Friday, 29 July 2011

Ice age threat should freeze Global Warming Alarmists.

Subtitle: It's the Sun, Stupid! 

Or The Lack of Sun Spot Activity.

Everyone should rug up. Alarmists and Realists alike.

The Washington Examiner in an opinion piece by Shannon Gossling reports:

Ice age threat should freeze EPA global warming regs

The U.S. National Solar Observatory, the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory and astrophysicists across the planet report that the nearly all-time low sunspot activity may result in a sustained cooling period on Earth.
The news has sent global warming theory advocates scrambling to discount and explain away the impact on global temperatures. However, the "news" is not really that new.
Many reputable scientists have been warning for decades that we are nearing the end of the 11,500-year average period between ice ages. And the last similar crash in sunspot activity coincided with the so-called "Little Ice Age" in the 1600s that lasted nearly a century.
 Shannon goes on to say that vested interests are continuing to push for "stringent limits on carbon dioxide emissions" despite the fact the evidence continues to grow to show CO2 is innocent.
For example, global warming alarmists admit by their own calculations that reducing carbon emissions among a sample of large U.S. "emitters" to EPA-required levels might reduce the surface temperature by .00071 degree Celsius -- or 70 times lower than what is detectable.
Why bother when the sun is doing its bit to cool  things down.
The forces at work behind the global warming regulatory regime have, at worst, covered up, ignored and manipulated climate evidence to make the case that humans cause global warming and therefore humans should be punished.
At best, the mainstream scientific community is continuing to weigh the climate data as it becomes available. Caught in the flux are millions of Americans suffering under an economic tsunami that is anything but a theory.
See Also JoNova: Global Warming was due to increased Solar activity.

Gillard Green Government Mail-out - Return to sender.

If the polls are  right, only 20% of the people want a tax on the invisible trace gas - plant food carbon dioxide. Julia Gillard announced that she was going to "wear out her shoe leather" pushing the carbon (dioxide) tax that she said that wouldn't be. However, she ran into  much trouble  wearing out her shoe leather and it appears that the minders have locked her away in a back room to avoid further damage.

So the next tranch of the Gillard Green Government's ppropaganda push will be  a mail-out that will cost $4 million of your hard-earned.  Opposition environment spokesman Greg Hunt said the brochures were "destined to be junk mail" and were unlikely to explain related price rises. "Unfortunately the campaign is unlikely to tell Australians that their electricity will go up by 10 per cent in the first year and every year thereafter, and that they will be spending $3.5 billion each year every year on foreign carbon credits," he said.

Here is the suggestion.

Let Canberra know how you feel about the tax
. Mark it junk mail and mark it return to sender. If there is no return address, write RE-address to

Greg Combet
c/- Parliament House
Canberra   2600

If you get more than one in your household, re-address the second to Julia, the third to Wayne Swan, the fourth to Bob Brown etc.

Climate Change Minister Greg Combet defended plans to mail out a brochure explaining the tax and related compensation measures to every household. "We understand that households are keen for factual information about the Government's household assistance package," he said.

They probably are, Greg, however it is unlikely that you will give any in you mail-out. We have seen before how you were so wrong, Greg Combet!

Will you tell them that you are so scared of the threatening rise in sea-level that you bought a beachside house. (Tim Flannery, flawed author also has a waterside property!Al Gore, flawed film-maker has several waterside properties.)

Will you tell them that the tax is on carbon dioxide and not on carbon. (Are you trying to frighten the diamond market?).

Will you tell them that carbon dioxide is essential to all life on our planet?

Will you tell them that we inhale 400ppm of CO2 and exhale 40,000 ppm of CO2?

Will you tell them that the trace gas CO2 makes up less than 0.04% of the atmosphere, that man-made CO2 emissions account for less than 3% of that and that Australia's contribution to total world CO2 emission is around 1% and that you tax superficially is going to reduce that minute amount by 5%?
How much is that, Greg? Will you tell them that?


Carbon cops handed tough new powers

In the old Soviet Union, there were shortages; food shortages, clothing shortages, consumer product shortages.


Ivan: We've been in the queue for two hours now, how much longer must we wait , tovarich?

Yuri: I waited all day yesterday until they closed. I came back this morning.

Ivan: That's the last straw. I am going to the President's palace and shoot him.

A while later, Yuri sees Ivan back in the queue. He calls back to him: Why are you back here?

Ivan: The queue there was LONGER than the queue here.

Not very funny, probably a little tragic, but much Russian humour has that bitter-sweet flavour. I worked under the Soviets. I had a book that was filled with cartoons and jokes such as that one. Word must have spread because one morning the local KGB man Gennadiy stormed into my room, demanded the harmless cartoon book, tore it up and stormed out again.

Not a great problem, I was out a few dollars, but the invasion surprised and terrified me.

Why am I writing this?

Today we read of similar powers given to Julia's Storm Troopers.
A NEW carbon cop will be given sweeping powers to enter company premises, compel individuals to give self-incriminating evidence and copy sensitive records under a carbon tax package that will force about 60,000 businesses to pay 6c a litre extra for fuel.
The tough new powers of the Clean Energy Regulator were included in the fine detail of the carbon tax package released yesterday, which enshrines national emissions cuts of 12 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year after 2016, if the government of the day rejects targets proposed by its Climate Change Authority.
Beware! Be afraid! The socialist arm of the Gillard Green Government are dragging us closer and closer to a regime so similar to Communism that soon we may not be able to tell the difference.

There are several rallies coming up where people can and should protest the actions of the Green Gillard Government:

  • ELECTION NOW MARCH this Sunday July 31 from Hyde Park
  • ELECTION NOW! RALLY (CATA) 16 August Noon at Parliament House

Details on the No carbon Tax Web-site HERE

New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism

From Forbes Magazine by James M. Taylor
A new study published in a peer-reviewed journal  Remote Sensing co-authored by Dr Roy Spencershows that
Terra Satellite
NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted.
Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release
HUNTSVILLE, Ala. (July 26, 2011) — Data from NASA’s Terra satellite shows that when the climate warms, Earth’s atmosphere is apparently more efficient at releasing energy to space than models used to forecast climate change have been programmed to “believe.”
The result is climate forecasts that are warming substantially faster than the atmosphere, says Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist in the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville.
And further:
The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show,” Spencer said. “There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.
Not only does the atmosphere release more energy than previously thought, it starts releasing it earlier in a warming cycle. The models forecast that the climate should continue to absorb solar energy until a warming event peaks. Instead, the satellite data shows the climate system starting to shed energy more than three months before the typical warming event reaches its peak.
At the peak, satellites show energy being lost while climate models show energy still being gained,” Spencer said.
This is the first time scientists have looked at radiative balances during the months before and after these transient temperature peaks.
Applied to long-term climate change, the research might indicate that the climate is less sensitive to warming due to increased carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere than climate modelers have theorized. A major underpinning of global warming theory is that the slight warming caused by enhanced greenhouse gases should change cloud cover in ways that cause additional warming, which would be a positive feedback cycle.
Forbes Magazine reports:
The new findings are extremely important and should dramatically alter the global warming debate.
Scientists on all sides of the global warming debate are in general agreement about how much heat is being directly trapped by human emissions of carbon dioxide (the answer is "not much"). However, the single most important issue in the global warming debate is whether carbon dioxide emissions will indirectly trap far more heat by causing large increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds. Alarmist computer models assume human carbon dioxide emissions indirectly cause substantial increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds (each of which are very effective at trapping heat), but real-world data have long shown that carbon dioxide emissions are not causing as much atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds as the alarmist computer models have predicted.
UPDATE: Dr Spencer has tabulated the reation to his paper HERE

Spencer, R.W.; Braswell, W.D. On the Misdiagnosis of Surface Temperature Feedbacks from Variations in Earth’s Radiant Energy Balance. Remote Sens. 2011, 3, 1603-1613.

James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at The Heartland Institute and managing editor of Environment & Climate News.