64 Comments

1. heather:

I have a theory that humans are ‘hardwired’ to worry about the future. This was perfectly understandable back in the day when we had to get up out of bed in the cold cold dawn to hunt a mastodon; or pick up our hoe and plant grains in early March when - again - it was totally uncomfortable.

However, here we are, in the wealthiest, most comfortable civilization ever, and we continue to worry… about the weather (It’s going to CHANGE!!! OHMIGOD!!! WHERE CAN I BUY SOME CARBON!!!).

Jan 11, 2009 - 2:24 pm 2. Pajamas Media » Annals of Global Warming … or Cooling?:

[...] Read the entire piece here. [...]

Jan 12, 2009 - 2:59 am 3. David Thomson:

Everyone should view “The Great Global Warming Swindle.” This film clearly shows the exaggerated concerns of some thirty years ago regarding world cooling. The current global warming fad merely helps to empower ego tripping politicians, bureaucrats and leftist ideologues. And don’t forget the money! Greed has much to do with this nonsense. Many well placed individuals perceive green technologies as lucrative opportunities—especially if they can force taxpayers to fund their investments.

Jan 12, 2009 - 3:27 am 4. Boris:

“Why didn’t political leaders act then to save the earth?”

Because Newsweek wrote a terrible article. The idea of an anthropogenic ice age (or an imminent one) was not accepted by the scientific community.

See this article in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Association, for example.

Jan 12, 2009 - 5:28 am 5. nadadhimmi:

Who owns the carbon offsets company? Would that be Al Gore? Now that it’s cold as a well diggers a$$ in the Yukon, we are told it’s not “Global Warming”, but rather climate change that we are causing. You see, in the liberal world, hot causes cold, I guess kind of like drinking causes sobriety. These people are lunatics, and, or, charlatins after my money, mind and soul. I choose to not give them any of the above.

Jan 12, 2009 - 5:48 am 6. Boris:

“Who owns the carbon offsets company?”

I’m not sure.

“Would that be Al Gore?”

No.

Jan 12, 2009 - 5:55 am 7. Prague:

If you read the Pravda article carefully, they seem to leave a few things out. For instance, they cite the “hockey stick” graph as if it hasn’t been proven incorrect, do not discuss the effect of sunspots at all, and - unless I totally missed it - never actually say where we are in the Milankovich cycles (”on the brink” geologically may be quite different than “on the brink” in a human’s lifespan).

It seems a bit of an overreaction to me - people panicking in the other direction. I’m guessing that the snow in Hell (caused by HuffPo’s recent article lambasting Al Gore and AGW/climate change) may have had something to do with that.

I agree with Heather. It makes sense that we’re basically hardwired to worry about the weather. Bring on the mastodon hunt!

Jan 12, 2009 - 6:18 am 8. Peter the Sub Guy:

Actually, Boris, Al Gore is known to own at least one business that sells Carbon Offsets.

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=258075474834657

Jan 12, 2009 - 6:21 am 9. Quig:

Years ago I saved like crazy to move from Canada to Australia because the glaciers were returning.
Then THEY told me the earth was warming and Australia was going to get hotter than the 7th level of Hell! So I moved back to Canada!
Now you tell me I’m going to get my butt frozen off again?

Sheeesh!

Jan 12, 2009 - 6:54 am 10. jerryofva:

Boris et al are getting desperate as the data continues to contradict the models. Eventually policymakers will catch on to the fact that all the GCMs are garbage and what passes for climate science is little more that model masterbation at which point the federal cash spigot will be turned off.

Jan 12, 2009 - 7:11 am 11. Magic:

Find a scientist that is a Global Warming advocate give him $20.00 and he will back the new Ice Age theory. It doesn’t matter it is climate change and he is highly educated, so he can’t be wrong. You people are suppose to believe what ever he tells you, you are the sheeple.

Jan 12, 2009 - 7:28 am 12. Boris:

“Actually, Boris, Al Gore is known to own at least one business that sells Carbon Offsets.”

Sorry, but that editorial is incorrect. GIM does not sell carbon credits. They buy them for all of their employees from another company.

Feel free to prove me wrong. Here’s there website:

http://www.generationim.com

Jan 12, 2009 - 7:45 am 13. ThinkingPerson:

Ice Age Coming? Boy do I feel for the losers who bought into Global Warming and purchased those God-awful Prius’s. No power at all and now they won’t have traction in the mountains of snow and ice headed our way! Dang! Now what are we to do with all of those heinous energy saver bulbs that put off Frankenesque light and are full of toxic chemicals that will pollute our watersheds? I think we should dump them in Al Gore’s lawn. He can buy some offsets for all of us with the millions he’s made from our willingness to follow blindly. Where IS Al Gore now by the way?

Jan 12, 2009 - 8:22 am 14. steeple:

Magic 11, couldn’t agree more. Here’s some additional:

Rapid growth spurt leaves amount of ice at levels seen 29 years ago. (from DailyTech.com)

Thanks to a rapid rebound in recent months, global sea ice levels now equal those seen 29 years ago, when the year 1979 also drew to a close.

Ice levels had been tracking lower throughout much of 2008, but rapidly recovered in the last quarter. In fact, the rate of increase from September onward is the fastest rate of change on record, either upwards or downwards.

The data is being reported by the University of Illinois’s Arctic Climate Research Center, and is derived from satellite observations of the Northern and Southern hemisphere polar regions.

Each year, millions of square kilometers of sea ice melt and refreeze. However, the mean ice anomaly — defined as the seasonally-adjusted difference between the current value and the average from 1979-2000, varies much more slowly. That anomaly now stands at just under zero, a value identical to one recorded at the end of 1979, the year satellite record-keeping began.

Sea ice is floating and, unlike the massive ice sheets anchored to bedrock in Greenland and Antarctica, doesn’t affect ocean levels. However, due to its transient nature, sea ice responds much faster to changes in temperature or precipitation and is therefore a useful barometer of changing conditions.

Earlier this year, predictions were rife that the North Pole could melt entirely in 2008. Instead, the Arctic ice saw a substantial recovery. Bill Chapman, a researcher with the UIUC’s Arctic Center, tells DailyTech this was due in part to colder temperatures in the region. Chapman says wind patterns have also been weaker this year. Strong winds can slow ice formation as well as forcing ice into warmer waters where it will melt.

Why were predictions so wrong? Researchers had expected the newer sea ice, which is thinner, to be less resilient and melt easier. Instead, the thinner ice had less snow cover to insulate it from the bitterly cold air, and therefore grew much faster than expected, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center.

In May, concerns over disappearing sea ice led the U.S. to officially list the polar bear a threatened species, over objections from experts who claimed the animal’s numbers were increasing.

Jan 12, 2009 - 8:28 am 15. Skip:

This phenomenon of “professional hysteria” is a time honored tradition. So-called experts continually fall into line behind their colleagues in belief of nonsense.

Jan 12, 2009 - 8:35 am 16. Self-hating Boomer:

Keep in mind that unlike warming, global cooling is uncontroversial. It’s not a question of whether, but of when. Pravda may be a bit quick to jump the gun, but the geological record is absolutely clear; the currently temperate parts of the earth spend most of the time in a frozen-over state, and the interglacials, such as now, are relatively rare. And if anyone thinks Gore’s rising ocean scenarios are scary, they pale compared to what another ice age will (not may) do to humanity.

Jan 12, 2009 - 8:48 am 17. Pee Wee Herman, Community Organizer:

Hey Boris! You no contradict Pravda! You go to Siberia! Now! We show you cold! You buns freeze off! Hahahaha!

Jan 12, 2009 - 8:51 am 18. ReConUSMC:

Here is what the brilliant Common sense Conservative Mind of Dr Gregory Young wrote on the American Thinker that neeeds repeating .

Liberals by nature will not listen to reason. Nor will they be convinced by the facts of the matters under consideration. Their positions are truly bound to emotional hystrionics and self-absorption. But Liberals are not really who we are posting to. Our intended audience are those that are still on the fence. And more importantly, the Politicians of all stripes who will not wish to be exposed as “stupid” or become embarrassed when found on the “wrong” side of things. These may not countenance the truth as we do, but they can feel the sting of public embarrassment in the voting booth.

The facts and opinions that “we” (and I mean to include all those that responsibly post comments on AT and elsewhere) all argue are quintessentially important. All of us are daring to bring truth to light. We are freely voicing our opinions, based on factual evidence, coming to conclusions that are becoming more and more irrefutable. We are chorusing such a sound that those that remain on the fence will be blown over, for fear of looking stupid in the all searching public eye.

In the matter of Global Warming in particular, there is now a “movement” a foot, a tidal action which has not only affected other scientists who now have defected from the IPCC position and chose to join our ranks instead, but Politicians world wide are now re-examining their positions. Point of fact: Note the recent declarations of the Environmental Minister in England, as well as the German Chancoller, publically doubting the position of AGW.

But we’re not through yet… Recently, as you will remember, the Left has called in their black-robed “reinforcers,” turning to the courts to seal their deal. And I suppose that since the pretended hazards of CO2 has been now incredulously ratified, no less but by the U.S. Supreme Court, the question must remain moot, or so wishes the Liberal Left? To wit: Said Dickens’ through Mr. Bumble in David Copperfield: “If that is the law, sir, then the law is a arse!” I respectfully agree with Dickens, but I don’t think the matter has become moot, as the Left would have us believe. The Fat Lady has yet to sing!

Still, as we further our combined efforts, we can bring reason to bear. May I suggest something rather boldly. I would think that arguments and articles like mine that we choose to embrace should be copied and sent to our representatives in Washington, DC., as well our State Representatives. Both centers of government must be targeted, federal and local.

Again, the more we make this truth obvious to our Politicians, the more we can make the light shine upon them. The more uncomfortably exposed they feel in the face of this information, the less likely they’ll support AGW. And too, the more power we will have over the MSM and Liberal hsysteria.
Semper Fi

Jan 12, 2009 - 8:58 am 19. therealist:

I grew up frightened of being vaporized by a Soviet nuclear missile and spent the last several years of my adult life traveling the globe one step ahead of three terrorist bombings and a tsunami. Global warming? I’ll take it.

Jan 12, 2009 - 9:20 am 20. Jim Baker:

Since the climate change collectivists base their rhetoric on completely baseless theories, they will never know what to predict next. This is junk science politics. Worse yet, it is being foisted upon our school children.

Jan 12, 2009 - 9:23 am 21. arktkek48:

Thank God we have the Chicago Climate Action Plan in place. According to a recent press release Chicago’s climate will soon be similar to that of Baton Rouge, La. unless we do something to stop global warming. Yep, sure looks a lot like the bayou around here, alligators crawling through the snow drifts and icicles hanging from the Spanish moss. Oh wait how could this be? A blizzard warning for tonight! Hold on a minute, we have already had a normal year’s snowfall with three more storms due this week. The alarmists will say it’s all part of global climate CHANGE. I say it’s all part of normal climate behavior that has changed in the past and will continue to change in the future. Who put Al Gore in charge of the thermostat anyway? The arrogance and hubris of these self appointed guardians of the earth that they can control climate is mind boggling.

Jan 12, 2009 - 9:48 am 22. Jim:

Al Gore’s carbon offset company is also the same company he buys his carbon offsets from.

Following his lead, every time I fill up my coal burner, I donate $5 to my carbon offset company, which then uses the money to offset another 50 pounds of coal to the hopper.

Jan 12, 2009 - 9:51 am 23. seven:

Dishonesty. I expect to see more pictures taken in the summer here in the middle of a frigid winter. Pictures are all they have. The captions don’t have much truth in them.

Jan 12, 2009 - 9:58 am 24. kharwick:

Ice Ages are and warming periods are cyclical and being at 12,000 years into this warming cycle it would be prudent to start looking into technology that might help minimize an ice age, as it would be far more disastrous than global warming which has occurred naturally many times though out time on earth.

Jan 12, 2009 - 10:40 am 25. Fecal McStool:

I like to talk about stool.

Jan 12, 2009 - 10:44 am 26. tim maguire:

Not to worry! All of you can rest assured that the perscription to end global warming–huge new taxes, vast new regulations, fewer white people–will work just as well to prevent global cooling.

So let’s keep moving towards socialism and everything will keep being fine!

Jan 12, 2009 - 11:14 am 27. Steynian 307 « Free Canuckistan!:

[...] warming to bring you this headline from Pravda: Earth on the Brink of an Ice Age; Slovenia with record low temperature -49; Snow continues to trap thousands at Madrid airport …. [...]

Jan 12, 2009 - 11:19 am 28. robotech master:

Well on the plus side an ice age could really be a problem… verse the warming which would help ppl…

To 7. Prague

I know lots of global warming nuts who still believe the hockey stick is real… in fact I’ve read a science paper think about 6 months ago that cited the hockey stick as proof of global warming. I seen about 5 shows in that produced in 2008 saying the hockey stick was real. Just because your educated doesn’t mean the rest of the world is… I mean no one educated believed global warming in the first place.

Jan 12, 2009 - 11:56 am 29. Peter the Sub Guy:

Hey, Boris, here you go…

http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2007/03/al_gores_inconv.html

Jan 12, 2009 - 12:15 pm 30. John the Libertarian:

If you take away global warming, er, climate change, the alarmists would fall to despair. We all need a purpose bigger than ourselves. They’ve rejected God for Mother Earth. Take that away, too, and they have nothing.

Jan 12, 2009 - 1:24 pm 31. ThinkingPerson:

#30 I totally agree with you except I think they’ve already found another purpose…Renaming fish as kittens anyone?

Jan 12, 2009 - 1:49 pm 32. UsaBruce:

Re: John the Libertarian - BINGO!

Jan 12, 2009 - 1:53 pm 33. Valjean:

Not to confuse climate with weather (like some other prognosticators I *could* mention), but on the tiny northern (US) island where I live we’ve had quite a bit more snow than usual this winter. Only mention this as a backdrop to what happened to a green-washed neighbor who bought a Prius a few months back with the avowed intention of “doing her part” to save Mother Earth.

First good dump of snow, of course, she got stuck. Rescued by another neighbor with a big, nasty, carbon-belching 4×4 Chevy Truck.

The irony was just too rich for me. Wish I’d taken pictures.

Jan 12, 2009 - 2:14 pm 34. ReConUSMC:

In the spirit of being a good neighbor, I’ve decided to offer a needed service for all of the believers in human-caused global warming. That’s right, step right up, folks, I’m going to be selling carbon credits to those who want to assuage their guilt about heating up the planet with their SUVs.

For those of you not familiar with carbon credits, people who don’t want to cut back on their use of fossil fuels just pay someone else to cut back, much the same way you might pay someone to eat healthy foods for you so you can eat anything you want.

My gimmick is that I’m offering $100 carbon credits for only $89 each. If you buy carbon credits from Al Gore, you’ll have to pay the full retail price. But if you send your money directly to me, you’ll receive an official certificate for $100 in carbon credits for every $89 you send. But wait, there’s more. If you are among the first 500 purchasers, we’ll include a fantastic vegetable chopper, a $19.99 value, absolutely free.

And you will be helping to save the planet. I’ve had my eye on a 12-foot jon boat with a used 10-horse Evinrude, which will no doubt pump out oodles of carbon dioxide. But instead, I’m going to use the proceeds of carbon credit sales to purchase a sailboat — in other words, an environmentally friendly boat that uses wind power. The latest issue of Yachts International includes an ad for a 66-foot Van De Stadt for a mere $2,295,000. That’s a lot of carbon credits, but I’m sure if all of you dig deep enough, we can pull this off.

When you display your certificates on the wall, not only can you be smug about protecting our planet, you can also proudly tell your friends and neighbors that you got them wholesale.

Expanding the same general principle, I’m also pleased to offer healthy food credits to folks who need to improve their diet. Just send me $5, and I’ll eat a stalk of celery for you. Of course, that’s with a big blob of Cheese Whiz spread all over it. Sorry, if you want me to eat the thing with no topping; it’ll cost you 10 bucks.

(Note to the humor-challenged: the above is satire. Do not send money to me or to any carnie out there, whether they are selling carbon credits or tickets to see a two-headed calf.)

I believe it was P.T. Barnum who said that there is a carbon credit purchaser born every minute. Or, did he say that a carbon credit purchaser and his money are soon parted? Well, it was something like that.

It would be easy to write off the global warming alarmists as a bunch of harmless boobs who will soon be refuted, but we should learn from history. DDT alarmism was also based on politics instead of science and has been thoroughly refuted, but at last count, there are still a million people perishing from malaria each year due to the DDT ban.

While everyone agrees that the earth has warmed between a half degree and one degree centigrade over the last century, and that humans may have a small part in it, there is absolutely no “consensus” that humans are the major cause. Since the planet Mars is also warming, it is likely that we are experiencing a normal variation in the sun’s output. Furthermore, if the earth continues to warm, there is no universal agreement that humans can actually do anything about it.

Yes, of course we need to reduce our use of fossil fuels to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. But, we know that global warming alarmism is simply a political ploy when alarmists refuse to acknowledge the real solution — nuclear power — which puts nothing other than water vapor into the atmosphere.

A report released by Sen. Inhofe (R-OK) on Dec. 20 included this opening statement: “Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.” That sums it up nicely, but you can read the entire report at epw.senate.gov.

Jan 12, 2009 - 2:46 pm 35. Ed 4:

Boris,
It says right on GIM’s website that investment in ‘Carbon Markets’ is one of their four ‘Key Priority Areas’

Jan 12, 2009 - 3:09 pm 36. Jim Baker:

Environmentalism = State sponsored religion. Exactly what the founders feared when they indicated that government should not establish a favored religion.

Jan 12, 2009 - 3:32 pm 37. Alice Finkel:

Climate change you can believe in? Everyone needs something like an Obama-messiah or climate change or peak oil or Y2K apocalypse.

For the media, it gives them “news” when nothing is really happening. Plus, it’s politically correct to harp on global warming and attack big oil, even if Putin and Chavez are closer to being villains than Exxon.

Al Gore has made millions on carbon hysteria and aims to make billions more. James Hansen and Michael Mann have garnered fame and big time money grants. Job security. The IPCC and Pachauri etc. get more money to operate and a bigger microphone. They are taken seriously, which is all any bureaucrat really wants.

Jan 12, 2009 - 4:15 pm 38. murphyranch:

Just a question: If there isn’t going to be global warming, but an ice age instead, wouldn’t we be better off with our carbon footprint being as big as possible to keep the heat INNNNNNN?

What a bunch of hooey this whole global warming thing is…think about it…a way to TAX the productive nations by placing a tax on the very air we all breathe…what a diabolical governmental dream…are you going to help make it come true?

Murphyranch

Jan 12, 2009 - 6:44 pm 39. Oh, the Weather Outside is Frightful | One from the Peanut Gallery:

[...] to Mr. Kimball for the link. It was not reported whether Al Gore was promoting himself and global warming in the [...]

Jan 12, 2009 - 7:56 pm 40. Boris:

“It says right on GIM’s website that investment in ‘Carbon Markets’ is one of their four ‘Key Priority Areas’”

Does “investment in carbon markets” mean they sell carbon offsets? Investing and selling are different things.

Jan 13, 2009 - 5:56 am 41. Jim Baker:

To murphyranch,

No, because they are even wrong about that.

Jan 13, 2009 - 9:20 am 42. Stan63dt:

Actually, I think that “An Inconvenient Truth” will be a classic, ranking right up there with “Reefer Madness”.

Jan 13, 2009 - 10:52 am 43. c:

I think Russian scientists said that there will be global cooling instead of global warming because the sun was/is temporarily weaker.

Nothing we can do about it and makes sense.

Jan 13, 2009 - 12:26 pm 44. Pat J:

I always consider “global warming” to be a misnomer. The actual issue is climate change. The main controversy is whether it is antropogenic.

Jan 13, 2009 - 12:50 pm 45. Hannah C:

Im a 7th grade kid a crosswinds middle in woodbury mn. im doing a project on global warming and i wuz wondering if anyone could emial me their opinion about global warming & some stuff u know about it. it would be very helpful!! my teachers email is kristen.siskow@emid.6067.net thx 4 ur help!!

Jan 13, 2009 - 1:17 pm 46. David H Dennis:

ReConUSMC, I enjoyed your post. Unfortunately, you forgot to mention that a 66′ Van de Stadt has a 220 horsepower engine that’s used much of the time in practice, so it is extremely doubtful that your carbon credit programme would actually result in lower carbon levels.

Fortunately, there is a solution - a solar powered yacht has been developed and you could consider that. It can glide around at 5 knots for a day under solar power alone. We can tactfully ignore its 75hp engine that cuts in when there is not enough sun. I am not involved in the company but the concept’s too cool to ignore.

Unfortunately I think it’s just a coastal cruiser - I doubt it’s durable enough to last out a severe storm. So watch out for those tiresome hurricanes.

This all being said, I have been continuously appalled that people are talking about global warming as though it’s a bad thing. Certainly the lives of Americans living in the overwhelming majority of the country would be enormously improved by a warmer climate. Why should we pay an amazingly hefty price when doing nothing would result in a tremendous improvement in our lifestyle?

If global warming is a problem, I think we should work on mitigating the sea level rises and enjoy our better climate.

Unfortunately, if we’re talking about a new ice age, that’s a much worse problem. Surely if carbon is going to be able to prevent that, it’s time for us to fire up our most gas-greedy SUVs and save ourselves from a terrible fate.

Then maybe you can sell Carbon Debits to people who don’t use enough carbon and use them to buy the 141′ turbine yacht you’ve always wanted. It has a top speed of 53 knots and I seem to remember fuel consumption figures in the 400 gallons per hour range. Better sell a lot of those debits!

D

Jan 13, 2009 - 4:42 pm 47. Squirmn:

@ 45 Hannah C:

I would, but I am so busy sending factual information to my own kids teachers I have no time to help your cause. LOL.

Jan 13, 2009 - 4:53 pm 48. paul_unalaska:

Boris -

Again, when is Al Gore, Yasser Arafat and Jimmy Carter planning to return their Nobels & cash? Heck, Arafat funneled millions of U.N. idiot good faith money and rolled it into more than a billion dollars. Strange, apparently the ‘poor, poor Palestinians’ didn’t receive that money/ aid. Hmmph. That’s weird..

Hannah C - The book, ‘Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1,500 Years’ by Dennis T. Avery and S. Fred Singer should suffice.

Jan 13, 2009 - 5:09 pm 49. brad!:

Ha ha! Such good stuff. But how dare you all torment the true believers so much and so harshly. One wonders, when the ghost of global warming finally evaporates, what will the masses next be mesmorized by? I don’t think it matters much, as long as the major media latches onto it breathlessly, and treats whatever it is like the abolute truth; then, when its so frigging obvious that its not the absolute truth, or any truth at all, but a blatant falsehood, they’ll skip onto the next alarmist crap, as if nothing has occured. I think the main thing to remember here isn’t so much that the global warming hysteria is really a bunch of bilge, but with what ease most people gobble it up — without question, and treat it as truth; their attitude towards it is almost impenetrable, even though unreasoned — but something that has just been absorbed without any criticism whatsoever. That’s the really ugly thing. And most of it has been spoon fed to them by the major media…….I think this is a much larger threat than either global warming, or the fact that it is a total lie, and swallowed up like candy!

Jan 13, 2009 - 5:37 pm 50. Peter the Sub Guy:

40. Boris wrote:
Does “investment in carbon markets” mean they sell carbon offsets? Investing and selling are different things.

Peter explains: The article states that Gore is, in effect, buying carbon credits from himself. If that is the case, then ergo, his company SELLS carbon credits.

Clear to you now?

Jan 14, 2009 - 5:42 am 51. Boris:

“The article states that Gore is, in effect, buying carbon credits from himself.”

What article? The editorial that’s wrong?

“If that is the case, then ergo, his company SELLS carbon credits.”

But it isn’t the case. GIM buys carbon offsets for its employees, including Gore.

Just show me where I can buy a carbon offset from GIM and I’ll say you are right.

Jan 14, 2009 - 6:05 am 52. S.M.:

Now I don’t understand the science any more than Mr Kimball does, but what I’m told is that freak weather such as the Slovenian cold snap are no indication of general climate trends. What I do know is that there is a broad consensus within the scientific community about climate change, making it seem rather unlikely that the whole thing is a leftwing conspiracy cooked up in the fervid imagination of former Vice President Gore. Many mainstream political parties outside the US, from both ends of the political spectrum, are paying serious attention to what the boffins are telling us.

Here, for example, is what that well-known agitator for Trotskyite permanent revolution, the British Conservative Party, has to say on the matter:

http://www.qualityoflifechallenge.com/Policy_Climate_Why.htm

The thing is, I’m 22 years old. I suspect that the average age of Mr Kimball’s supporters is significantly higher. I only point this out because, to put it rather bluntly, many of you will not be alive when the effects of this climate change become apparent. I will! Therefore, as a rationally self-interested agent, I will vote for anyone promises to wrench you out of those SUVs (by non-coercive means, of course). Perhaps it will all turn out to be nonsense, but I’d prefer not to take the risk, if it’s all the same to you.

Though I’m what Americans refer to as a ‘Liberal’, I would remind you that environmentalism and conservatism are not mutually exclusive. Edmund Burke, bless his soul, would doubtless be horrified at the rate at which we all of us are consuming and polluting. I take no particular pleasure in thinking of the high taxes and the regulations which will need to be enforced by responsible governments attempting to mitigate the effects of climate change. It’s just that I don’t want to die before my time if I don’t have to. Sorry.

Jan 14, 2009 - 10:03 am 53. Pat J:

Again, when is Al Gore, Yasser Arafat and Jimmy Carter planning to return their Nobels & cash?
—————————-
Um? I hate to break it to you brother, but Arafat is dead!

Jan 14, 2009 - 1:37 pm 54. stuart Williamson:

The only science there is in “Climatology” is in the instruments, and the hardware and methodology of examination and analysis of recorded data. The information recovered from studying old records and core drilling samples, is sufficient only to provethere are no positive patterns.. All else is assumptions, projections, theory and probability, and scam.

It is the modern equivalent of forecasting the future by examining the entrails of chickens. Anybody who states that Global Warming or Global Cooling are based on “sound science” or “concensus” and that the rest of us are flatlanders, is a fool, undeserving of the name of scientist. The Gods are laughing at puny humans who think we any significant influence on the giant crap shoot that is our universe.

Jan 14, 2009 - 6:53 pm 55. Dave:

S.M.,

Also don’t forget, billions of people believe that Hell is a real place where you will suffer for all eternity if you don’t practice their religion. They might be wrong, but just in case, you’d better go to mosque on Friday, synagogue on Saturday, and three or four church services every Sunday, just to cover a few of the possibilities.

You’d make us all happier, too. If Liberals did more praying, they’d have less time to think up new ways to tax and regulate our lives.

Jan 15, 2009 - 12:34 am 56. Spindok:

S.M.

The reason you dont understand the science is that nobody does.

About a year ago an investement broker with over 20 years experience in a large investement firm advised me to buy stock in two large blue-chip companies with excellent reputations and long term stability. He had access to top- line analysis from every possible angle, advanced statistics, intense sector and specific company analysis, years of historical data. Lots of very scientific information went into his recommendation. Those two stocks (Goldman-Sacks and Bank of America) are now less than half of what I paid for them and he now agrees that they will never recover to that price.

The stock market is relatively simple compared to climate yet nobody can predict it and all of those boolean distributions and moving averages are smoke and mirrors in the long run.

Nobody can even say with certainty what all of the variables that make up ‘climate’ are, let alone how important each may be. Even if we could list them all out and incorporate them into a grand model we would be wrong, in part because of the butterfly effect whereby in a complex dynamical system very small changes in one variable can induce huge preturbations in the system down the line.

There is also the problem of ‘black swans’ unexpected rare events which drastically alter outcomes (9/11 for example). It has also been pointed out that from the point of view of thermodynamics there is no such thing as a ‘global climate’. Instead there are many smaller systems on earth, each affecting the others in ways too complex to predict (again the butterflys wings in Tibet causing a hurricane in Brazil). To average them out into a ‘global climate’ makes as much sense as taking all of the numbers in the phone book and arriving at an ‘average phone number’.

To take all of that predictive uncertainty and go ten steps further by thinking that we can actually change the climate by reducing CO2 emissions from human activity, a totally unproven experiment in a complex, barely understood, uncontrolled open system, at unimaginable cost in economic and human development, is patently absurd.

Goldman-Sachs was a much more secure bet. It had been done many thousands of times before with proven results. I would have been an idiot though to bet my whole retirement on it, and didnt.

So it makes sense to make a small bet on the issue of climate change and alternative energy technology. Certainly we would like to know more about climate and need better energy sources anyway.

I think the reason liberals jump on the bandwagon quicker is just because liberals have a greater tendancy to latch onto the cool hipster movement of the day wheather they understand it or not.

Spindok

Jan 15, 2009 - 6:44 am 57. comatus:

SM, You’re only 22 so there are a few things we expect you not to understand. That is why social structures, not just in our society but around the world, have evolved in such a way that we elders choose the conflicts, and those of your age are, basically, fodder for the cannon. We keep you in rather protected intellectual and psychic surroundings to nurture you, because we expect to profit by your sense of endeavor, but we don’t really allow you to do much. And there’s a reason for that. Your youthful idealism reflects enthusiasm, concern, and the joy of life, which is certainly commendable in one your age, but you simply lack the sense of judgment to make important decisions about your future. You’re at a critical juncture in your young life now. For the next 15 or 20 years, your main function will be to follow instructions, observe your superiors, and learn to be a real adult. Only then will your vote, your effort, and your opinion really count in the grown-up world. Thanks for giving us all a refreshing glance at the go-get-em cheerleader aspect of a bright young mind’s first exposure to the affairs of mature culture. Time to go out there now, roll up your sleeves, pay attention, and gain the trust and respect of your elders.

The biggest “risk” you need to worry about is your plan to (non-coercively, of course!) “wrench” me out of anything. The mere carbon footprint of that encounter would be enough to negate your whole cooling project. We’re old, sure, but we fight dirty. We control your university, your employer, your career, basically your entire future–and we will even after we’re dead. And those candidates you’re sucking up to, to use the hammer of government to do what you haven’t the courage to undertake like a man? Why, we’ve bought and paid for them too. Just watch. Step away from the vehicle, snotlick.

Jan 15, 2009 - 9:40 pm 58. tanstaafl:

How do climate hysterics know which side to champion on a given day?

Some current climate hysterics blithely maintain that freezing our backsides off, 8 straight years of cooling, not warming temps. and any thickening of Antarctic ice are all signs of global warming.

You just take whatever is happening, and slap it into the anthropogenic global warming paradigm.

AGW (like Communism) has gotta be “right” regardless of any outward signs or circumstances.

Capiche ?

Jan 16, 2009 - 10:24 am 59. tanstaafl:

Again, when is Al Gore, Yasser Arafat and Jimmy Carter planning to return their Nobels & cash?
—————————-
Um? I hate to break it to you brother, but Arafat is dead!

That’s all right, Algore and Jimmah are dead, too.

Dead to any semblance of anything that doesn’t smack of self-serving glorification.

Anyway the (almost dead) Nobel committee could take back Yasser’s prize posthumously or (at the very least) express regret at their choice, as they did with the peace prize they awarded to Shimon Peres. (same year as Arafat, 1994, trifecta, Arafat, Peres & Rabin were the award’s recipients)

Jan 16, 2009 - 10:43 am 60. Ben Blankenship:

Friend Dennis Avery (”Unstoppable Global Warming–every 1500 years” author) once growled to me that just once, he’d love to see a rip-roaring alltime freeze-your-butt blizzard hit Washington D.C. to disabuse all our area’s global warming bigshots up close and personal of their snot-nosed notions. Well, after a long period of mild winters, DC may finally get hit along with the rest of the northern US this time around and affect warm esoteric thought. January 20 or there-abouts would be ideal.

Jan 16, 2009 - 10:45 am 61. Sam:

Listen. This article has no evidence whatsoever to contradict theories of global warming. You stupid shits just don’t understand what’s going on, you only know what the tip of your knob feels like. Melting ice caps flood the middle regions of the oceans with cold water, changing the water current temperatures and causing extreme winter weather conditions. If anything, THIS ARTICLE SHOULD CONVINCE YOU TO BE CONCERNED.

Jan 16, 2009 - 7:39 pm 62. tanstaafl:

Melting ice caps flood the middle regions of the oceans with cold water, changing the water current temperatures and causing extreme winter weather conditions.

You see ? I rest my case.

Sam’s never heard of low sunspot activity & natural climate cycles.

My goodness, even some of the diehards over at HuffoPo

Are starting to make sense

Jan 16, 2009 - 8:56 pm 63. Paul:

PREDICTION: When summer arrives and temperatures increase, some record highs will be broken. Then all the global warming con artist will be back at the game and will ignore this winters record cold.

Jan 17, 2009 - 7:16 am 64. Global Warming Myth Exposed! – part 2 of 11 « 22MOON.COM:

[...] Annals of Global

May 19, 2009 - 10:45 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed) remember personal info?
Comments: