Et tu, Fred?

Just like Brute betrayed Ceasar, so has Singer betrayed
climate skepticism.

Gallia omnia est divisa in partes tres. All of Gaul is divided into three parts.

This quote by Julius Caesar begins a new essay by Fred Singer in the American Thinker. Singer, a longstanding opponent to the AGW scam, writes that like Gaul, the global warming debate is dvided into three parts: the deniers, the skeptics and the warmists. The title of the essay is:
"Climate Deniers Are Giving Us Skeptics a Bad Name"

The term "climate deniers", as you know, was invented by the econazi Sturmabteilung-Hitler-jugend global warming fascists in order to make sound scientific skepticism appear equivalent to holocaust denial.

So who is Fred so ignobly calling "climate deniers"? He writes:

Now let me turn to the deniers. One of their favorite arguments is that the greenhouse effect does not exist at all because it violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics -- i.e., one cannot transfer energy from a cold atmosphere to a warmer surface. It is surprising that this simplistic argument is used by physicists, and even by professors who teach thermodynamics. One can show them data of downwelling infrared radiation from CO₂, water vapor, and clouds, which clearly impinge on the surface. But their minds are closed to any such evidence.
Then there is another group of deniers who accept the existence of the greenhouse effect but argue about the cause and effect of the observed increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide. One subgroup holds that CO₂ levels were much higher in the 19^th century, so there really hasn't been a long-term increase from human activities. They even believe in a conspiracy to suppress these facts. Another subgroup accepts that CO₂ levels are increasing in the 20^th century but claims that the source is release of dissolved CO₂ from the warming ocean. In other words, they argue that oceans warm first, which then causes the CO₂ increase. In fact, such a phenomenon is observed in the ice-core record, where sudden temperature increases precede increases in CO₂. While this fact is a good argument against the story put forth by Al Gore, it does not apply to the 20^th century: isotopic and other evidence destroys their case.
Another subgroup simply says that the concentration of atmospheric CO₂ is so small that they can't see how it could possibly change global temperature. But laboratory data show that CO₂ absorbs IR radiation very strongly. Another subgroup says that natural annual additions to atmospheric CO₂ are many times greater than any human source; they ignore the natural sinks that have kept CO₂ reasonably constant before humans started burning fossil fuels. Finally, there are the claims that major volcanic eruptions produce the equivalent of many years of human emission from fossil-fuel burning. To which I reply: OK, but show me a step increase in measured atmospheric CO₂ related to a volcanic eruption.

 Yes, those that Singer so disgracefully labels "deniers" are those who are truly skeptical to AGW. These are the genuine skeptics. Singer calls himself a skeptic, but he really believe in central parts of the warmist dogma.

Fred Singer, if you are going to combat witches, you cannot run around with a broom and a black cat. There is no such thing as selling only half your of soul to the devil. A bird cannot fly with only half a wing.

If we concede that some of the things the eco-fascists claim are true, how is Joe Sixpack going to remember what is true and what is false? Joe Sixpack is only going to be confused.You are playing into the hands of the warmists, Fred.
And who the hell are the "Us Skeptics"  you think you are speaking for? A small bunch of fence-sitters who think they are so smart they can outsmart the 2nd law of thermodynamics? Without us real skeptics, we the doubters of every tenet of the AGW religion, you are nothing, Fred. You are nothing, nothing, nothing!

You are free to believe in this AWG nonsense, Fred, if you so wish, but I'm warning you: don't come and tell us what to think! We are entitled to our own facts! That is what skepticism and science really is about.

Luckily, the people that comment Fred's essay are almost uniformly against it. They are only common folks, but they are much more well informed than Dr Singer. They are the true scientists and the real skeptics. It is Dr Singer, not them, that make us real skeptics a bad name.

This is what some of these good people write.

FalconTinker:

Fred, if I'm a denier for concluding that there's a conspiracy to suppress facts, then put me in that category. I think that the Climategate 'hide the decline' email proved that beyond a reasonable doubt.

Vegetarian:

This article seems a bit naive. When one realizes that the warmistas are not telling the truth, yet they are praised and rewarded by political allies, then you must conclude the whole theory is a scam and discount it. Now if independently one starts engaging in real science and starts proving a connection between CO2 and temperatures, then we can then start engaging in a real scientific process which must include individual verification.

Jerseyvet:

The author doesn't address the common conclusion that the climate change kerfuffle is more religious than scientific. The Gaia worshippers are hellbent to protect and embrace the earth and its environment. Funny thing, one massive explosion of a volcano can do more damage in a fortnight than hundreds of factories spewing CO2 into the environment for a number of years!

nanNJ:

How come all these wizards of smart still can't even predict the weather 3 days out? Put me on the denier side.

WeMustResist:

I think that there is a Carbon Dioxide warming effect that had been found in labs but not in the field. I hope that make me a skeptic.
I also think that the climate is changing every second. It is never the same.
What I really deny is:
1) Politicians can control the temperature of the atmosphere, or the troposphere, or the climate of this planet.
2) The climate of the whole globe changed (at the same time) in the twentieth century.
3) Any climate changes which have happened in two continents at the same time have been shown to have the same manmade cause in both continents.
I am sure that events beyond the solar system change our climate much more than humans can change our climate.

AnneCink:

Supporters of global warming love to write about the diversity of interests on the subject. They talk about levels of agreement like
"warmists" and "deniers".
Yet, when it comes to financing their beliefs, where's the diversity? They want everyone to pay an equal part in support of their cause, whether you believe in it or not. If they want to put money down that hole, let them form a non-profit and donate their own money to it.

angrytom:

No man can undo what God has done!Sorry Mr.Singer but if you think man can destroy this planet you are totally wrong! I seem to remember that during the last couple million years our earth has has experienced massive volcanic activity,massive flooding and other catastrophic events.here we are.We are still here.All you warmistas which you are one need to take a closer look at yourselves because your God complex is really getting tiresome!One man can kill another.But no man can kill the human race!And no one but nature(God) can undo what nature(God)has done!

angrytom:

P.S.One super volcano eruption spews more pollutants than all the cars,trucks,boats,airplanes combined have produced in the history of the world!!

Rick+Johnson:

What a safe position, Dr. Singer. This is the typical PC approach - both sides have their extremists. You probably think the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto had their extremists as well.

Lets finish with a funny picture:

"Who believes that CO2 causes global warming?
Then the science is settled. Sehr gut, mein Volk!"

Now at WUWT: Astrologer refutes global warming from chlorofluorocarbons

It is always nice to see a real scientist from one of the hard sciences take on the pseudoscientific superstition of "global climate warming change".  Therefore, the post 'A view of climate “on the ground” from a reporter who was there at the beginning' on WUWT by distinguished astrologer Theodore White is a must read.  I quote:

...
But I digress – in short, when I wrote pieces on the climate, I refused to write on the theory that chlorofluorocarbons were the sole cause of worldwide warming because that had never been proved. Now, though there was evidence that the use of aerosols were clearly evident in the upper atmosphere; the data did not support that this was the cause of the fear-mongering on ozone holes which was all the rage in the climate community of the late 1980s and 1990s.
...
Follow the money pushing the ideological AGW lie. If one examines climate science funding from 1986 to 1996 and then from 1996 to the present – you may find some amazing numbers.
Incredible amounts – increasing yearly and wasted on every bigger and more expensive computers to run models. Careerists who cannot forecast seasonal weather were making things up (and began to alter weather data on purpose) while spending lavishly on computers pushing the AGW ideology – all at the public’s great expense.
....
Still, by 1989, the AGW science did not make sense to me in light that it would violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Which I remind everyone – remains in effect to this very day.

Anyhow, it did not seem to matter to Wirth’s office, Hansen, or the growing careerists at NCAR and NOAA; because whomever was pushing ‘man-made global warming’ on the United States, were also doing it at the international level too.

My view was that it was a conspiracy right from the start to bamboozle the world on the lie of anthropogenic global warming sandbagging much of the mainstream media, the markets and the educational system to not believe their own eyes and ears.
....

With such high-quality contributions, it is no wonder that Whats Up with Watts won the 2012 Weblog Award for Best Science or Technology Weblog.

Warning: The previous post was a fake

The previous post about the Heartlend Institute issuing an apology was a fake. I did not write it. Somebody else must have sneaked in while I had left my computer on and entered that horrible piece of trash. Those eco-fascist traffic lights - to green to yellow that they are red - stop at nothing before they have destroyed all of human civilization! But this shameless forgery will be the final nail in the rotten and worm-ridden coffin of the bloated global warming alarmist corpse! Ha!

I have this to say to the shameless person who perpetrated this crime.

Baron von Monckhofen views the malicious and fraudulent manner in which this Fake Post was put on his blog, as providing the basis for civil actions against those who put it there. Baron von Monckhofen  fully intends to pursue all possible actionable civil remedies to the fullest extent of the law.

Baron von Monckhofen  respectfully demands: (1) that the responsible person removes the Fake Post from Baron von Monckhofen 's web site; (2) that the same person remove from Baron von Monckhofen 's web site all posts that refer or relate in any manner to the Fake Post ; (3) that the same person removes from Baron von Monckhofen 's web site any and all quotations from the Fake Post; (4) that the same person publishes retractions on Baron von Monckhofen's web site of prior postings; and (5) that same person removes all such documents from Baron von Monckhofen's server.

One obvious suspect in the Heartlend Post Fakery case -- and this is just my speculation -- is one of my ex wifes, Olga. Olga is a committed alarmist rent-seeker who seems quite bitter.

Heartlend apologizes for deception

In an unexpected move today, the dear people at the Heartlend Institute followed the example of Peter Gleick and issued an apology to all of humankind for their many deceptions. Joseph Bust, the Heartlend Institute chair, declared:

I was deeply move by Peter Gleick's heartfelt apology and his expression of remorse. I have realized that it is time that also we at the Heartlend Institute consider the moral implications of our actions. When I look back at what we have been doing for many years, regarding the climate, the environment, smoking and so on, I feel deeply ashamed. Peter Gleick may have lied to one of our staffers in order to get those documents, but we have systematically been lying to all of humanity during all of our existence. So please, don't be angry with Gleick: it is us that you should be angry with. We beg on our bare knees for forgiveness for our anti-climate, anti-environment, anti-health and anti-science activities, and we promise that we will never do it again.
We also want to apologize to the IRS for falsely pretending to be a public charity. We are so sorry! Take all the money you want!

The retreat has begun!

From the eminent blog NoTricksZone run by the intrepid P Gosselin we learn about the beginning of the desperate retreat of the warmists. Gosselin reports:

Usually warmists screech that humans are 95% responsible for the recent warming, and that huge positive water vapor feedbacks will get involved in the future. So it’s not very often you hear a warmist admit that humans perhaps could be just half responsible for the warming of the last 100 years.

This is what German climate expert Professor Mojib Latif said in an interview this morning with NDR public radio.

And what did Latif Say? Fasten you seat belts, folks, he said this:

"The fact is that there is climate change. The fact is that man is also at least 50% responsible for the warming over the last 100 years.”

Yes, your eyes are not deceiving you: he said "50%". That is 0.35 degrees! That's practically nothing. It is clear that the global warming rats are leaving the sinking climate change ship. It is a nearly incredible u-turn relative to the orthodox ICCCP position. According to the ICCCP bible:

Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.

Of course, you can expect Latif to be hounded and vilified by the warmist inquisition after this unambiguous admission that the ICCCP is wrong and there is no climate threat. He is surely not going to get any more science grants after he has deserted the dogma of the global warming religion: his days at the gravy train are past. But this is a sure sign that the Berlin Wall of the eco-fascistic mega bureaucracy is beginning to crack, and the cracks will become larger and more until the whole unholy edifice comes tumbling down just like the walls of Jericho!

   

More Climategate 2.0 - the arrogance of the Team

"...we know they are as black
as Beelzebub's rear end."

The MSM is really botching the great Climategate 2.0 scandal. They even publish articles trying to "explain" what the quoted passages mean, and the explanations are often fabricated by asking the people that sent them. We know perfectly well what those quotes mean, and  after reading them we simply don't trust the infernally corrupted criminals that wrote them so why should we believe in their explanations?  They are just trying to whitewash themselves, but we know they are as black as Beelzebub's rear end! But the MSM are all part of the NWO, so we should not be surprised.

So it seems it is once again up to the free blogosphere to tell the truth. We can all do an effort by searching through the emails for evidence of evildoing and publish this evidence on various blogs. You can find the Climategate 2.0 emails at http://foia2011.org. Just start looking for suitable phrases and I promise you: there is plenty to be found.

Such as this email (#20), which reveals the boundless arrogance of the Team. Is it a scientist who is writing this, or is it an activist hellbent on the destruction of Western civilization? The answer should be obvious: no true scientist should ever resort to the kind of ridicule and contempt towards the famous and widely respected hockey-stick breaker Ross McKitrick that is expressed here. When the Joe Sixpacks get to read something like this, they are surely going to be justifiably dismayed by the Team, and they are obviously going to sympathize with Ross McKitrick. Equally shocking is the way the Team is controlling the complicit MSM in order to implement their vicious smear campaigns!

Hello all. Ah ha--the latest idiot--McKitrick--reenters the scene. He and another incompetent had a book signing party at the US Capitol--Mike
MacCracken went and he can tell you about it--last summer. McKitrick also had an article--oped, highly refereed of course--in the Canadian National Post on June 4 this year. Here is the URL that worked back then:
http://www.nationalpost.com/search/site/story.asp?id=045D5241-FD00-4773-B816-76222A771778

It was a scream. He argued there is no such thing as global temperature
change, just local--all natural variablity mostly. To prove this he had a graph of temperature trends in Erie Pennsylvania for the past 50 years (this is from memory) which showed a cooling. THat alone proves nothing, but when reading the caption I noticed the trend was for temperature in October and November!! So one station for two months consitituted his "refutation" of global warming--another even dumber than Lomborg economist way out of depth and polemicizing. I showed it to a class of Stanford freshman, and one of them said: "I wonder how many records for various combinations of months they had to run through to find one with a cooling trend?" THe freshman was smarter than this bozo. It is improtant to get that op-ed to simply tell all reporters how unbelievably incompetent he is, and should not even be given the time of day over climate issues, for which his one "contribution" is laughably incompetent. By the way, the Henderson/Castles stuff he mentions is also mostly absurd, but that is a longer discussion you all don't need to get into--check it out in the UCS response to earlier Inhofe polemics with answers I gave them on Henderson/Castles if you want to know more about their bad economics on top of their bad climate science. "Enjoy", CHeers, Steve

IPCC and the Team use magicc!

Will this wicked and wanton sorceress be a lead author of
the next IPCC report? 

New revelations about the boundless depravity of the Team and the Stygian darkness in the corrupted heart of the IPCC!  They claimed to do science, but a newly released Climategate 2.0 email has uncovered evidence that the degenerate organisation whose mission is claimed to be to summarize climate science actually is dabbling in unholy and blasphemous magiccal rites. From email #182:

Sarah,
I realize that you have got a copy of this.
What I am concerned about is the use of MAGICC in AR4. It is likely that the only way that MAGICC can be legitimately used is for it to be (again!) calibrated against the various AOGCMs being run for AR4. The AOGCM data that will be available this time will allow us to do this more comprehensively than your TAR analysis. I think this is something we should do together this time.

 They are even conspiring to make their filthy black arts legitimate! This can in no way be allowed - such debased practices must be severely punished by the Law!  And what are they going to use the tar for? To smear their brave and truth-loving opponents? And what unspeakable evil from the nether abysses of Hell are AOGCMs? And exactly what wicked and debauched "something" are Sarah and Ben going to do together? it is just getting worse and worse. Why are the MSM not reporting this?
Thank the Lord that blog science can be a bulwark against this avalanche of devilry. There are still rational and skeptical people like myself with both feet safely planted in the realm of reality who can counter the lies and deceptions of the IPCC and its Team!