Image 01 Image 03

Climate Change Tag

I have the pleasure of working with Dr. Roger Cohen, RWC Fellow American Physical Society, to publicize a better understanding of climate science and the flaws associated with the models that are being pushed to generated bad policy. The claim that there is "consensus" among scientists that there is significant, man-made environmental impact on a global scale is based largely on the suppression of dissenting voices, especially in the American media. Recently, Cohen and his colleague Dr. William Happer (Cyrus Fogg Professor of Physics, Emeritus Princeton University) wrote an open letter to the American Physical Society (APS) that gives the public a much needed window into the workings of a normally reputable organization's response to politicized science. For example, here is how the original APS statement supporting "global warming" came about:

President Barack Obama focused on global climate change in his commencement remarks at the Coast Guard Academy.
“I’m here today to say that climate change constitutes a serious threat to global security, an immediate risk to our national security, and – make no mistake – it will impact how our military defends our country,” Obama said. He added that climate change deniers are negligent and derelict in their duties. "And if you see storm clouds gathering or dangerous shoals ahead, you don’t just sit back and do nothing. You take action to protect your ship, to keep your crew safe. Anything less is negligence. It is a dereliction of duty. And so too with climate change. Denying it or refusing to deal with it endangers our national security," he said.
For those of you want to endure the entire speech, here is the White House video: There are so many perplexing aspects to these remarks, I hardly know where to begin. Such a great deal of evidence refutes the climate assertions made by environmental activists (including expanding Antarctic glacial levels) that failure to question the premise is a dereliction of common sense.

The last time we checked in with Pope Francis, he was preparing an encyclical addressing "the moral cause of climate change." A group from the Heartland Institute, which promotes free-market solutions to social and economic problems, was on its way to Rome to present data that would give the pontiff a more science-based perspective than the faith-based theories of climate change activists. Sadly, the team did not obtain an audience with the Pope. However, they did hold a "Environmental Workshop" in an attempt to formally present information to the public in hopes that it will eventually been seen by the Holy Father. There were many wonderful talks, but perhaps the most poignant was given by Christopher Monckton, British peer and chief policy advisor to the Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI).

While environmental activists around the world were celebrating Earth Day by racing around in private jets, our planet responded...by unleashing thousands of cubic feet of greenhouse gases.
An ash cloud from the Calbuco volcano in southern Chile that erupted unexpectedly on Wednesday was blowing into Chile and Argentina on Thursday, forcing the cancellation of flights from nearby cities in both countries and blanketing residents in ash.

Happy Earth Day, everyone! Hope you're all enjoying your...composting...and your...carbon offsets? I used aerosol hairspray today, so I'm not even going to pretend I observe this non-holiday. President Obama does, however. Today, he boarded his private jumbo jet and burned down to the Everglades to deliver a blistering take on his political opponents who aren't doing enough to stop people from flying their private jets everywhere. Also, something about protecting fragile ecosystems. In anticipation of Obama's Earth Day stump speech, the media started publishing annoying articles about Air Force One's carbon footprint. How inconvenient, right? When asked about the jet's effect on the environment, White House press secretary Josh Earnest crumbled under the weight of his boss's sanctimony. Watch the madness unfold:

I reported the other day how U. Penn anti-Israel students try backdoor divestment ploy:
I will give the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement credit for one thing: It is highly adaptive. The run-of-the mill anti-Israel divestment pushes on college campuses have had only mild success. Most often the attempt to get student government to endorse a boycott of companies doing business in Israel has failed, but there have been some successes, particularly in the U. California system.... By contrast, divestment from fossil fuels is gaining some traction even at the administrative level, because there is more of a student and campus consensus. It was only a matter of time that BDS tried to co-opt a larger issue to use against Israel. Some anti-Israel groups at the University of Pennsylvania seem to think they have found a broader theme: Divestment from companies causing “displacement” of people.
I don't believe in coincidences. When BDS switches tactics at multiple campuses, it's almost certainly part of a broader shift. One of the many great frauds of the BDS movement is the impression it conveys of grassroots activism, when in fact it is highly coordinated. So it is no great surprise that anti-Israel students and faculty at New York University are following the path taken at U. Penn., to link divestment from Israel to other unrelated divestment movements. Liel Leibovitz at The Tablet Magazine, writes At NYU, BDS Goes Stealthy: Divestment movement on campus attempts to link Israel and fossil fuels:

California's "mega-drought" has been caused more by water mismanagement than "global warming." As I have foreseen, the state's drought cycle is the pad for Governor Jerry Brown to launch new rules. This time, Brown is issuing the state's first set of water restrictions.
Brown ordered the California Water Resources Control Board to implement mandatory restrictions to reduce water usage by 25%. The water savings are expected to amount to 1.5 million acre-feet of water over the next nine months. Other elements of Brown's order would: --Require golf courses, cemeteries and other large landscaped spaces to reduce water consumption. --Replace 50 million square feet of lawn statewide with drought-tolerant landscaping as part of a partnership with local governments.

Climate change is turning into the hobgoblin of political posturing, with both sides seemingly incapable of making it through a news cycle without finding some new and exciting way to bring up the impending boiling of our oceans. Progressives can always be counted on to play connect-the-dots with their favorite token issues, and a new Congressional resolution does just that. California Democrat Barbara Lee proposed a resolution in the House of Representatives late last month that encourages policymakers to frame their approach to climate change through the lens of gender equality. The resolution claims that women in developing areas could eventually be forced into prostitution in exchange for access to clean water and food for their families. Correlation vs. causation---it's a problem for liberals. Dennis Miller opines:

The broken clock at Vox.com is right about something. Al Gore should run for president:
To many Democrats, the fight the party needs is clear: Hillary Clinton vs. Elizabeth Warren. But the differences between Warren and Clinton are less profound than they appear. Warren goes a bit further than Clinton does, both in rhetoric and policy, but her agenda is smaller and more traditional than she makes it sound: tightening financial regulation, redistributing a little more, tying up some loose ends in the social safety net. Given the near-certainty of a Republican House, there is little reason to believe there would be much difference between a Warren presidency and a Clinton one. The most ambitious vision for the Democratic Party right now rests with a politician most have forgotten, and who no one is mentioning for 2016: Al Gore. Gore offers a genuinely different view of what the Democratic Party — and, by extension, American politics — should be about. Climate change is a real and growing threat to the world's future.... No one really knows what that kind of temperature change — a swing that approaches the difference between most of human history and the Ice Age — would mean for humankind. The World Bank says that there is "no certainty that adaptation to a 4°C world is possible." Income inequality is a serious problem. But climate change is an existential threat.
Don't think Vox is alone.  Last July Salon.com was pushing Gore as the single-issue candidate we need

In a speech given yesterday to the Atlantic Council, Secretary Kerry made a few... interesting remarks. Saying of economic concerns, "this is not a choice between bad and worse. Some people like to demagogue this issue. They want to tell you, “Oh, we can’t afford to do this.” Nothing could be further from the truth. We can’t afford not to do it. And in fact, the economics will show you that it is better in the long run to do it and cheaper in the long run." He droned on for about 40 minutes, waxing poetic about 'science' before finally reaching his hyperbolic conclusion. Blaming the end of the world on 'climate skeptics', Secretary Kerry broadly invoked scripture (though no specific scripture was cited), and begged his audience to ignore climate deniers whose actions weren't only wrong, but immoral! And why? For the children™.

One of the earliest projects I took on as a citizen activist was promoting the work of former UCLA professor, Dr. James Enstrom, an epidemiologist who challenged the voodoo science used by the California Air Resources Board to pass stiff, new air emission regulations. David French of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) explained what subsequently happened to this heroic whistle-blower:
The facts of the case were astounding. As the environmentalist Left pushed new, job-killing regulations in the interests of “public health,” Dr. Enstrom took his own look at the data and determined that the health threat from diesel emissions was being wildly overstated. As he looked further, he discovered that the lead researcher pushing the new regulations actually possessed a fraudulent degree, purchased from “Thornhill University,” a shady, long-distance diploma mill. Moreover, members of the state’s “scientific review panel” tasked with evaluating the science had in some cases overstayed term limits by decades. At least one was a known ideological radical. (He was a member of the infamous “Chicago Seven.”) Dr. Enstrom did what a scientist should do. He exposed public corruption, called out fake scientific credentials, and worked to save California from onerous and unnecessary regulations. So UCLA fired him. After more than 30 years on the job.

About a year ago, the biggest political headache Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber faced was explaining why there wasn't a single enrollee in Covered Oregon ,after spending over $300 Million on the state health insurance exchange. This year, however, Kitzhaber is Oregon's former chief executive after resigning in response to reports indicating his finacee, Clivia Lynne Hayes, advised the governor and state employees on energy policy while getting paid by a group advocating on the issue. In the wake of that resignation, officials have started digging into Kitzhaber's other advisors...including the self-designated "Princess of Darkness", who was tasked with fixing Covered Oregon.
...Kitzhaber handed oversight of the Cover Oregon mess to a secretive campaign consultant who liked to call herself the Princess of Darkness. By her own admission, Patricia McCaig knew virtually nothing about health care reform or the reasons Cover Oregon had crashed. Her primary mission was not to save a beleaguered state program but to get Kitzhaber re-elected. Emails that Kitzhaber’s office tried to delete from state computers show McCaig was effectively in charge of all decision making for Cover Oregon beginning in February 2014.

Researchers now claim global warming predictions are greatly exaggerated. (This is not surprising to those of us climate change skeptics.) What is shocking is that the findings were published in a peer-reviewed journal and are now actually being covered by some media. The UK Daily Mail has a review of the study:
Since 1990, scientists have used complex models to predict how climate change and manmade greenhouse emissions will affect the world. But a team of experts - including an astrophysicist, statistician, and geography professor – has claimed these models ‘very greatly exaggerate’ the effects of global warming. Using a simpler, solar-based model, the researchers arrived at figures that are more than half those previously predicted. The paper, ‘Why models run hot: results from an irreducibly simple climate model’, was written by Lord Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, astrophysicist and geoscientist Willie Soon, Professor of Geography at the University of Delaware David Legates, and statistician Dr Matt Briggs. It has been peer reviewed and is published in the journal Science Bulletin.
Interestingly, one of the scientists who authored the paper has a connection to Cornell. Dr. Matt Briggs, who has a Ph.D. in mathematical statistics from that university, has been the focus of a lot of heat from global warming advocates. He explained the smear campaign to Stephen K. Bannon on Breitbart News Sunday.

The hottest topics in weather today are the officially-named winter storms that are being covered as enthusiastically as hurricanes once were. Winter storms Pandora, and the associated Siberian Express, are well-chronicled via social media. The photos are amazing: And so are the videos: Tragically, however, over two dozen Americans have died as a result of the frigid weather.
...Nearly a week of cold and ice has contributed to 18 weather-related fatalities in Tennessee since Monday, according to the Tennessee Emergency Management Agency. They include nine people who died of hypothermia and five victims of motor-vehicle accidents. And in Kentucky, 10 people have died since Monday in weather-related incidents, said Buddy Rogers, a spokesman for Kentucky Emergency Management. Pennsylvania authorities said Friday at least two people had frozen to death outside. A 119-year-old record low temperature for February 20 was broken in Washington, with a temperature of 5 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 15 degrees Celsius) recorded at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.

"Global warming" has long been bandied about as "settled science." However, in what can reasonably be termed as a "science-based crime", scientists have been caught adjusting their raw temperature data to enhance the supposed global warming effect. This fakery is really too bad for Professor Jacobson, who is spending the day shoveling the snow from Winter Storm Neptune.
The storm's predicted barometric pressure, a measure of the storm's intensity, "is typically observed with a Category 2 hurricane," the National Weather Service in Boston said. The heaviest snow will stretch from northeastern Massachusetts to coastal Maine with more than a foot expected, AccuWeather predicts. Wind gusts could approach 70 mph in some spots — strong enough to cause structural damage and widespread power outages, the weather service said.
You know a storm is going to be bad when it is given a name, and the state's governor makes a statement about it before the first flake strikes the ground.
“New Yorkers should take every appropriate precaution as subzero temperatures and blizzard-like conditions hit the state this weekend,” Cuomo said in statement. According to the National Weather Service, [Gov. Andrew] Cuomo said some areas of the state may experience some of the “coldest temperatures in generations.” Cuomo claimed that temperatures at LaGuardia Airport may drop to their lowest since 1943 and Central Park may experience its lowest temperature since 1888.
Back in California, I'll be strolling along the beach enjoying sunny weather. However, my state is also facing its own generational climate crisis -- a drought that is the worst in US history, and severe enough to earn the term "megadrought".

In an ill-omened trip, Secretary of State John Kerry headed to India to pave the way for a climate change deal, missing the important Paris march against terror. I was skeptical that the Indians would warm to any carbon emissions agreement, given the level of poverty in that country and need to rapidly modernize its industry. He should have listened to me, because he just emitted a whole lot of greenhouse gas for no reason. The Indians rejected the deal.
President Barack Obama has left India for Saudi Arabia without inking a climate deal that formed much of the basis for his second trip to the subcontinent. The Hindustan Times reported on Tuesday that India has refused to embrace the idea of a 'peaking year' for greenhouse gas emissions – a designated year after which emissions levels would have to start decreasing. China agreed to that sort of framework last year, but Indian officials now see being lumped in with Beijing as a negative thing. India is the world's fourth-biggest carbon emitter. China is number one. 'Having a peaking year was not acceptable to us,' an Indian environment ministry official told the Times. Obama visited India on Air Force One, a plane that burns five gallons of jet fuel for every mile it flies. His round-trip, including a stop in Saudi Arabia, will emit 809 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.
The President did offer the Indians $1 billion to develop green technology to sweeten the deal...which is fascinating, because American green technology ventures sponsored by this administration have been man-made disasters.

Secretary of State John Kerry recently visited India to set-the groundwork for President Obama's trip later this month.
Secretary of State John Kerry met with Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday to promote economic ties with India and set the stage for President Obama’s visit later this month. “The goal is to have very concrete and tangible things that we can show forward movement on when President Obama and Prime Minister Modi meet, including on climate change,” a senior State Department official told reporters. Mr. Obama is planning to attend India’s Republic Day celebrations on Jan. 26. It is the first time that an American president has been invited to the event as the nation’s chief guest. Negotiations between India and the United States on issues like climate change, an agreement on civilian nuclear plants, military purchases, and investment and manufacturing rules have quickened in recent weeks because of Mr. Obama’s coming visit. But it remains to be seen whether the president’s trip will be mainly symbolic or if it will lead to significant agreements.
At this point, I am placing my bets on "symbolic". This particular trip seems to have been filled with some very bad omens. To start with, Kerry was absent from the historic Paris March that captured the attention of the world. Obama Invisible Drudge