Home Climate Facts Climate Briefs Alarmist Rebuttals Failed Predictions Historic News Clipings News Reports Russian Money How They Lie to YOU Its OK to Lie! CO2 Facts Warm Periods Lack Of Data Electricity Cost Climate Is Normal Heat/Cold Deaths Wild Fires Green New Deal No Rapid Waring Sun - Real Cause of Climate Alarmist errors C13/C12 Isotope Ratio oregon_climate_plan Tipping Points Climate Predictions IPCC Says Our Best Data 22 Inconvenient Truths Medieval Warm Period Extinctions Propaganda Fossil Fuel subsidies Who's Lying? What is Real Science Peer Review Adjustment Example proxies Climate Papers Debunking Claims NASA Debunk Antarctic Loss Renewables Corals Trillion Dollar Industry Big Money Scaring green money Paid by fossil fuel Warming Stopped Media Lies People are Dying History (politics) Extreme Weather? Its Warming,But Acidification IPCC_Flawed IPCC Prediction Fail IPCC_Disproved IPCC_PeerReview IPCC Scientists IPCC&CLouds WWF Infiltrated the IPCC Harming People misconduct Data Adjustments Major Data Tampering Cooling since 1945? Drought, hurricanes etc. Arctic History Selected Emails Selected Quotes Fraud Of Century? 97 percent of scientists 97% is meaningless 25% of AMS / 50% JonesInterview An OK Prediction Data Sources Record Temperature Energy Facts GridStorage CostlyEnergy Michael Mann Mann's Book Wegman on Mann paper styn_vs_mann Peer Review Error Statistical Errors The Sun Solar OceanHeat Ocean Heat Polar Bears OK AlGore's Errors Ask Questions Climate Models Record Highs Local Food Threats Why I'm a Skeptic GreenhouseMoon Alternative Energy 1350+ realist papers Conflict of Interest? Muzzeled Scientists How To Argue Common Ground Hurricane No Proof NW Snow Pack James Hansen Consensus The Hockey Stick 650 Dissenters Easy Solution DataQuality Heat Island Is Science Settled? Ocean Level Sea Level sea_&_islands Glaciers Ice Sheets Greenland Gore's Mentor OGWC Articles Summary FinancialPapers OtherMotivations PeakOil Ozone Hole Fracking Acid Rain No Limits Videos Printables Links EcoTretas Selected Emails Briffa et al (1998) data

Debunking the Climate Scam

Billions of Dollars -  Fudged Data  -  Corrupt Scientists

Greedy Green Corporations - Trillion Dollar Prize

No Warming For Two decades - Illiterate Media

Bought and Paid For Organizations

5000 Years Of Climate Change From Greenland Ice Cores

Observed Climate Change and the Negligible Effect on Greehouse Gases in the State of Ohio , by SPPI , Friday, 06 February 2009

In December of 2008, the environmental organization Environment Ohio released its report “What’s at Stake: How Global Warming Threatens the Buckeye State” in an effort to apply pressure on the government of Ohio to enact legislation to limit the emissions of greenhouse gases from the state.  SPPI’s report rectifies a multitude of omissions by performing the types of analyses that Environment Ohio should have performed itself if its goal was to provide a complete picture of climate change and the effects of actions to mollify it.

"Warming freezes the Southern Ocean,"Another Mann-made Climate Change , by Christopher Monckton , Monday, 26 January 2009

In late January 2009, the once-respected “science” journal Nature published the results of a computer model apparently showing that nearly all of the Antarctic continent had not cooled over the past 50 years, as the real-world observational data showed, but had warmed instead. The newly-created “warming” was achieved not by direct observation, which has long produced inconvenient cooling, but by “statistical climate-field-reconstruction techniques to obtain a 50-year-long, spatially complete estimate of monthly Antarctic temperature anomalies.”

Alaska Climate Change, by Staff , Sunday, 25 January 2009

The climate of Alaska has changed considerably over the past 50-plus years. However, human emissions of greenhouse gases are not the primary reason.

Instead, the timing of the swings of a periodic, natural cycle-the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO)-has made a strong imprint on the observed climate of Alaska since the mid-20th century. Despite its established existence and influence, this natural cycle is often overlooked or ignored in zealous attempts to paint the current climate of Alaska as being one primarily molded by the emissions from anthropogenic industrial activities. In truth, the climate of Alaska and the ecosystems influenced by it have been subject to the cycles of the PDO and other natural variations since the end of the last ice age (some 12,000 years ago) and likely for eons prior. It is primarily these natural cycles that are currently shaping Alaska's long-term climate and weather fluctuations.

United States and Global Data Integrity Issues, by Joe D’Aleo , Sunday, 25 January 2009

Issues with the United States and especially the global data bases make them inadequate to use for trend analysis and thus any important policy decisions based on climate change. These issues include inadequate adjustments for urban data, bad instrument siting, use of instruments with proven biases that are not adjusted for, major global station dropout., an increase in missing monthly data and questionable adjustment practices.

Arizona Climate Change , by SPPI, Wednesday, 10 December 2008

In February 2005, Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano, citing concerns of global climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions from human activities, issued an Executive Order creating the Arizona Climate Change Advisory Group (CCAG). The CCAG was tasked with:

• Establishing a baseline inventory and forecast of greenhouse gas emissions in Arizona, and,

• Producing a Climate Action Plan with recommendations for reducing the state’s greenhouse gas emissions.

The Action Plan developed by the CCAG was accepted by Governor Napolitano and in

September 2006 another Executive Order was signed which established a statewide goal of reducing Arizona’s future greenhouse gas emissions to the 2000 emissions level by the year 2020, and to 50 percent below the 2000 level by 2040. A Climate Change Executive Committee was created to oversee implementation of the recommendations of the Climate Action Plan

Observed Climate Change in Florida, by Robert Ferguson , Tuesday, 04 November 2008

In October 2008, the Governor’s Action Team on Energy and Climate Change released a draft version of its 14-month effort of developing an Action Plan aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions from Florida. The impetus behind the creation of the Action Team and the development of the Action Plan grew out of a summit on climate change (“Serve to Preserve: A Florida Summit on Global Climate Change”) hosted by Governor Crist in July of 2007. This event “gathered leaders of business, government, science, and advocacy to examine the unique risks of climate change to Florida and the nation, and to explore the economic development opportunities available through an aggressive response to climate change.”

Climate Action Plans Fail to Deliver:, by Robert Ferguson, Saturday, 20 December 2008

(REVISED) Around the country, localities, states and multi-state regions are convening Climate Change Task Forces aimed at developing plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

As the name suggests, these groups have been created to develop Climate Action Plans that are intended to lessen the projected impacts of anthropogenic climate change around the world in general, but more particularly, in each state

CO2, Global Warming and Coral Reefs: Prospects for the Future, by Dr. Craig Idso, Monday, 12 January 2009

One of the long-recognized potential consequences of the ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 content is CO2-induced global warming, which has been predicted to pose a number of problems for both natural and managed ecosystems in the years ahead. Of newer concern, in this regard, are the effects that the ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 content may have on coral reefs. It has been suggested, for example, that CO2-induced global warming will do great damage to corals by magnifying the intensity, frequency, and duration of a number of environmental stresses to which they are exposed. The predicted consequences of such phenomena include ever more cases of coral disease, bleaching, and death.

Why the IPCC should be disbanded, Written by John McLean, Friday, 09 November 2007

The common perception of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is one of an impartial organization that thoroughly reviews the state of climate science and produces reports which are clear, accurate, comprehensive, well substantiated and without bias.

Arctic Sea Ice Losses, by Chip Knappenberger , Friday, 31 October 2008

Already various countries are setting into motion plans to take advantage of the potential opening of important shipping lanes through the Arctic waters. In the November 2008 issue of The Atlantic magazine, the potential opening of reliable shipping routes through the Arctic is described in the following way (http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200811/map-arctic):

Proved: There is No Climate Crisis, by Robert Ferguson, Tuesday, 15 July 2008

WASHINGTON (7-15-08) - Mathematical proof that there is no “climate crisis” appears today in a major, peer-reviewed paper in Physics and Society, a learned journal of the 4,600-strong American Physical Society, SPPI reports.

Christopher Monckton, who once advised Margaret Thatcher, demonstrates via 30 equations that computer models used by the UN’s climate panel (IPCC) were pre-programmed with overstated values for the three variables whose product is “climate sensitivity” (temperature increase in response to greenhouse-gas increase), resulting in a 500-2000% overstatement of CO2’s effect on temperature in the IPCC’s latest climate assessment report, published in 2007.

Greenhouse Warming? What Greenhouse Warming? , by Christopher Monckton, 3rd Viscount Monkton of Brenchley, Wednesday, 22 August 2007

THE FACT of warming tells us nothing of the cause. Yet the scientific consensus is that, though the rapid climatic warming from 1906 to 1940 was a natural recovery from the historically low temperatures of the Little Ice Age, it is we who are chiefly to blame for the equally rapid warming from 1975 to the present. Since some climatologists challenge this consensus, can we settle the debate by predicting with models and then detecting by observation a characteristic “signature” in the climate data that allows us definitively to distinguish between anthropogenic and natural warming of the Earth’s atmosphere? This paper answers that key question.

35 Inconvenient Truths, The errors in Al Gore’s movie,  By  Christopher Monckton of Brenchley,  October 18, 2007

... in October 2007 the High Court in London had identified nine “errors” in his movie An Inconvenient Truth. The judge had stated that, if the UK Government had not agreed to send to every secondary school in England a corrected guidance note making clear the mainstream scientific position on these nine “errors”, he would have made a finding that the Government’s distribution of the film and the first draft of the guidance note earlier in 2007 to all English secondary schools had been an unlawful contravention of an Act of Parliament prohibiting the political indoctrination of children.

A Glimpse Inside the Global Warming Controversy, by William DiPuccio, Thursday, 18 December 2008

“Do you believe in Global Warming?” I have often been asked this question by people with little or no scientific background. It seems like a simple question that demands a “yes” or “no” answer. But in reality it is a complex question that cannot be reduced to an unqualified “yea” or “nay”. The intent of this paper is not to resolve this question by rallying evidence for or against Global Warming (as if that can be done in a few pages!), but rather to lay bare the complexity of the climate change issue. Those who come to appreciate this fact will likely agree that simple answers are not only bad education, but can lead to bad policies.

Prejudiced Authors, Prejudiced Findings , by John McLean, Tuesday, 15 July 2008

The IPCC is a single-interest organisation, whose charter presumes a widespread human influence on climate, rather than consideration of whether such influence may be negligible or missing altogether. Though the IPCC's principles also state that a wide range of views is to be sought when selecting lead authors and contributing authors, this rule has been honored more in the breach than in the observance.

More than two-thirds of all authors of chapter 9 of the IPCC’s 2007 climate-science assessment are part of a clique whose members have co-authored papers with each other and, we can surmise, very possibly at times acted as peer-reviewers for each other’s work. Of the 44 contributing authors, more than half have co-authored papers with the lead authors or coordinating lead authors of chapter 9.

Demographic and Ecological Perspectives on the Status of Polar Bears, by Dr. Mitchell Taylor and Dr. Martha Dowsley , Friday, 14 March 2008

Although two polar bear subpopulations (Western Hudson Bay and Southern Beaufort Sea) no longer appear to be viable due to reduction in sea ice habitat, polar bears as a species do not appear to be threatened by extinction in the foreseeable future from either a demographic or an ecological perspective. Ecological perspectives that suggest the reductions to survival and recruitment rates for two populations (Western Hudson Bay and Southern Beaufort Sea) have occurred because of a long-term decline in sea ice due to climate warming. These populations occur where summer ice coverage is seasonal (WH) or divergent (SB).

Fallacies about Global Warming, Written by John McLean, Friday, 07 September 2007

It is widely alleged that the science of global warming is “settled”. This implies that all the major scientific aspects of climate change are well understood and uncontroversial, and that scientists are now just mopping up unimportant details. The allegation is profoundly untrue: for example the US alone is said to be spending more than $4 billion annually on climate research, which is a lot to pay for detailing; and great uncertainty and argument surround many of the principles of climate change, and especially the magnitude of any human causation for warming.

Peer review? What peer review?, Written by John McLean, Thursday, 06 September 2007

The IPCC would have us believe that its reports are diligently reviewed by many hundreds of scientists and that these reviewers endorse the contents of the report. An analysis of the reviewers' comments for the scientific assessment report by Working Group I show a very different and very worrying story.

Shining More Light on the Solar Factor: A discussion of Problems with the Royal Society, by Dr. Joseph D’Aleo, Friday, 20 July 2007

When Lockwood and Froehlich go on to say that the intensification of solar activity seen in the past hundred years has now ended, we don't disagree with that. We part company only when they say that temperatures have gone on shooting up, so that the recent rise can't have anything to do with the Sun, or with cosmic rays modulated by the Sun.

The Myth of Dangerous Human Caused Climate Change, by Bob Carter, Thursday, 19 July 2007

Whether dangerous human-caused climate change is a fact, possibly a fact or a fabrication depends on who you choose to believe. Many of us line up somewhere between probable and possible on this spectrum.

Is It Me, or Did the Oceans Cool? A Lesson On Global Warming From My Favorite Denier” Article By Josh Willis

It is worth reading. The article chronicles his experience with correcting the error in his original analysis, but also in presenting us with an effective summary of the current science and engineering of diagnosing ocean heat content. He presents two informative figures in the article, which are reproduced below (thanks to /climatesci.org for the link)

As discussed in Pielke Sr., R.A., 2003: Heat storage within the Earth system. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 84, 331-335, it is the change in ocean heat content that provides the most effective diagnostic of global warming and cooling. Thus unless further checks on the upper ocean measurements find errors, there has been no significant ocean heating since mid-2003. This means that we now have 5 1/2 years without global warming as measured by this climate metric. (thanks to /climatesci.org for the link)

Heat capacity, time constant, and sensitivity of Earth's climate system, Stephen E. Schwartz, Atmospheric Science Division, Brookhaven National Laboratory

The short time constant implies that GMST is in near equilibrium with applied forcings and hence that net climate forcing over the twentieth century can be obtained from the observed temperature increase over this period, 0.57 ± 0.08 K, as 1.9 ± 0.9 W m-2. For this forcing considered the sum of radiative forcing by incremental greenhouse gases, 2.2 ± 0.3 W m-2, and other forcings, other forcing agents, mainly incremental tropospheric aerosols, are inferred to have exerted only a slight forcing over the twentieth century of -0.3 ± 1.0 W m-2.

U.S. Temperature Rankings Rearranged, Problems and Concerns with Temperature data sets, Written by Robert Ferguson,

Thursday, 23 August 2007

Trumpets were blaring at the Washington Post when, on the front page of the January 10th, 2007 edition of the paper, they proclaimed “Climate Experts Worry as 2006 is Hottest year on record in U.S.” The Post was relying on temperature data supplied to them from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)

Fallacies about Global Warming, by John McLean   Friday, 07 September 2007

It is widely alleged that the science of global warming is “settled”. This implies that all the major scientific aspects of climate change are well understood and uncontroversial, and that scientists are now just mopping up unimportant details. The allegation is profoundly untrue: for example the US alone is said to be spending more than $4 billion annually on climate research, which is a lot to pay for detailing; and great uncertainty and argument surround many of the principles of climate change, and especially the magnitude of any human causation for warming. Worse still, not only is the science not “settled”, but its discussion in the public domain is contaminated by many fallacies, which leads directly to the great public confusion that is observed.

This paper explains the eight most common fallacies that underpin public discussion of the hypothesis that dangerous global warming is caused by human greenhouse gas emissions.

Selected Article Links (Most from climate-skeptic.com)

“Consensus”? What “Consensus”?Among Climate Scientists, The Debate Is Not Over , by Viscount Monckton of Brenchley , Thursday, 19 July 2007

It is often said that there is a scientific “consensus” to the effect that climate change will be “catastrophic” and that, on this question, “the debate is over”. The present paper will demonstrate that the claim of unanimous scientific “consensus” was false, and known to be false, when it was first made; that the trend of opinion in the peer-reviewed journals and even in the UN’s reports on climate is moving rapidly away from alarmism; that, among climate scientists, the debate on the causes and extent of climate change is by no means over; and that the evidence in the peer-reviewed literature conclusively demonstrates that, to the extent that there is a “consensus”, that “consensus” does not endorse the notion of “catastrophic” climate change.

Most Useless Phrase in the Political Lexicon: “Peer Reviewed”

The main goals of peer review are:

   * Establish that the article is worthy of publication and consistent with the scope of the publication in question.  They are looking to see if the results are non-trivial, if they are new (ie not duplicative of findings already well-understood), and in some way important.  If you think of peer-reviewers as an ad hoc editorial board for the publication, you get closest to intent

   * Reviewers will check, to the extent they can, to see if the methodology  and its presentation is logical and clear — not necessarily right, but logical and clear.  Their most frequent comments are for clarification of certain areas of the work or questions that they don’t think the authors answered.  They do not check all the sources, but if they are familiar with one of the sources references, may point out that this source is not referenced correctly, or that some other source with which they are familiar might be referenced as well.  History has proven time and again that gross and seemingly obvious math and statistical errors can easily clear peer review.

   * Peer review is not in any way shape or form a proof that a study is correct, or even likely to be correct.  Enormous numbers of incorrect conclusions have been published in peer-reviewed journals over time.  This is demonstrably true.  For example, at any one time in medicine, for every peer-reviewed study I can usually find another peer-reviewed study with opposite or wildly different findings.  The fraud in the “peer reviewed” Lancet on MMR vaccines and autism by Andrew Wakefield is a good example.

The IPCC under the Microscope       Here are 50 articles that seriously question the credibility and integrity of the IPCC's activities and claims.

Former astronaut speaks out on global warming , By Associated Press

SANTA FE, N.M. - Former astronaut Harrison Schmitt, who walked on the moon and once served New Mexico in the U.S. Senate, doesn’t believe that humans are causing global warming.

"I don’t think the human effect is significant compared to the natural effect," said Schmitt, who is among 70 skeptics scheduled to speak next month at the International Conference on Climate Change in New York.

Schmitt contends that scientists "are being intimidated" if they disagree with the idea that burning fossil fuels has increased carbon dioxide levels, temperatures and sea levels.

"They’ve seen too many of their colleagues lose grant funding when they haven’t gone along with the so-called political consensus that we’re in a human-caused global warming," Schmitt said.

Synchronized Chaos: Mechanisms For Major Climate Shifts    The authors show that this mechanism explains all global temperature tendency changes and El Nino variability in the 20th century.

List of quality articles about the solar connection: http://www.co2science.org/subject/s/summaries/solarirradiance.php

Global warming alarmists out in cold   Name just three clear signs the planet is warming as the alarmists claim it should. Just three. Chances are your "proofs" are in fact on my list of 10 Top Myths about global warming.

A Brief Response to the Wrath of 2007: America's Great Drought from Independent UK,, by Robert Ferguson, Monday, 11 June 2007

The June 11th issue of the U.K.’s The Independent contained a story written by Andrew Gumble titled “The Wrath of 2007: America’s great drought.” The story leads “America is facing its worst summer drought since the Dust Bowl years of the Great Depression. Or perhaps worse still.”

Or, more accurately, perhaps not

IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group says its global population estimate was “a qualified guess”   

... the global estimates were “…simply a qualified guess given to satisfy public demand” and according to this statement, were never meant to be considered scientific estimates, despite what they were called, the scientific group that issued them, and how they were used (see footnote below).

All this glosses over what I think is a critical point: none of these ‘global population estimates’ (from 2001 onward) came anywhere close to being estimates of the actual world population size of polar bears (regardless of how scientifically inaccurate they might have been) — rather, they were estimates of only the subpopulations that Arctic biologists have tried to count.

For example, the PBSG’s  most recent global estimate (range 13,071-24,238) ignores five very large subpopulation regions which between them potentially contain 1/3 as many additional bears as the official estimate includes (see map below). The PBSG effectively gives them each an estimate of zero.

See the rest of the deception here: