation. He is also an unpaid climate advisor for the UK. Unpaid? In theory he is not being paid but he is supposed to influence the US to adopt tighter CO2 regulation. This in turn will help GIM make money from which he will benefit.

What is strange about this arrangement is that as an agent of a foreign power, Al is supposed to register with the US government and present a current registration to Congress before testifying. From what I am privy to, he did no such thing. Also, it is accepted practice to divulge any vested interest in the outcome of what you are testifying about. I heard his entire testimony and I never heard him mention anything about his income being dependent on tighter CO2 restrictions. The first point concerning being an agent of a foreign power is punishable by 5 years in jail and $10,000 fine. By the way, the law is clear in that it matters not whether the agent is paid or not and the law specifically points out this kind of relationship. It does not make exceptions for ex next presidents.

 Perhaps you have heard all this before but there is more. Surrounding GIM is a network of organizations in which Mr. Gore is a significant player. He claims that he is forfeiting his salary. There is no mention of any bonuses or other compensation which could easily be multiples of any salary.

GIM has a close relationship with Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) that actually sells carbon credits while GIM buys them from CCX. Maurice Strong is the force behind CCX and a very close friend of Al Gore. Gore recommended Strong for a position with the world bank at one time. But who is Maurice Strong? He is a Canadian who some say left school after the 11th grade. From this beginning he turned himself into a multi-billionaire. Not bad for a dropout! He was employed by an oil company for a while. He then worked his way up through the UN to become an advisor to Kofi Annan, former UN Secretary General. Prior to that he was on the Commission for Global Governance. He supposedly saw the connection between carbon cap and trade and a one world Global Governance. So do I. 

 From The National Center for Public Policy Research comes this: “Strong’s most significant role at the U.N. to-date has been his position as Secretary General of the 1992 U.N. Conference on the Environment and Development, the Rio Earth Summit. In the opening session of the Rio Earth Summit, Strong commented: “The concept of national sovereignty has been an immutable, indeed sacred, principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation. It is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation states, however powerful. The global community must be assured of environmental security. Interestingly, Strong had initially been blocked from participating in the conference by the U.S. Department of State. When Strong learned of this, however, he persuaded then-President George Bush to overrule the State Department.”

This, I believe, is the true motivation behind AGW activities. He expects the US to give up it’s sovereignty to the UN in favor of environmental security for the world.

In June 2006 the World Bank, Strong’s former employer, joined CCX. World Bank’s Carbon Finance Unit works with European countries to set up funds to buy carbon credits for use in developing countries. They are traded on the European Climate Exchange, half of which is owned by CCX which is of course closely related to GIM. It should come as no surprise to you that Strong is the architect of the Kyoto treaty. They call him “Mr. Environment”. Can we see the pattern developing here yet?

From Private Equity Week we get: “One of GIM’s associated firms is Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers Notable members of the firm include partners John Doerr and Brook Byers, as well as high-profile individuals such as Sun Microsystems co-founder Bill Joy (who joined as partner in January 2005), former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell (who joined in July 2005 in the newly-created position of “strategic limited partner”), and former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, who joined as partner in November 2007 as part of a collaboration between KPCB and Gore’s firm Generation Investment Management to promote green technology, business and policy solutions.^“ I find it interesting that Colin Powell is associated with Al Gore. I would never have guessed that one.

If you find this confusing and complicated, it is, and is intended to be that way. Mr. Gore would never be able to sell his alarmist program to the world if everyone knew the background behind his real intentions. Maurice Strong, for his part, is most comfortable wheeling and dealing in the background as he is prone to do. I personally believe that knowing what is behind the key individuals pushing any program says a lot about what they are pushing. What these facts say is that two individuals have taken a major role in the AGW hype, working together, and have strategically positioned themselves to clean up with no one being the wiser.

I’ll cover more on this as I firm up some really interesting facts.

Kirt Griffin

References: http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/v1185475433.pdf http://www.sovereignty.net/p/sd/strong.html http://www.taxtyranny.ca/images/HTML/Maurice-Strong/article1.html 

http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/22C11.txt

Read Full Post »

So you want to believe in AGW

AGW for the purpose of this blog means Alarmist Global Warmers

So you want to be a believer that man is responsible for the current warming of our planet? I have here, everything that you need to be a convert. The primary prerequisite is unquestioned faith in the organizations and individuals that are the prophets of doom. Primary among these is the UN. This is the group that brought you the oil for food scandal which lined the pockets of UN cronies instead of supplying food and supplies to oppressed children and then covered it up. This is the group that made Libya the chair of the human rights committee. This is the group that issued 14 resolutions against Iraq but after more than 12 years of non-compliance refused to take any action. This is the group that exaggerated the aids epidemic to emphasize the need. But despite all this, you need to accept that this time they are honestly saving the world, not to promote their power but for purely humanitarian interests. Sounds fair so let’s move on.  

Second, it would be helpful to accept that Al Gore, who had a little difficulty with science classes and couldn’t make the grade in seminary school ( Some say, to be fair,  he had a one year scholarship to the school and managed to get through it.) has suddenly been transformed into the world’s science guru (with experience in preaching) with the help of a NASA scientist of course. A real scientist, James Hansen, that just happened to find climate alarmism profitable, won a $250,000 prize from the Heinz Foundation and also received a $720,000 grant from the Open Society Institute funded by the left wing radical George Soros. With that kind of payoff  I too could believe. There was a little confusion over hot years but what is 64 years between friends. But you must believe. Al Gore’s mentor, a scientist named Revelle hired a Scientist name Keeling who investigated CO2 induced global warming. Arrhenius’ and Callendar’s speculations that anthropogenic CO2 could cause global warming, became fact when Keeling accepted them without further testing other than CO2 was increasing. These were key prophets of the newly formed religion. Blessed be the prophets.

It is important to distinguish between the motives of big corporations in their funding of research. If you are an oil company your motives must be evil (Unless of couse you are BP which has a cooperative agreement with GE) . If you are GE, for example, your motives for getting government incentives to subsidize the purchase of your photo cells( a solar system that cost $75,000 could be had after incentives for about $20,000) and windmills, which would otherwise not be viable alternatives, are the result of the highest regard for the Earth and mankind. Not to mention profits. Discrediting scientists for working for an organization that once accepted donations from someone who was related to someone who worked in an oil refinery who was paid by “Big Oil”, is considered great sport by true believers. Fun and games. I hope you are hanging in there. Then there is the Hockey Stick reconstruction of temperature history. Never mind that the graph wiped out several well known historic climate events that were published in previous assessment reports both cold as well as warm. And of course, what is the probability that one could conceive of a mathematical scheme that generated hockey sticks from trendless data. Sure, it could happen to anyone. It happens every day. And purely by accident. I’ve done a lot of graphical representations and I’ve never been so lucky but some people have it all. I couldn’t help but notice when Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, who debunked the hockey stick (Their complaints were later confirmed by 2 independent studies), pointed out the issues quite clearly to the chart’s authors The authors very vehemently cried foul to something else! As far as I know the questions were never entirely answered and no acknowledgement was ever made of the error. A religous belief is sometimes difficult to accept but if you expect to be a believer….

Like many religions, it sometimes gets a little tougher to find truth and the ultimte wisdom. Now you must have the biggest leap of faith. You must accept what seems counter intuitive in that you must absolutely, without equivication, believe that the Sun has a minimal warming effect on the planet. This is not so hard to believe when you have made it this far. There it is on the NASA web site. The sun is a one of the smallest contributors to warming and CO2 somehow actually generates heat out of very thin air. Apparently, the idea of the sun being the source of light and heat must be wrong. It is actually CO2 molecules bumping into each other that causes the heating.  I guess? What else could it be. But salvation awaits. Now is not the time to let your belief be shaken.

Then there is that nutty stuff about solar intertial motion. We all know the Sun is the center of the Solar System and how could it be possible that the Sun would find itself at some point away from the “geographical” center.  Magnetic fields of the Sun and it’s polarity vary. All 4 poles.  This affects cosmic rays that allow ice to form into clouds that reflect solar radiation resulting in cooling. But hey, the IPCC only recognizes irradiance. Hmmm? So does the Goddard Institute. And while we are at it, I believe the National Acadamy of Sciences does also. Is there any connection going on here. There are rumors but these thing would, of course, be held close to the vest. You must resist getting into this idea too much. It is too confusing. It is so much easier to blame CO2 and man. . Besides the Gurus of the religion have spoken.

If you are OK with everything so far, congratulations, you are a believer. Pass the KoolAid, Jim. And I don’t mean Jim Jones.

Read Full Post »

Some Problems with the AGW Claims

As we have noted, there have been other claims of man causing climate change. There was media hype in 1895 of an upcoming ice age. Then came warming, then cooling again and finally warming again. Four times! And each time we look at it like it was the first time. Climate changes all the time.

One of the signatures of a Green House Gas induced warming, according to the IPCC,  is that the upper troposphere would warm at 2 to 3 times the rate of warming of the surface. Not that the temperature would be higher. Just the rate of increase. In the temperature record, the upper troposphere has been almost flat and this is supposed to be the signature effect! This in itself should be enough to kill the entire idea but apparently it is not.

The AGW hype comes across as more of a religion than science. Al says it is a moral issue. Most, but not all, AGW advocates say there should be no debate. I read several scientific facts per week that support the sceptic or rationalist’s position. New information is being discovered daily. The science should never be settled.

A key point of the AGW  claims is that there is nothing else that could cause it and the warming is happening. For instance, the claim is that the sun’s variation in irradiance is not sufficient to account for the changes being observed. Really? What they miss here are the indirect effects of the solar magnetic field, erratic solar orbits, length of solar cycles, polarity changes in the sun’s magnetic fields, the link between the Earth’s magnetic field and that of the Sun, the variation in length of day (not hours of light, the 24hr+ total) and the overall effect on galactic cosmic rays (GCR) that affect cloud formation. Add all these up and you have some powerful effects. More than enough to account for the modest warming being measured. One of my favorite quotes is by Oliver Manuel, “Compared to cosmic rays, CO2 has about as much effect on climate as the weight of a flea on an elephant.” Says it all. Here is a paper on solar effects/orbits:

 http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Calen2/Rhodes.html

Speaking of being measured, we are told the Earth is warming. But is it? We are told that the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect is well accounted and adjusted for. There are many that have significant problems with the allowance the IPCC applies to this. There are many more sites in the US than in any other portion of the globe. There are parts of the globe where there are no temperature stations. Those temperatures are determined from adjacent squares in the grid. Many stations are inappropriately placed and poorly maintained. The net effect of most of these issues is an uncorrected increase in temperature. Since the measured global temperature has been pretty flat since 1998, despite a 4% increase in CO2 concentration, maybe the Earth is actually cooling. In my humble opinion, that is a very likely possibility.

Throw in that aerosols, once thought to offset the warming, may actually be augmenting the warming. That land use is considered a negative effect by the IPCC, yet the UHI effect is a part of that and it is definitely a positive forcing. Also the IPCC has discarded the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age that appeared in previous Assessment reports. I believe they became an Inconvenient Truth. To support their claim of warming they start most of their temperature charts at 1860 which just happens to be the minimum of the Little Ice Age. Isn’t that convenient. Move the starting point back a few hundred years and we might be wondering when we will get back to the warm times.

These problems bring into question the claims of AGW and we should be cautious in spending $Billions to solve what is probably natural variation. Kyoto, if followed to the letter, would destroy economies and have a negligible effect on the alleged warming. Wouldn’t we be better off spending the money on making inexpensive, plentiful energy available to the masses?

Cheers,

Kirtland Griffin

Read Full Post »