[CHRISTY: Well, the carbon dioxide is going up. And remember that carbon dioxide is plant food in the fundamental sense. All of life depends on the fact carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere. So, we're fortunate it's not a toxic gas. But, on the other hand, what is the climate doing. And when we build -- and I'm one of the few people in the world that actually builds these climate data sets -- we don't see the catastrophic changes that are being promoted all over the place.]

And neither do reasonable environmentalists.

A fringe group, led by Hansen and Strong, used the United Nations in an attempt to kick start One World Government. Jacques Chirac admited it ---- a first step, he said.

Thanks for driving this point home again and again, Kate. The only thing we have to fear are the fear mongers. They are more dangerous than Mother Nature. At least humans have learned to deal with natural disasters over time, as for Evil, that is the reason to go to war and I fear it may take another protracted war to cleanse human society of the evil of socialism once and for all.

Thanks, kate, for posting and posting on the idiocy and yes, malevolence, that is AGW. Yes, the UN's agenda is a one-world governance, by its unelected unaccountable 'ministers'.

As for socialism, doug, I think such an ideology will always be part of the human condition. Socialism in its various guises (communism, fascism) is a utopian perspective that assumes that perfection is possible. It rejects the basic human - and natural - condition of fallibility.

It considers that a perfect state can exist; that this state once reached is, as perfect, stable and 'the end of history'. The problem seems to be that this utopia is, for some odd reason, 'unnatural'. That is, it requires force, repression, authoritarianism, to make the people behave 'perfectly'. It is assumed that once this perfect state is arrived at, the repressive force will no longer be needed, and Pure People Will Behave Perfectly From Then On.

These people lack common sense; they lack an understanding of reality - the real, chemical and biological - and psychological world that is never 'finished', perfect, pure and good. The real world is a complex adaptive system, that is always 'fiddling with interactions and changes' and has no perfect origin or end state.

Socialists are Cloud Dwellers; they live within a fairy tale world of 'One day....". Because this unnatural world is emotionally satisfying in its misty air-brushed nature, we'll always have socialists with their dreams and rejection of reality.

Kyotoism is an excellent example of the neurosis of the socialist. Kyotoism assumes a steady-state perfect world, assumes that humans are Evil and Sinful and are harming this perfect steady-state world. The Kyotoist's remedy is to retreat to an inadequate energy base that cannot support the world population, and/or, have the industrial world hand over huge sums of money to the UN's pet undeveloped nations.

ignore the scientists behind the curtain, we should be well into this by now

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olduvai_theory

The CBC has decided, unlike most other Canadian news outlets, that the storm about to hit the Maritimes is "the remnants of Hurricane Noel". I can't find anything that says it was ever a Hurricane. Interestingly, there's a new category, it seems: "post-tropical-storm". "Dangerous Spring shower" anyone?

GW is now so ingrained in the left/media/elite consciousness that reason can have no purchase on error. The only saving grace is that the big names will wander off after a while and find some new horror. However, the damage is done, and we'll have to fight the army of jobsworths and thickies created to "do something". Like "racism", GW is a crisis looking for effects, and it is sufficiently vague that almost anything can, and will, be tampered with in its name.

" So long as there is a single rock in all the world's oceans without socialism , there will be boat people . "

Ack, ack, Bill D. Cat, great comment at 8:47 pm.

You had it in quotes, do you have an attribution?

Like a broken record, the NOAA predicted again in 2007 what they had forecasted incorrectly for 2006: http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/outlooks/hurricane.shtml

But for the second year in a row now: http://www.caribbeannetnews.com/cgi-script/csArticles/articles/000043/004310.htm and http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/

Hopelessly stuck on stupid and starting, no doubt, to wonder why they are losing friends.

Jean-Francois Revel .

From Why Democracies Fail .... go figure .

The global warming fanatics are going madder as the hurricane season is passing and just nothing that can be considered a really big one has occurred.
This is leading then to invent even more categories of "storms".

Yes ET, Socialists are cloud dwellers, they lack the capacity to see reality. Global warming is the perfect schtick for them, they can't explain it, it just is.

An example of the height of hypocrisy is a really big Socialist like Mo Strong advocating and pushing trade with China, one of the biggest polluters on the planet.
How does that fit in with their global warming concerns?

"The CBC has decided, unlike most other Canadian news outlets, that the storm about to hit the Maritimes is "the remnants of Hurricane Noel". I can't find anything that says it was ever a Hurricane. Interestingly, there's a new category, it seems: "post-tropical-storm". "Dangerous Spring shower" anyone?"

I like to bash the CBC as much as the next guy (I have personal reasons to be disgusted with them) but this one they got right:
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2007/al16/al162007.discus.023.shtml?
Noel was a hurricane.

Post-tropical is a term that has come about in the past few years as scientists at the CHC study extratropical transition of tropical cyclones. Once that transition is underway and thereafter until the identity of the storm is gone, the storm may be referred to as "post-tropical".

BTW Noel was briefly a hurricane. Then it went "poof". It was supposed to menace us here in Nfld - as though we weren't used to winter storms.

Johann

I love a good CBC bashing as well. Care to share your personal story?

The sadness about the global warming hysteria is that while there are some potential (and, in the long run, inevitable) disasters such as asteroid and cometary impact, and the eruption of supervolcanoes about which we can do little or nothing, equally there is one real threat where "we" can do much. I am thinking of infectious disease. It is one area where more research might be genuinely useful - research not only into pathogens but into vaccines, antibacterials, and antivirals. It would be of advantage to identify legal and institutional obstructions, and to put pressure on governments to reduce or remove them. However, slowing the spread of infectious disease is very much a matter of morality - of combatting the slovenliness in the medical profession, for example which has allowed MRSA to proliferate in hospital, and which facilitated the SARS epidemic in the Toronto area. Such morality can, and must, be practiced by all - hygienic measures are mostly simple, and dull, and more or less effective. Of "risky" behaviour much has been said and written, most of it true. Promiscuity kills.

War is a somewhat different matter. We cannot all be soldiers or airmen; but we can give all of our support to those who do fight on our behalves.

The global warming campaign has been an evil thing in that it has been intended to distract us, and to a degree has distracted us - from real threats, mortal threats, the remediation of which does lie to some extent within our powers.

Dr. John Christy also appeared in The Great Global Warming Swindle explaining why the CO2 theory is not matching up with what is really happening in the atmosphere. (At approx. 18 min in).

In my best Elvis voice " And now the end is near, and so I face my final curtain. My friends, I'll say it clear, I'll state my case of which I'm certain." It's oooooooooooooooover!!!

Oh, sorry. The last line was pure Roy Orbison. Its over, its over, its oooooooooover!!! tada tada dum - dum dum dum.

Oh Sh*t Kate! Wrong site!!! Sorry.

"Johann

I love a good CBC bashing as well. Care to share your personal story?"

Well, Woodporter,

I gave CBC radio a live interview about something going on at the time. At the time, it was a case of "the s**t is currently not hitting the fan, but the potential exists later for the s**t to hit the fan." Well, about 45 minutes later, the s**t did indeed hit the fan. The NATIONAL then played a tiny part of my radio interview, somehow with a picture of me from their files onscreen, and said that "Merely 45 minutes before it happened, Johann said that the s**t WOULD NOT hit the fan."

(I'm being intentionally vague because of potential professional repercussions. But the point is that they knowingly misrepresented my statement. Made me look like an idiot.)

"The story of how the panic over climate change was pushed to the top of the international agenda falls into five main stages."

The deceit behind global warming

By Christopher Booker and Richard North

No one can deny that in recent years the need to "save the planet" from global warming has become one of the most pervasive issues of our time. As Tony Blair's chief scientific adviser, Sir David King, claimed in 2004, it poses "a far greater threat to the world than international terrorism", warning that by the end of this century the only habitable continent left will be Antarctica....-
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1920697/posts

"Furthermore, scientists and academics have recently been queuing up to point out that fluctuations in global temperatures correlate more consistently with patterns of radiation from the sun than with any rise in CO2 levels, and that after a century of high solar activity, the sun's effect is now weakening, presaging a likely drop in temperatures." (from 'The Deceipt Behind Global Warming)

The sun causes warming? Nooo. And all along I thought heat had nothing to do with the sun.

$350 billion a year is being spent on this swindle.

I just want to see the day that it is declared the greatest fraud in history and Al Gore, Suzuki, et al, are prosecuted and convicted in both criminal and civil lawsuits to the full extent of the law.

The war against stupid, continues.

So the tempeture gose up by one tenie weenie degree and the enviromentalists are crying this global warming poppycock i mean not even chicken little could match these eco-wackos

"irwin daisy at November 4, 2007 10:07 AM"
Isn't it amazing the ignorance that some will foster in order to get uninformed and stupid people to buy their books?
Daisy honestly, can’t you see the propaganda in that article?
Are you going to buy his book Daisy?

"So the tempeture gose up by one tenie weenie degree"

Admit it Spurwing, you don't get it.

beak first,

"Isn't it amazing the ignorance that some will foster in order to get uninformed and stupid people to buy their books?"

Considering the pulitzer prize awarded to Gore's propoganda, I guess you're right on that one. Well done.

It's a blogosphere first: Spurwing Plover debates Albatross over global warming...

Will a Puffin volunteer to moderate?

Latest stats are in that the Antarctic ice grew to a record size this past summer, eventhough the arctic ice melted to its lowest in the near history. So is this global or regional, Why haven't the MSM recported the ALL TIME ice increase in Anarctica. Maybe we have global warming in the North and global cooling in the south...Go figure...

With antarctic ice growing thus reducing the worlds oceanonic water supply (because it's ice on land) I wonder if the computer models predict the ocean shrinking creating new beaches.

Just wondering....

RL, it did not grow to a record sized this past summer. Don't kid yourself that increased ice in Antarctica means a colder hemisphere, it simply means there is more moisture in the atmosphere as would be expected.

Sorry but the sattelite data says it grew.

Bring out the beach chairs as the beaches grow.

Hey Alby 39 if the antarctica is just getting more snow which is causing the ice to grow, Maybe the same argument could be made against Gore. He preaches that the snows of kilamajaro are receeding because of G.W. eventhough the temperature readings don't indicate it. Maybe its because the diminished precipitation and not G.W.

Whay's good for the goose is good for the gander. You can't use the same argument to make your point on both sides of the issue.

Ah, where would we be without Alby and his false claims of facts?

RL, AGW zealotry has reached the point of never having to stick to a constant position.

In a recent thread, one zealot argued how "hard" it was to update tree proxies. Later, another zealot argued that if you gave the locations of the trees it would be so "easy" to vandalize them.

"Latest stats are in that the Antarctic ice grew to a record size this past summer"

AND

"Sorry but the sattelite data says it grew.
Bring out the beach chairs as the beaches grow.

Posted by: RL

RL, it's not summer there, it's winter.

Talk to me in a couple of years when there is a definite trend in the flux of multi year ice. Right now satellites indicate an loss of multi year ice and nobody measures single season winter ice to measure climate change, they use the change in multi year ice. If there is more ice at the end of the summer melt than there was the previous year, it indicates a cooler year than the previous one. If there is less is it indicates a warmer year. If there is less ice year after year, that is when you can say there is a warmer local climate, but you still can’t declare one shrinking glacier or ice cap to be as a result of global warming.

Robert in Calgary at November 4, 2007

See above.
BTW it is difficult to update tree ring data. It's costly, it's time consuming and not required when we already have the cores.

"Writing in the report, Gen Zinni, a former commander of US Central Command, says: "It's not hard to make the connection between climate change and instability, or climate change and terrorism."

He adds: "We will pay for this one way or another. We will pay to reduce greenhouse gas emissions today, and we'll have to take an economic hit of some kind.

"Or we will pay the price later in military terms. And that will involve human lives. There will be a human toll."

The report was issued by a Virginia-based national security think-tank, The CNA Corporation, and was written by six retired admirals and five retired generals.

Peacenik libtards...wait...what?

Albatros39a:

Any reasonable person looking at the sea ice area or sea ice extent for Antarctica plotted up by year since satellite coverage began in 1979 would have to admit the likelyhood that serious warming is occurring there is nil. I took the trouble to plot up both September (Antarctic late winter) and February (Antarctic late summer) and both show the same increasing trend (for both area and extent).

In fact, the September march upward between 1986 and 2000 looked so relentless and predictable, I did a trial R2 and got 0.68, not bad for typically very noisy climate data.

If it was just the sea ice...but it's not. Gridded HADCRU3 data south of latitude 70 show a steady decline over the same period (1979 to 2006). MSU data show the same trend, however the MSU satellites don't see the area right over the south pole.

As for your claim that tree cores are difficult to update, you should read the "starbucks" hypothesis story at climateaudit.org, which does a good job of showing just how undifficult it was to update a Colorado Bristlecone pine site.

Regards, BRK

Brian Klappstein at November 5, 2007 11:50 AM
Sea ice and continental ice are being affected differently in the warming Antarctic. There has been a net loss of continental ice due to warming and this is what I am referring to above.
Sea ice on the other hand is a problem because we are seeing an increase in ice yet are also seeing and increase in both air and water temperatures. The cause appears to be due to an increase in upper sea temperatures reducing the salinity thereby density of that water which retards the overturning and the up welling of deeper, warmer water from below.. So yes, you can have a warmer ocean while at the same time having increased sea ice.

In the collection of cores you referred to above if memory serves me, all he did was simply demonstrate how a core was taken not how a sample was taken. To get an accurate sample many cores must be sampled from the entire region to get an accurate indication of local climate. Such a sampling may take many man hours conducted over many days by a team. Depending on the area, hundreds or even thousands of samples can be taken. There is absolutely no need to repeat the samples as the samples already exist for that region.

Albatros39a:

What net loss of Antarctic continental ice? And what datasets show recent warming in the Antarctic?

You're wrong on the climateaudit.org "expedition". They brought back cores from the Colorado bristlecone site for scanning which they subsequently posted.

"..There is absolutely no need to repeat..." You can't be serious. Some of these sites haven't been updated since the 80's. Obviously a reputable scientist would like to confirm their assumptions on the ongoing relationship between ring width and temperature.

Of course that would bring up the "divergence" problem again.....

Regards, BRK

GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE AND A HOAX AL GORE GETS TWO UNDESERVED AWARDS FOR A FRUAD AND BE CAREFUL MY BEAK IS SHARP SQUAWK SQUAWK