“I DEVOTED six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia’s compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector.
FullCAM models carbon flows in plants, mulch, debris, soils and agricultural products, using inputs such as climate data, plant physiology and satellite data. I’ve been following the global warming debate closely for years.
When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the old ice core data, no other suspects.
The evidence was not conclusive, but why wait until we were certain when it appeared we needed to act quickly? Soon government and the scientific community were working together and lots of science research jobs were created. We scientists had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet.
But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming. As Lord Keynes famously said, “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” ….
…If there really was any evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming, don’t you think we would have heard all about it ad nauseam by now?
The world has spent $50 billion on global warming since 1990, and we have not found any actual evidence that carbon emissions cause global warming. Evidence consists of observations made by someone at some time that supports the idea that carbon emissions cause global warming. Computer models and theoretical calculations are not evidence, they are just theory.
What is going to happen over the next decade as global temperatures continue not to rise? The Labor Government is about to deliberately wreck the economy in order to reduce carbon emissions. If the reasons later turn out to be bogus, the electorate is not going to re-elect a Labor government for a long time. When it comes to light that the carbon scare was known to be bogus in 2008, the ALP is going to be regarded as criminally negligent or ideologically stupid for not having seen through it. And if the Liberals support the general thrust of their actions, they will be seen likewise.
The onus should be on those who want to change things to provide evidence for why the changes are necessary. The Australian public is eventually going to have to be told the evidence anyway, so it might as well be told before wrecking the economy.”
“There has not been a public debate about the causes of global warming and most of the public and our decision makers are not aware of the most basic salient facts:
1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it.
Each possible cause of global warming has a different pattern of where in the planet the warming occurs first and the most. The signature of an increased greenhouse effect is a hot spot about 10km up in the atmosphere over the tropics. We have been measuring the atmosphere for decades using radiosondes: weather balloons with thermometers that radio back the temperature as the balloon ascends through the atmosphere. They show no hot spot. Whatsoever.
If there is no hot spot then an increased greenhouse effect is not the cause of global warming. So we know for sure that carbon emissions are not a significant cause of the global warming. If we had found the greenhouse signature then I would be an alarmist again.
When the signature was found to be missing in 2007 (after the latest IPCC report), alarmists objected that maybe the readings of the radiosonde thermometers might not be accurate and maybe the hot spot was there but had gone undetected. Yet hundreds of radiosondes have given the same answer, so statistically it is not possible that they missed the hot spot.
Recently the alarmists have suggested we ignore the radiosonde thermometers, but instead take the radiosonde wind measurements, apply a theory about wind shear, and run the results through their computers to estimate the temperatures. They then say that the results show that we cannot rule out the presence of a hot spot. If you believe that you’d believe anything.
2. There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None. There is plenty of evidence that global warming has occurred, and theory suggests that carbon emissions should raise temperatures (though by how much is hotly disputed) but there are no observations by anyone that implicate carbon emissions as a significant cause of the recent global warming.
3. The satellites that measure the world’s temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year (to the temperature of 1980). Land-based temperature readings are corrupted by the “urban heat island” effect: urban areas encroaching on thermometer stations warm the micro-climate around the thermometer, due to vegetation changes, concrete, cars, houses. Satellite data is the only temperature data we can trust, but it only goes back to 1979. NASA reports only land-based data, and reports a modest warming trend and recent cooling. The other three global temperature records use a mix of satellite and land measurements, or satellite only, and they all show no warming since 2001 and a recent cooling.
4. The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect.
None of these points are controversial. The alarmist scientists agree with them, though they would dispute their relevance.”
Dr David Evans was a consultant to the Australian Greenhouse Office from 1999 to 2005.
Authors: G. V. Chilingar; L. F. Khilyuk; O. G. Sorokhtin; Rudolf W. Gunnerman
Abstract
The writers investigated the effect of CO2 emission on the temperature of atmosphere. Computations based on the adiabatic theory of greenhouse effect show that increasing CO2 concentration in the atmosphere results in cooling rather than warming of the Earth’s atmosphere.
Introduction
Traditional anthropogenic theory of currently observed global warming states that release of carbon dioxide into atmosphere (partially as a result of utilization of fossil fuels) leads to an increase in atmospheric temperature because the molecules of CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) absorb the infrared radiation from the Earth’s surface.
This statement is based on the Arrhenius hypothesis, which was never verified (Arrhenius, 1896).The proponents of this theory take into consideration only one component of heat transfer in atmosphere, i.e., radiation. Yet, in the dense Earth’s troposphere with the pressure pa > 0.2 atm, the heat from the Earth’s surface is mostly transferred by convection (Sorokhtin, 2001a).
According to our estimates, convection accounts for 67%, water vapor condensation in troposphere accounts for 25%, and radiation accounts for about 8% of the total heat transfer from the Earth’s surface to troposphere. Thus, convection is the dominant process of heat transfer in troposphere, and all the theories of Earth’s atmospheric heating (or cooling) first of all must consider this process of heat (energy)-mass redistribution in atmosphere (Sorokhtin, 2001a, 2001b;Khilyuk and Chilingar, 2003, 2004).
When the temperature of a given mass of air increases, it expands, becomes lighter, and rises. In turn, the denser cooler air of upper layers of troposphere descends and replaces the warmer air of lower layers. This physical system (multiple cells of air convection) acts in the Earth’s troposphere like a continuous surface cooler. The cooling effect by air convection can surpass considerably the warming effect of radiation. The most important conclusion from this observation is that the temperature distribution in the troposphere has to be close to adiabatic because the air mass expands and cools while rising and compresses and heats while dropping. This does not necessarily imply that at any particular instant distribution of temperature has to be adiabatic. One should consider some averaged distribution over the time intervals of an order of months
December last year, at the UN conference in Bali, I heard Viscount Monckton present a paper prepared by himself, the Australian Dr David Evans and our own Dr Vincent Gray (who were at Bali, too) that showed while the IPCC models predict that greenhouse gases would produce an extensive “hot spot” in the upper troposphere over the tropics, the satellite measurements show no such hotspots have appeared.
Monckton and Evans found a large part of this discrepancy is the result of some basic errors in the IPCC’s assessment of the Stefan-Boltzmann equation. When they applied their revised factor to the effect of greenhouse gases, the temperature rise was about a third of that predicted by the IPCC.
So by late last year we not only knew IPCC forecasts of atmospheric global warming were wrong; we were beginning to understand why they are wrong.
The key issue in this debate is whether anthropogenic greenhouse gases or natural solar activities are the prime drivers of climate change. A closely related argument is whether the climate is highly sensitive to carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere.
Doubtful predictions
Put together, these uncertainties raise doubts as to whether the IPCC models can accurately forecast the climate over the long term. If they cannot, then we have to wonder how much damage we should risk doing to the world’s economies in attempts to manage the possibly adverse effects of these “predictions.”
The findings that the predicted “tropical hot spots” do not exist are important because the IPCC models assume these hot spots will be formed by increased evaporation from warmer oceans leading to the accumulations of higher concentrations of water vapour in the upper atmosphere, and thereby generating a positive feedback reinforcing the small amount of warming that can be caused by CO2 alone.
Atmospheric scientists generally agree that as carbon dioxide levels increase there is a law of “diminishing returns” - or more properly “diminishing effects” - and that ongoing increases in CO2 concentration do not generate proportional increases in temperature. The common analogy is painting over window glass. The first layers of paint cut out lots of light but subsequent layers have diminishing impact.
So, you might be asking, why the panic? Why does Al Gore talk about temperatures spiraling out of control, causing mass extinctions and catastrophic rises in sea-level, and all his other disastrous outcomes when there is no evidence to support it?
The alarmists argue that increased CO2 leads to more water vapour - the main greenhouse gas - and this provides positive feedback and hence makes the overall climate highly sensitive to small increases in the concentration of CO2.
Consequently, the IPCC argues that while carbon dioxide may well “run out of puff” the consequent evaporation of water vapour provides the positive feedback loop that will make anthropogenic global warming reach dangerous levels.
This assumption that water vapour provides positive feedback lies behind the famous “tipping point,” which nourishes Al Gore’s dreams of destruction, and indeed all those calls for action now - “before it is too late!” But no climate models predict such a tipping point.
However, while the absence of hot spots has refuted one important aspect of the IPCC models we lack a mechanism that fully explains these supposed outcomes. Hence the IPCC, and its supporters, have been able to ignore this “refutation.”
So by the end of last year, we were in a similar situation to the 19th century astronomers, who had figured out that the sun could not be “burning” its fuel - or it would have turned to ashes long ago - but could not explain where the energy was coming from. Then along came Einstein and E=mc2.
Hard to explain
Similarly, the climate sceptics have had to explain why the hotspots are not where they should be - not just challenge the theory with their observations.
This is why I felt so lucky to be in the right place at the right time when I heard Roy Spencer speak at the New York conference on climate change in March. At first I thought this was just another paper setting out observations against the forecasts, further confirming Evans’ earlier work.
But as the argument unfolded I realised Spencer was drawing on observations and measurements from the new Aqua satellites to explain the mechanism behind this anomaly between model forecasts and observation. You may have heard that the IPCC models cannot predict clouds and rain with any accuracy. Their models assume water vapour goes up to the troposphere and hangs around to cook us all in a greenhouse future.
However, there is a mechanism at work that “washes out” the water vapour and returns it to the oceans along with the extra CO2 and thus turns the added water vapour into a NEGATIVE feedback mechanism.
The newly discovered mechanism is a combination of clouds and rain (Spencer’s mechanism adds to the mechanism earlier identified by Professor Richard Lindzen called the Iris effect).
The IPCC models assumed water vapour formed clouds at high altitudes that lead to further warming. The Aqua satellite observations and Spencer’s analysis show water vapour actually forms clouds at low altitudes that lead to cooling.
Furthermore, Spencer shows the extra rain that falls from these clouds cools the underlying oceans, providing a second negative feedback to negate the CO2 warming.
Alarmists’ quandary
This has struck the alarmists like a thunderbolt, especially as the lead author of the IPCC chapter on feedback has written to Spencer agreeing that he is right!
There goes the alarmist neighbourhood!
The climate is not highly sensitive to CO2 warming because water vapour is a damper against the warming effect of CO2.
That is why history is full of Ice Ages - where other effects, such as increased reflection from the ice cover, do provide positive feedback - while we do not hear about Heat Ages. The Medieval Warm Period, for example, is known for being benignly warm - not dangerously hot.
We live on a benign planet - except when it occasionally gets damned cold.
While I have done my best to simplify these developments they remain highly technical and many people distrust their own ability to assess competing scientific claims. However, in this case the tipping point theories are based on models that do not include the effects of rain and clouds.
The new Nasa Aqua satellite is the first to measure the effects of clouds and rainfall. Spencer’s interpretation of the new data means all previous models and forecasts are obsolete. Would anyone trust long-term forecasts of farm production that were hopeless at forecasting rainfall?
The implications of these breakthroughs in measurement and understanding are dramatic to say the least. The responses will be fun to watch.
Alarmists, ‘experts’ face a new inconvenient truth
Christopher Pearson, of The Australian newspaper (March 22), has written up a remarkable ABC television interview with Dr Jennifer Marohasy, a senior fellow of the Institute of Public Affairs, a Melbourne-based think tank.
Dr Marohasy says the impact of the Aqua satellite and Spencer’s interpretation of the data and prompts the reporter to conclude with some pungent observations of his own:
“If Marohasy is anywhere near right about the impending collapse of the global warming paradigm, life will suddenly become a whole lot more interesting.
“A great many founts of authority, from the Royal Society to the UN, most heads of government along with countless captains of industry, learned professors, commentators and journalists will be profoundly embarrassed. Let us hope it is a prolonged and chastening experience.
“With catastrophe off the agenda, for most people the fog of millennial gloom will lift, at least until attention turns to the prospect of the next ice age. Among the better educated, the sceptical cast of mind that is the basis of empiricism will once again be back in fashion. The delusion that by recycling and catching public transport we can help save the planet will quickly come to be seen for the childish nonsense it was all along.
RAIN CHECK: Spencer’s analyses based on new satellite data pour cold rain on warming theory
“The poorest Indians and Chinese will be left in peace to work their way toward prosperity, without being badgered about the size of their carbon-footprint, a concept that for most of us will soon be one with Nineveh and Tyre, clean forgotten in six months.
“The scores of town planners in Australia building empires out of regulating what can and can’t be built on low-lying shorelines will have to come to terms with the fact inundation no longer impends and find something more plausible to do. The same is true of the bureaucrats planning to accommodate ‘climate refugees.”
Well, gentlemen and gentlewomen: today, Friday, July 18th, is once again the official Full Moon. Although I haven’t checked the moon charts, I suspect the exact moment the Moon will be on the opposite of the Earth from the Sun, which makes it officially full, will be sometime this morning. Of course, the moon will already be on its daily trip on the other side of our planet by that time.
The Moon set about 30 minutes ago at 6:29 AM as the Sun rose over the Wichita horizon at basically the same time of 6:22 AM … the few minutes difference because of the diameter of the sun rising over the horizon.
But tonight and tomorrow night the Moon will continue to appear full.
So this evening, Friday, July 18th, if you happen to be out fishing along the fast flowing Ninnescah River in Pratt County, watch the eastern horizon at about 9:20 PM for the orange “full buck” Moon to rise over the southeastern prairie horizon.
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israel accused six Arabs on Friday of trying to set up an al Qaeda cell in Israel and said one of them had proposed attacking helicopters used during a visit by President George W. Bush.
In case any of you were concerned about Freddie and Fannie’s shareholders you can exhale and stop worrying. U.S. taxpayers many get walloped, but those shareholders will be just fine.
———-
Freddie Mac mulling $10 billion share offer
(Reuters) - “Mortgage giant Freddie Mac is considering raising capital by selling as much as $10 billion in new shares to investors.”
“Any sale would have to offer a high rate of return to attract buyers, given the near-14 percent yield on Freddie’s preference shares, the paper added.”
No, Ms. Ink, exactly the opposite; preferred shareholders are first in line for dividends, leaving common shareholders out in the cold. Preferred sharholders are also first in line in case of insolvancy.
The reason this step is being considered is so that Mac and Mae do not have to submit to federal oversite, which would prohibit execessive salaries and other compensation for executives.
This is another debacle partially the fault of dergulation. Only a few years ago the percentage of capital required to cover defaults was drastically reduced. Soon afterwards, Mac and Mae’s loan portfolios increased from billions to trillions.
Good morning and thanks annie_moose.
I shouldn’t tease cosmos like that but he is so intense about AGW.
I don’t disbelieve him necessarily, I’m just not convinced. And I think some of the ‘medicine’ the AGW fanatics try and spoon us is more harmful than the problem, if in fact it exists
Got’a run, busy day.
Boxlock,
Of course your right, bottom line nobody knows for sure. Personally, growing up in the big city and driving through Gary, Indiana in the 60’s it’s not hard for me to get my head around human caused pollution and global warming. But that’s me.
Chas
Posted July 18, 2008 at 12:23 am | Permalink
GMC —
Please note… use all of your feeble brain power….
“admit you wrote what you wrote”
I NEVER DENIED WRITING WHAT I WROTE…. THESE PEOPLE ARE DANGEROUS NUT CASES… AS A PROSECUTOR, YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT… BUT HERE YOU ARE DEFENDING THEIR SORRY ASSES….
AND YOU DAMNED RIGHT I POSTED THAT CRAP ON THIS BLOG…. AND THERE ARE THOSE WHO POST HERE, WHO ARE PART OF THOSE GROUPS, OR AT LEAST SHARE THE LUNATIC IDEOLOGY!!
FIND SOME WHERE THAT I DENIED THAT, IDIOT!!
AND NO THERE WILL BE NO APOLOGY!! YOU SIT HERE DAILY AND SMEAR PEOPLE… AS YOU CALL IT… BUT SOMEHOW WHEN YOU DO IT, YOU SEEM TO FEEL ITS ALRIGHT… NOW THE SHOE IS ON THE OTHER FOOT…. SO, WEAR IT, COWBOY…. LIVE WITH IT… THEY ARE REAL… THEY WALK AMONG US… THEY VOTE!!
NIGHT, LOSER!!
———
Chas was in full all-caps mode last night - a sure sign of desperation. He’s caught. Again.
Chas has repeatedly smeared, by his own words, “THOSE WHO POST HERE, WHO ARE PART OF THOSE GROUPS”. (caps in original)
I’ve never defended the positions of these nuts, as Chas claims. On the contrary; I’ve demanded Chas back up his claim with evidence of exactly what posters here have posted which would justify classifying any poster with these nuts. Chas has made a serious accusation. He has called unnamed posters on this blog, who “know who they are,” racists. When called upon, repeatedly, to name names, he refuses to do so, and denies he smeared posters here. An honorable man would recognize two options: Name names, and back up his smear with evidence, or apologize.
But Chas is not an honorable man. He won’t do either. To do so would admit error, and if there’s one thing Chas NEVER does, it’s admit error. This episode will go down with all the other Chas episodes. Among the highlights: the obit mistakenly attempting to out a poster with bold type, an angry STFU that means (no, I’m not making this up) ‘Stand The Floor Up’ (Riiiight). Among others. Chasisms. He makes an outrageous claim or remark, and then when called on it, squirms and denies the undeniable.
And when desperate, he writes in all caps.
And now add to that list accusing fellow posters of being anti-government racists, without a shred of evidence in support of said accusation. Without even the decency to support the charge.
You make serious accusations, you better tender serious evidence, Chas. You’ve supported your accusation with . . . nothing. Not a shred. Not a whit.
“San Fran measure to name sewage plant for Bush makes Nov. ballot
Recently, it seems, voter referendums are used increasingly not so much to put in the hands of citizens crucial decisions on important issues of public policy. But they’re being used as a more compelling excuse to get certain voter groups out to the polls on election day than simply electing candidates.
Think marriage amendment and the 2004 presidential election in such places as Ohio.
Well, a new measure has now qualified for the November ballot in San Francisco. And it’ll likely help draw out city voters from the Democratic and from the Republican party, all three of them there.
It’s the measure to rename the Oceanside Water Pollution Control Plant, which treats waste water from San Francisco’s west side, the George W. Bush Sewage Plant in an effort to embarrass the president for actions such as the Iraq war.
When the president becomes the former president in January, he’ll be returning to his isolated Texas ranch near Crawford, which likely has a septic tank. So he won’t notice the change if it passes.”
I don’t know about you, but I am, in fact, impressed with both major presidential candidates: Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama . And I can’t remember a previous presidential election when I thought that or would have said that. Perhaps I am getting too old and my memory and my biases are fading simultaneously. But I happen to think we are particularly fortunate at this time, with the range of problems facing our nation, to have two such able candidates.
On his birthday we think about the man, his life, his sacrifices. This article is a brief summary of the life of a man who went from prison to president.
FACTBOX-Nelson Mandela
– Charged with capital offences in the 1963 Rivonia Trial, his statement from the dock was his political testimony.
“I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.” Mandela was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1964.
Hmmmm…. who do we know here who bitches about fiat currency, the federal reserve, etc?
You poking at me Farmie? Think I am a racist or a kook? Yeah the fiat monetary system is screwed and now so are we. Yeah the Fed is a$$ raping us. That makes me a kook of a racist?
It’s probably extremely important these generals be very comfortable while they plan what our very uncomfortable soldiers will accomplish next.
————
Air Force uses counterterror funds to pay for VIP ‘comfort capsules’
The U.S. Air Force has been trying to use counterterrorism funding to pay for “comfort capsules” that will allow government VIPs to enjoy “world class” travel on military transport planes, according to reports.
The Washington Post says at least four generals have been involved in discussions about the “design details” associated with this $7.6 million program, including the color of carpeting and leather chairs in the so-called SLICCs and SLIPs.
“One man is hospitalized after being shot during a home burglary. It happened just after noon Thursday at the Elton Park Apartments on Elton Road in south Jackson.”
“A clerk at a local convenience store on North Kings Highway shot at a man who tried to rob the store last night, according to Myrtle Beach police officials.”
Ah, Nelson Mandella, the great African statesman. His wonderful wife Winnie.
To get a sense of the ANC and the Mandella’s techniques for handling problems you might GOOGLE ‘Maki Skosana’ this month is the 23rd aniversary of her contribution to ending apartheid in South Africa.
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385296 It seems like nobody else is willing to just spit it out, and call these wingnuts what they are…. But if I dont quit seeing their garbage here day after day after day, I will post what their bottom line REALLY means, and I wont cover up their language either…
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385361 Well, KFG —- I guess we know now who those idiots be, huh??
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385367 These “posters” are of the same mind as Bo Greitz, and Randy Weaver… And Timothy McVeigh; and the Posse Commitatus… and the various Militia groups…. such as the infamous Michigan Militia… and others….
NOW…. MANY of those people are posting daily on this very Blog…. They know who they are…
It is time to stand up to these maniacs, and let them know they arent going to get anywhere here… and that they can all go back to whatever Cuckoo’s Nest they came from…
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385407 Those on the Blog KNOW who they are
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385417 With the way you are carrying on, you are starting to act like one of TH”EM folks!! LOL Watch yourself now… Be careful…
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385607 are you worried about YOU being on the list
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385639 I take it you think you are one of them… Who knows?? MAYbe you are….
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385693 AND THERE ARE THOSE WHO POST HERE, WHO ARE PART OF THOSE GROUPS
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385698 However, there are many who post here, who ARE part of those groups, or at the very least, part of what those groups stand for… namely, ANTI Government!!
So chas, who would those bloggers be? Just antonymous nics will serve.
‘NOAA: Eighth Warmest June on Record for Globe‘ http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2008/jun/jun08.html
“The combined average global land and ocean surface temperatures for June 2008 ranked eighth warmest for June since worldwide records began in 1880, according to an analysis by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. Also, globally it was the ninth warmest January - June period on record.”
http://www.aps.org/
“APS Climate Change Statement APS Position Remains Unchanged
The American Physical Society reaffirms the following position on climate change, adopted by its governing body, the APS Council, on November 18, 2007:
“Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth’s climate.”
An article at odds with this statement recently appeared in an online newsletter of the APS Forum on Physics and Society, one of 39 units of APS. The header of this newsletter carries the statement that “Opinions expressed are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the APS or of the Forum.”
This newsletter is not a journal of the APS and it is not peer reviewed.
While those generals continue planning how many millions to spend on the comfort pods for military aircraft so they can be extremely comfortable while discussing what our soldiers will accomplish next, we get this report…
——–
Electrical Risks at Iraq Bases Are Worse Than Said
“During just one six-month period — August 2006 through January 2007 — at least 283 electrical fires destroyed or damaged American military facilities in Iraq, including the military’s largest dining hall in the country…”
“And while the Pentagon has previously reported that 13 Americans have been electrocuted in Iraq, many more have been injured, some seriously, by shocks, according to the documents. A log compiled earlier this year at one building complex in Baghdad disclosed that soldiers complained of receiving electrical shocks in their living quarters on an almost daily basis.”
I can’t wait to hear the important difference between a “Time Horizon” and an “Arbitrary Timetable” for a drawdown. I also can’t wait to hear how said difference is important.
lindainks55
Posted July 18, 2008 at 10:47 am | Permalink
US Election issues guide
Find out the positions of Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain on key election issues:
Linda why do you think you need to have the BBC furnish you with a voter guide to the US election? There is some irony there. There are voters guides provided by AARP and several American publications.
LLTVET
Posted July 18, 2008 at 11:15 am | Permalink
I can’t wait to hear the important difference between a “Time Horizon” and an “Arbitrary Timetable” for a drawdown. I also can’t wait to hear how said difference is important.
———————————-
Horizons are based on events.
Linda, I have learned that NEOCONS aren’t that hard to deal with. As long as you let them think that they are right and that the good ideas are theirs, they can compromise and give you what you want.
You just have to let them think it was their idea to talk with Iran, not Obama’s.
You just have to let them think it was their idea to draw down troops, not moveon.org.
‘The Australian’s War on Science XV‘ http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/07/the_australians_war_on_science_16.php
“The Australian continues to display its contempt for science, scientists and the scientific method. They’ve published this piece of AGW denial by David Evans. Last time I looked at Evans he was saying that new evidence since 1999 had changed his mind about global warming, with this new evidence including the fact that the world had cooled from 1940 to 1975. Apparently this was too silly even for the Australian, so he now offers us four alleged facts.”
”
It is a bit of a stretch to claim three centuries of awareness of greenhouse gases contributing to a possible climate warming effect is several centuries old. I think it was Arrhenius who actually made a public case of it, in just a bit over century and a decade ago.
[Jerry Mahlman]
”
Status
Noted. Text has been edited.
The interesting thing Regular is that it has ALWAYS been based on events. So what was the agreement? For Bush and Maliki to agree again on what they had already agreed upon?
“
“Over the last decade global land-surface sets have been able to increase the number of
stations substantially”.
Is untrue.There has been a substantial reduction
in the number of stations since 1980. see T C Peterson and R S Vose 1997 “An Overview of the Global Historical Climatology Network Temperature Database” Bulletin of the Royal Meteorological Society Vol 78, pages 2837-2849. There has been a particularly large reduction in the former Soviet Union. Delete from “decade” on line 30 to “not” on line 33 and replace with “substantial reductions in numbers of stations, and in their reliability, since 1980, have affected accuracy of recent figures”.
[Vincent Gray]
”
Status:
Noted. Text has been edited.
”
We always have to be very careful when we discuss “abrupt climate change”. Typically,
such “abrupt”
climate changes take decades to centuries to millenia,
e.g. thermohaline circulation slowdown/collapse(50-100 years), West Antarctic ice sheet collapse(500-1000years) ; Arctic summer sea ice melting roughly a century or so).
[Jerry Mahlman]
”
Status:
The point is well taken, although much faster changes than those cited by the reviewer are now known to occur. We will alter the text to clarify the concept of abrupt climate change.
Sol . . . we’re you being sarcastic? The temps and CO2 are very closely matched.
You’re right that recently the temp hasn’t gone up as fast as CO2, but if you look back over the millenia, you can see that often there are lags between temp and CO2 just as large or larger than the one you pointed out–and they eventually match each other.
Your graph is as close to proof positive as we can get that temps are going to be driven up no doubt sooner rather than later.
Massively off track. The CO2 is off the graph while temperatures have actually fallen. Temperature and CO2 seem to be related, but as the graph shows, one does not drive the other.
The little blue line represents CO2. Do you see it? There you go. Now look at the right of the graph, See that little blue line is way off the graph? See how it even hit the ‘Y’ in the word ‘Today’? There you go.
Now, the little red line means temperature. Do you see, on the right, where that little blue line takes a sharp dip, then shoots right off the graph? Well that was a pretty hot time and the CO2 was shockingly lower than the temps. Now from that point what does the little red line do? Well lookie lookie. It never makes it back up to that hot time.
Basic cosmos. CO2 rose dramatically while temperature dropped. Very basic indeed.
Tough to do without his login. Not that there arent a few around here who know how to do that sort of thing.
========================================
Oh gee, Heckler…. Are you going to name names??? Huh?? Huh?? When you gonna name names, Heckler?? You just cant come on here, and post……… etc, etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseum……
I don’t usually think Leonard Pitts is all that great, but he hit a grand slam in this editorial about the death of irony and satire:
“But increasingly, that’s who we are in this country: ignorant, irony-impaired and petrified. So maybe we should just cancel the campaign and ask that the last intelligent person turn off the lights when he or she leaves. And bring the last book with you. Nobody here will need it.
“Somewhere between the stained blue dress and the vice president shooting a guy in the face, between Swift-boat lies and “war on terra” alibis, the absurd became the ordinary, facts became optional and satire became superfluous.
“We are beyond satire, my friends. These days, there’s nothing more ridiculous than the truth.”
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385698 However, there are many who post here, who ARE part of those groups, or at the very least, part of what those groups stand for… namely, ANTI Government!!
So chas, who would those bloggers be? And to which group(s) do(es) s/he belong?
Most relevant in my mind was the paragraph that pointed out that CO2 is responsible for only about 1/3rd of Global Warming and the graph is consistent with models predicting global warming of about 3 degrees C in the near term.
And before you science-deniers start whining that that’s “nothing,” remember that heat is energy. More energy means more storms–hurricanes and tornadoes and hail.
I’ve lived in Kansas for 20 years and I saw more hail in the last several years than I ever have before. Last month, it hailed three times in one day at my location.
This is perfectly consistent with more heat energy that creates bigger, more severe mesacyclonic activity.
The “100 year floods” that now seem routine along the upper Mississippi are also consistent with that pattern. Warmer air holds more moisture and dumps more rain when it does rain (as in the tropics now).
#
LLTVET
Posted July 18, 2008 at 12:23 pm | Permalink
I expected your response 3 minutes ago Regular. Your slacking.
Or do I over think a problem by asking you to define the scenario that becomes said can of worms?
Still waiting on your answer on what Bush and Maliki agreed to that they didn’t agree to years ago. Or is that over thinking?
———————————-
Not at all.
I was just giving you the opportunity for you to rethink your position and realize the difference between an event based system and one based on arbitrary dates.
Evidently, the simplified explanation has evaded any conceptualization you had on the matter.
You do understand the difference between events and dates do you not?
liar
Main Entry: li·ar
Pronunciation: \?l?(-?)r\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English l?ogere, from l?ogan to lie — more at lie
Date: before 12th century
: a person who tells lies
“Over the last decade global land-surface sets have been able to increase the number of
stations substantially”.
Is untrue.There has been a substantial reduction
in the number of stations since 1980. see T C Peterson and R S Vose 1997 “An Overview of the Global Historical Climatology Network Temperature Database” Bulletin of the Royal Meteorological Society Vol 78, pages 2837-2849. There has been a particularly large reduction in the former Soviet Union. Delete from “decade” on line 30 to “not” on line 33 and replace with “substantial reductions in numbers of stations, and in their reliability, since 1980, have affected accuracy of recent figures”.
[Vincent Gray]
”
Status:
Noted. Text has been edited.
Since I am not a scientist, I can only make observations… However — If the upper atmosphere is somehow cooling…. And if I remember, cool air FALLS…. Then the warmer air RISING will be shoved back down… and remain in the atmosphere, unable to escape properly…
I think that tells me I shouldnt be surprised by the increased rainfall, and the increase of heavier storms (such as hail three times in one day??)
“Warmer air holds more moisture and dumps more rain when it does rain (as in the tropics now).”
And what affect does all of that additional cloudcover and precipitation have on global temps?
Wouldnt the climate models have that info?
Oh no, that’s right, they don’t factor that type of stuff in.
And Capn, I’m not a science denier. I simply want all you Warmers to look at ALL of the relevant science. Not just the stuff that supports you’re appocolyptic view.
1. To begin with, a Christian parent must understand that a child will never learn a lesson unless they are beaten on their naked bottoms until the imprint of the rugged cross is plainly visible on both cheeks. (Proverbs 23:13-14) A clothed bottom is less humiliating and less painful for the wicked child. In fact, the child may feel no pain at all if they are cunning enough to sin while wearing heavy jeans or khaki pants. A youngster who can sit comfortably after a Godly beating will think they have outsmarted you and tend to repeat their misdeed and feel a license to move on to more hardcore sins, like rape and blasphemy. If a child is able to sit down within three days without ointment or a bag of frozen vegetables after their punishment, you have failed as a Christian parent. A good spanking should be traumatic and something the child will remember well into adulthood.
2. Use a heavy object, a ruler is too light, a belt-buckle may cause bleeding and suspicion from liberal democrat schoolteachers if you are careless enough to allow your child to attend a public school. We suggest a heavy King James authentic cowhide leather bound Bible.
3. Find a comfortable place to sit and ask your child to come over and have a seat on your lap. Act as if there is nothing amiss. We suggest that you smile or wink at your child. If it is your daughter, say “Come on over here and sit on daddy’s lap, sweet heart. I want to talk to my little angel for a minute.” If it is your son, we suggest you say, “Hey there, sonny - how’s Dad’s little quarterback? Come on over here and sit on my lap for a minute and let’s talk about Jesus.”
4. As soon as you have the child on your lap, clench his hands so that he cannot move. Immediately flip the child over so that his stomach is across your knees. If the child struggles, give him a good whack across the back of his head and tell him to shut up. Whisper in his ear, “You’re going to get a whole lot worse from Jesus, you rebellious, hateful, little sissy!”
5. This is the point where the child may act like a little demon and start screaming. Be prepared for this wicked outburst. Have an athletic sock in your back pocket and cram it into the child’s mouth. Stuff it back until you get to the stripes at the top of the socks. Don’t worry: if the child is smart enough to remember to breath through their nose, they won’t suffocate.
6. Ready your Bible, and lift it high above your head with one hand. Keep the child secure with your free hand. Scientists agree that the most effective way of securing the child for beating is to clench the back of his neck like a turkey. If they are still struggling, we suggest you raise your voice and say something like, “I’ll give you something to squirm over, you little devil!”
7. Pull down their pants and underwear to reveal their pink little hiney. May sure both cheeks are fully exposed.
8. To ensure that the child is aware of their misdeed, and they never forget it, it is often best to smack the child across the bottom with the Bible as you speak out their misdeed. Each word would be one healthy whack across their naked hind quarters. For example: “YOU” [WHACK!] “DIDN’T” [WHACK!] “EAT” [WHACK] “YOUR” [WHACK] “BRUSSEL” [WHACK] “SPROUTS” [WHACK!] “YOU” [WHACK!] “LITTLE” [WHACK!] “DEMON!” [WACK!] and finishing off with a lighter whack, “did” [whack!] “you?” [whack!]
9. Rebuke the child in the sweet name of Jesus, toss them aside like a used Kleenex and let them roll to the floor to contemplate their sinful nature.
10. After about an hour, when the child has calmed down, have him sit on your lap again and read him some scripture verses about Hell (We recommend, Matthew 13:41-42) from the same Bible you used to beat him with. Let the child know that the punishment he received today is nothing compared to the eternal punishment of Hell where Jesus burns and cooks all the bad little boys and girls who don’t do what their daddy tells them.
RedWhiteNBlue is obviously one of the usual progressive Liberal posters as the text of his last post comes from the farce Web Site of the Landover Baptist Church.
#
LLTVET
Posted July 18, 2008 at 12:43 pm | Permalink
Nicely done Regular!!!! You are learning to over-think and use Satire. I knew you had it in you.
—————————-
I’m sorry you cannot handle a serious response to your query.
Conditional statements that are unknown to a viewer or reviewer cannot be speculated on without qualify all possible scenarios. Since said scenarios could be potentially infinite, it would be a waste of time.
Mixing the subject of two posts (satire and the one about the Bush/Malaki conference) appears to be your infantile response to my post.
So it is the contributors to the IPCC report that are liars? Would those be the peer reviewed papers you were talking about?
So a paper is peer reviewed and added to the draft. Then it take some ‘Anyone who requests a copy” reviewer to find the lie? Geez, Who writes and reviews this garbage?
I’ve lived in Kansas for 20 years and I saw more hail in the last several years than I ever have before. Last month, it hailed three times in one day at my location.
This is perfectly consistent with more heat energy that creates bigger, more severe mesacyclonic activity. _ CapnAmerica
————–
Baloney. I’ve lived here my entire life also. I’ve seen huge dust storms, monster tornadoes, hail much larger and frequent than this spring, snow drifted over rooftops etc… It’s called Kansas weather.
Americans should be concerned that possibly their next president, the product of Biblically forbidden interracial marriage (2 Corenthians 6:14) was born of a Muslim father and raised in Muslim schools in a region of the world where children are brainwashed into serving the mission of Al-Qaeda from the day their little heads pop out of their mothers’ lady parts. They are programmed like the Manchurian Candidate to snap back into being a militant Muslim when a secret word is said. “Now, I don’t rightly know what that secret word is. We could wind up with a president who turns into a radical Islamic extremist! For the love of Christ! We’re talking about the fate of our Nation!
Latest NOAA Press Release in Total Disagreement with NASA Satellite
16 07 2008
Joe D’Aleo, CCM, Fellow of the AMS
“It was the eighth warmest June on record for the globe, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported Wednesday in the 129 years since records began in 1880. And the first six months of the year were the ninth warmest since record keeping began in 1880, NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center reported. The planet’s average temperature for June was 60.8 degrees Fahrenheit, 0.9 degrees warmer than average for the month.
Provide either evidence, or apology. Name names, smart guy. I dare you. I double dare you.
You can’t. You can’t, because you were talking (or writing) out of your a**, and you posted before thinking. Now you’re caught in a dilemma. You can’t admit error, we know that. Yet you can’t support your allegations.
Hmmmm. What to do, what to do? How ’bout just deny everything - in all caps.
“Ohio Attorney Files to Lift Stay on ‘04 Election Case, Cites Allegations, Evidence of Massive Fraud by a Number of GOP Operatives”
At a press conference this morning in Columbus, Ohio, Cliff Arnebeck, lead attorney for the plaintiffs in the case of King Lincoln Bronzeville v. Blackwell, announced that he is filing a motion to “lift the stay in the case [and] proceed with targeted discovery in order to help protect the integrity of the 2008 election.”
***
“We anticipate Mr. Rove will be identified as having engaged in a corrupt, ongoing pattern of corrupt activities specifically affecting the situation here in Ohio.”
***
Arnebeck will also “be providing copies of document hold notices to the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform and the U.S. Justice Department for Karl Rove emails from the White House.”
This case has the potential to put some of the most powerful people in the country in jail, according to Arnebeck, as he was joined by a well-respected, life-long Republican computer security expert who charged that the red flags seen during Ohio’s 2004 Presidential Election would have been cause for “a fraud investigation in a bank, but it doesn’t when it comes to our vote.”
“This entire system is being programmed in secret by programmers who have no oversight by anybody,” the expert charged, as Arnebeck detailed allegations of complicity by a number of powerful GOP operatives and companies who had unique access both to the election results as reported in 2004, as well as to U.S. House and Senate computer networks even today.
____________
CONs don’t let a little thing like “majority rule” stop them from ruling the majority. Democracy is far too important to trust to the voters . . .
Regular
Posted July 18, 2008 at 12:47 pm | Permalink
RedWhiteNBlue is obviously one of the usual progressive Liberal posters as the text of his last post comes from the farce Web Site of the Landover Baptist Church.
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0303/spanking.html
**********
James is correct about this being the source for RWNB’s post, but at the above site my anti-virus program went berserk and there was some not-to-pleasant spam there. I would avoid going to this site.
cosmos_originally
Posted July 18, 2008 at 11:06 am | Permalink
Global cooling(sic) update:
‘NOAA: Eighth Warmest June on Record for Globe‘
Makes you wonder. If Co2 levels are at their highest in the last 800,000 years, why isn’t the globe hotter than it has been over the last 800,000 years?
RWNB: They are on to you. They’re too sharp for you. You must admit that you were using satire and over thinking.
Now do you take requests? Baptists are a bit stale. Can you give us a good Catholic Rendition? You know, something like the nun praying the Rosary and telling Jesus, shut up I’m talking to your mother.
Heh, Steven, Pitts is unfortunately dead-on, though a little behind the curve. Tom Tomorrow’s ”
Sparky” declared irony officially dead a few years back, and Tomorrow complained how it was hard to create absurd cartoons these days that didn’t turn into serious headlines in a few week hence (he was referring to the Bush administration, but the principle is the same).
“President Obama and First Lady — as Seen From the Right-Wing Point of View” might have been the caption. Phil Klein of American Spectator nailed it: “This cartoon is intended to make fun of conservatives as ignorant racists and essentially marginalize any criticism of Obama as moronic.”
Unfortunately for the New Yorker, the cartoon misfired. Blow-ups are likely to be as pandemic in right-wing dorms this fall as were posters of “Che” Guevara in left-wing dorms in the 1970s.”
“This cartoon is intended to make fun of conservatives as ignorant racists and essentially marginalize any criticism of Obama as moronic.”
Heh, more unintended irony: He’s proving his ignorance by his vapid over-reading of the cartoon, and, by unwittingly defending idiocy, underscores the point of the cartoon.
#
Rage
Posted July 18, 2008 at 1:59 pm | Permalink
“This cartoon is intended to make fun of conservatives as ignorant racists and essentially marginalize any criticism of Obama as moronic.”
Heh, more unintended irony: He’s proving his ignorance by his vapid over-reading of the cartoon, and, by unwittingly defending idiocy, underscores the point of the cartoon.
———————
I know, but it’s fun to re-quote the often ridiculous Patrick J. Buchanan who has a propensity to use quotes to verify quotes of his own.
183 Comments
GLOBAL COOLING UPDATE
“I DEVOTED six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia’s compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector.
FullCAM models carbon flows in plants, mulch, debris, soils and agricultural products, using inputs such as climate data, plant physiology and satellite data. I’ve been following the global warming debate closely for years.
When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the old ice core data, no other suspects.
The evidence was not conclusive, but why wait until we were certain when it appeared we needed to act quickly? Soon government and the scientific community were working together and lots of science research jobs were created. We scientists had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet.
But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming. As Lord Keynes famously said, “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” ….
…If there really was any evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming, don’t you think we would have heard all about it ad nauseam by now?
The world has spent $50 billion on global warming since 1990, and we have not found any actual evidence that carbon emissions cause global warming. Evidence consists of observations made by someone at some time that supports the idea that carbon emissions cause global warming. Computer models and theoretical calculations are not evidence, they are just theory.
What is going to happen over the next decade as global temperatures continue not to rise? The Labor Government is about to deliberately wreck the economy in order to reduce carbon emissions. If the reasons later turn out to be bogus, the electorate is not going to re-elect a Labor government for a long time. When it comes to light that the carbon scare was known to be bogus in 2008, the ALP is going to be regarded as criminally negligent or ideologically stupid for not having seen through it. And if the Liberals support the general thrust of their actions, they will be seen likewise.
The onus should be on those who want to change things to provide evidence for why the changes are necessary. The Australian public is eventually going to have to be told the evidence anyway, so it might as well be told before wrecking the economy.”
For balance of article, see link.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24036736-7583,00.html
From the same article:
“There has not been a public debate about the causes of global warming and most of the public and our decision makers are not aware of the most basic salient facts:
1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it.
Each possible cause of global warming has a different pattern of where in the planet the warming occurs first and the most. The signature of an increased greenhouse effect is a hot spot about 10km up in the atmosphere over the tropics. We have been measuring the atmosphere for decades using radiosondes: weather balloons with thermometers that radio back the temperature as the balloon ascends through the atmosphere. They show no hot spot. Whatsoever.
If there is no hot spot then an increased greenhouse effect is not the cause of global warming. So we know for sure that carbon emissions are not a significant cause of the global warming. If we had found the greenhouse signature then I would be an alarmist again.
When the signature was found to be missing in 2007 (after the latest IPCC report), alarmists objected that maybe the readings of the radiosonde thermometers might not be accurate and maybe the hot spot was there but had gone undetected. Yet hundreds of radiosondes have given the same answer, so statistically it is not possible that they missed the hot spot.
Recently the alarmists have suggested we ignore the radiosonde thermometers, but instead take the radiosonde wind measurements, apply a theory about wind shear, and run the results through their computers to estimate the temperatures. They then say that the results show that we cannot rule out the presence of a hot spot. If you believe that you’d believe anything.
2. There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None. There is plenty of evidence that global warming has occurred, and theory suggests that carbon emissions should raise temperatures (though by how much is hotly disputed) but there are no observations by anyone that implicate carbon emissions as a significant cause of the recent global warming.
3. The satellites that measure the world’s temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year (to the temperature of 1980). Land-based temperature readings are corrupted by the “urban heat island” effect: urban areas encroaching on thermometer stations warm the micro-climate around the thermometer, due to vegetation changes, concrete, cars, houses. Satellite data is the only temperature data we can trust, but it only goes back to 1979. NASA reports only land-based data, and reports a modest warming trend and recent cooling. The other three global temperature records use a mix of satellite and land measurements, or satellite only, and they all show no warming since 2001 and a recent cooling.
4. The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect.
None of these points are controversial. The alarmist scientists agree with them, though they would dispute their relevance.”
Dr David Evans was a consultant to the Australian Greenhouse Office from 1999 to 2005.
Cooling of Atmosphere Due to CO2 Emission
Authors: G. V. Chilingar; L. F. Khilyuk; O. G. Sorokhtin; Rudolf W. Gunnerman
Abstract
The writers investigated the effect of CO2 emission on the temperature of atmosphere. Computations based on the adiabatic theory of greenhouse effect show that increasing CO2 concentration in the atmosphere results in cooling rather than warming of the Earth’s atmosphere.
Introduction
Traditional anthropogenic theory of currently observed global warming states that release of carbon dioxide into atmosphere (partially as a result of utilization of fossil fuels) leads to an increase in atmospheric temperature because the molecules of CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) absorb the infrared radiation from the Earth’s surface.
This statement is based on the Arrhenius hypothesis, which was never verified (Arrhenius, 1896).The proponents of this theory take into consideration only one component of heat transfer in atmosphere, i.e., radiation. Yet, in the dense Earth’s troposphere with the pressure pa > 0.2 atm, the heat from the Earth’s surface is mostly transferred by convection (Sorokhtin, 2001a).
According to our estimates, convection accounts for 67%, water vapor condensation in troposphere accounts for 25%, and radiation accounts for about 8% of the total heat transfer from the Earth’s surface to troposphere. Thus, convection is the dominant process of heat transfer in troposphere, and all the theories of Earth’s atmospheric heating (or cooling) first of all must consider this process of heat (energy)-mass redistribution in atmosphere (Sorokhtin, 2001a, 2001b;Khilyuk and Chilingar, 2003, 2004).
When the temperature of a given mass of air increases, it expands, becomes lighter, and rises. In turn, the denser cooler air of upper layers of troposphere descends and replaces the warmer air of lower layers. This physical system (multiple cells of air convection) acts in the Earth’s troposphere like a continuous surface cooler. The cooling effect by air convection can surpass considerably the warming effect of radiation. The most important conclusion from this observation is that the temperature distribution in the troposphere has to be close to adiabatic because the air mass expands and cools while rising and compresses and heats while dropping. This does not necessarily imply that at any particular instant distribution of temperature has to be adiabatic. One should consider some averaged distribution over the time intervals of an order of months
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/section?content=a788582859&fulltext=713%20240928
December last year, at the UN conference in Bali, I heard Viscount Monckton present a paper prepared by himself, the Australian Dr David Evans and our own Dr Vincent Gray (who were at Bali, too) that showed while the IPCC models predict that greenhouse gases would produce an extensive “hot spot” in the upper troposphere over the tropics, the satellite measurements show no such hotspots have appeared.
Monckton and Evans found a large part of this discrepancy is the result of some basic errors in the IPCC’s assessment of the Stefan-Boltzmann equation. When they applied their revised factor to the effect of greenhouse gases, the temperature rise was about a third of that predicted by the IPCC.
So by late last year we not only knew IPCC forecasts of atmospheric global warming were wrong; we were beginning to understand why they are wrong.
The key issue in this debate is whether anthropogenic greenhouse gases or natural solar activities are the prime drivers of climate change. A closely related argument is whether the climate is highly sensitive to carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere.
Doubtful predictions
Put together, these uncertainties raise doubts as to whether the IPCC models can accurately forecast the climate over the long term. If they cannot, then we have to wonder how much damage we should risk doing to the world’s economies in attempts to manage the possibly adverse effects of these “predictions.”
The findings that the predicted “tropical hot spots” do not exist are important because the IPCC models assume these hot spots will be formed by increased evaporation from warmer oceans leading to the accumulations of higher concentrations of water vapour in the upper atmosphere, and thereby generating a positive feedback reinforcing the small amount of warming that can be caused by CO2 alone.
Atmospheric scientists generally agree that as carbon dioxide levels increase there is a law of “diminishing returns” - or more properly “diminishing effects” - and that ongoing increases in CO2 concentration do not generate proportional increases in temperature. The common analogy is painting over window glass. The first layers of paint cut out lots of light but subsequent layers have diminishing impact.
So, you might be asking, why the panic? Why does Al Gore talk about temperatures spiraling out of control, causing mass extinctions and catastrophic rises in sea-level, and all his other disastrous outcomes when there is no evidence to support it?
The alarmists argue that increased CO2 leads to more water vapour - the main greenhouse gas - and this provides positive feedback and hence makes the overall climate highly sensitive to small increases in the concentration of CO2.
Consequently, the IPCC argues that while carbon dioxide may well “run out of puff” the consequent evaporation of water vapour provides the positive feedback loop that will make anthropogenic global warming reach dangerous levels.
This assumption that water vapour provides positive feedback lies behind the famous “tipping point,” which nourishes Al Gore’s dreams of destruction, and indeed all those calls for action now - “before it is too late!” But no climate models predict such a tipping point.
However, while the absence of hot spots has refuted one important aspect of the IPCC models we lack a mechanism that fully explains these supposed outcomes. Hence the IPCC, and its supporters, have been able to ignore this “refutation.”
So by the end of last year, we were in a similar situation to the 19th century astronomers, who had figured out that the sun could not be “burning” its fuel - or it would have turned to ashes long ago - but could not explain where the energy was coming from. Then along came Einstein and E=mc2.
Hard to explain
Similarly, the climate sceptics have had to explain why the hotspots are not where they should be - not just challenge the theory with their observations.
This is why I felt so lucky to be in the right place at the right time when I heard Roy Spencer speak at the New York conference on climate change in March. At first I thought this was just another paper setting out observations against the forecasts, further confirming Evans’ earlier work.
But as the argument unfolded I realised Spencer was drawing on observations and measurements from the new Aqua satellites to explain the mechanism behind this anomaly between model forecasts and observation. You may have heard that the IPCC models cannot predict clouds and rain with any accuracy. Their models assume water vapour goes up to the troposphere and hangs around to cook us all in a greenhouse future.
However, there is a mechanism at work that “washes out” the water vapour and returns it to the oceans along with the extra CO2 and thus turns the added water vapour into a NEGATIVE feedback mechanism.
The newly discovered mechanism is a combination of clouds and rain (Spencer’s mechanism adds to the mechanism earlier identified by Professor Richard Lindzen called the Iris effect).
The IPCC models assumed water vapour formed clouds at high altitudes that lead to further warming. The Aqua satellite observations and Spencer’s analysis show water vapour actually forms clouds at low altitudes that lead to cooling.
Furthermore, Spencer shows the extra rain that falls from these clouds cools the underlying oceans, providing a second negative feedback to negate the CO2 warming.
Alarmists’ quandary
This has struck the alarmists like a thunderbolt, especially as the lead author of the IPCC chapter on feedback has written to Spencer agreeing that he is right!
There goes the alarmist neighbourhood!
The climate is not highly sensitive to CO2 warming because water vapour is a damper against the warming effect of CO2.
That is why history is full of Ice Ages - where other effects, such as increased reflection from the ice cover, do provide positive feedback - while we do not hear about Heat Ages. The Medieval Warm Period, for example, is known for being benignly warm - not dangerously hot.
We live on a benign planet - except when it occasionally gets damned cold.
While I have done my best to simplify these developments they remain highly technical and many people distrust their own ability to assess competing scientific claims. However, in this case the tipping point theories are based on models that do not include the effects of rain and clouds.
The new Nasa Aqua satellite is the first to measure the effects of clouds and rainfall. Spencer’s interpretation of the new data means all previous models and forecasts are obsolete. Would anyone trust long-term forecasts of farm production that were hopeless at forecasting rainfall?
The implications of these breakthroughs in measurement and understanding are dramatic to say the least. The responses will be fun to watch.
Alarmists, ‘experts’ face a new inconvenient truth
Christopher Pearson, of The Australian newspaper (March 22), has written up a remarkable ABC television interview with Dr Jennifer Marohasy, a senior fellow of the Institute of Public Affairs, a Melbourne-based think tank.
Dr Marohasy says the impact of the Aqua satellite and Spencer’s interpretation of the data and prompts the reporter to conclude with some pungent observations of his own:
“If Marohasy is anywhere near right about the impending collapse of the global warming paradigm, life will suddenly become a whole lot more interesting.
“A great many founts of authority, from the Royal Society to the UN, most heads of government along with countless captains of industry, learned professors, commentators and journalists will be profoundly embarrassed. Let us hope it is a prolonged and chastening experience.
“With catastrophe off the agenda, for most people the fog of millennial gloom will lift, at least until attention turns to the prospect of the next ice age. Among the better educated, the sceptical cast of mind that is the basis of empiricism will once again be back in fashion. The delusion that by recycling and catching public transport we can help save the planet will quickly come to be seen for the childish nonsense it was all along.
RAIN CHECK: Spencer’s analyses based on new satellite data pour cold rain on warming theory
“The poorest Indians and Chinese will be left in peace to work their way toward prosperity, without being badgered about the size of their carbon-footprint, a concept that for most of us will soon be one with Nineveh and Tyre, clean forgotten in six months.
“The scores of town planners in Australia building empires out of regulating what can and can’t be built on low-lying shorelines will have to come to terms with the fact inundation no longer impends and find something more plausible to do. The same is true of the bureaucrats planning to accommodate ‘climate refugees.”
http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/climate-change-confirmed-global-warming-cancelled
Well, gentlemen and gentlewomen: today, Friday, July 18th, is once again the official Full Moon. Although I haven’t checked the moon charts, I suspect the exact moment the Moon will be on the opposite of the Earth from the Sun, which makes it officially full, will be sometime this morning. Of course, the moon will already be on its daily trip on the other side of our planet by that time.
The Moon set about 30 minutes ago at 6:29 AM as the Sun rose over the Wichita horizon at basically the same time of 6:22 AM … the few minutes difference because of the diameter of the sun rising over the horizon.
But tonight and tomorrow night the Moon will continue to appear full.
So this evening, Friday, July 18th, if you happen to be out fishing along the fast flowing Ninnescah River in Pratt County, watch the eastern horizon at about 9:20 PM for the orange “full buck” Moon to rise over the southeastern prairie horizon.
Thanks JWink. I can see it now.
Here cosmos is your reading and refuting assignment for today.
Now don’t thank me, I enjoy doing this for you.
Myth of Consensus Explodes: APS Opens Global Warming Debate
July 16, 2008, 9:35 PM
http://www.dailytech.com/Myth+of+Consensus+Explodes+APS+Opens+Global+Warming+Debate/article12403.htm
Europe’s Warming Attributed to Cleaner Air, Not Climate Change
July 14, 2008, 4:26 PM
http://www.dailytech.com/Europes+Warming+Attributed+to+Cleaner+Air+Not+Climate+Change/article12371.htm
So Much For Flooded Cities: Greenland Ice Loss Not Increasing
July 4, 2008, 7:34 AM
http://www.dailytech.com/So+Much+For+Flooded+Cities+Greenland+Ice+Loss+Not+Increasing/article12277.htm
Australian Researchers Warn of Global Cooling
July 1, 2008, 11:09 AM
http://www.dailytech.com/Australian+Researchers+Warn+of+Global+Cooling/article12250.htm
Greenpeace Sued Over False Global Warming Claims
June 12, 2008, 12:40 PM
http://www.dailytech.com/Greenpeace+Sued+Over+False+Global+Warming+Claims/article12070.htm
IEA: $45 Trillion Needed to Combat Global Warming
June 9, 2008, 10:12 AM
http://www.dailytech.com/IEA+45+Trillion+Needed+to+Combat+Global+Warming+/article12030.htm
Good Find Boxlock!,
You can get your global warming news and a slick review on the new Ipod
http://revver.com/u/DailyTech/
http://www.HerbertWest3rd.com
Israel makes arrests in alleged plot against Bush
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israel accused six Arabs on Friday of trying to set up an al Qaeda cell in Israel and said one of them had proposed attacking helicopters used during a visit by President George W. Bush.
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN9173242220080718?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews
In case any of you were concerned about Freddie and Fannie’s shareholders you can exhale and stop worrying. U.S. taxpayers many get walloped, but those shareholders will be just fine.
———-
Freddie Mac mulling $10 billion share offer
(Reuters) - “Mortgage giant Freddie Mac is considering raising capital by selling as much as $10 billion in new shares to investors.”
“Any sale would have to offer a high rate of return to attract buyers, given the near-14 percent yield on Freddie’s preference shares, the paper added.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSSP7134320080718?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&sp=true
No, Ms. Ink, exactly the opposite; preferred shareholders are first in line for dividends, leaving common shareholders out in the cold. Preferred sharholders are also first in line in case of insolvancy.
The reason this step is being considered is so that Mac and Mae do not have to submit to federal oversite, which would prohibit execessive salaries and other compensation for executives.
This is another debacle partially the fault of dergulation. Only a few years ago the percentage of capital required to cover defaults was drastically reduced. Soon afterwards, Mac and Mae’s loan portfolios increased from billions to trillions.
Good morning and thanks annie_moose.
I shouldn’t tease cosmos like that but he is so intense about AGW.
I don’t disbelieve him necessarily, I’m just not convinced. And I think some of the ‘medicine’ the AGW fanatics try and spoon us is more harmful than the problem, if in fact it exists
Got’a run, busy day.
Boxlock,
Of course your right, bottom line nobody knows for sure. Personally, growing up in the big city and driving through Gary, Indiana in the 60’s it’s not hard for me to get my head around human caused pollution and global warming. But that’s me.
Chas
Posted July 18, 2008 at 12:23 am | Permalink
GMC —
Please note… use all of your feeble brain power….
“admit you wrote what you wrote”
I NEVER DENIED WRITING WHAT I WROTE…. THESE PEOPLE ARE DANGEROUS NUT CASES… AS A PROSECUTOR, YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT… BUT HERE YOU ARE DEFENDING THEIR SORRY ASSES….
AND YOU DAMNED RIGHT I POSTED THAT CRAP ON THIS BLOG…. AND THERE ARE THOSE WHO POST HERE, WHO ARE PART OF THOSE GROUPS, OR AT LEAST SHARE THE LUNATIC IDEOLOGY!!
FIND SOME WHERE THAT I DENIED THAT, IDIOT!!
AND NO THERE WILL BE NO APOLOGY!! YOU SIT HERE DAILY AND SMEAR PEOPLE… AS YOU CALL IT… BUT SOMEHOW WHEN YOU DO IT, YOU SEEM TO FEEL ITS ALRIGHT… NOW THE SHOE IS ON THE OTHER FOOT…. SO, WEAR IT, COWBOY…. LIVE WITH IT… THEY ARE REAL… THEY WALK AMONG US… THEY VOTE!!
NIGHT, LOSER!!
———
Chas was in full all-caps mode last night - a sure sign of desperation. He’s caught. Again.
Chas has repeatedly smeared, by his own words, “THOSE WHO POST HERE, WHO ARE PART OF THOSE GROUPS”. (caps in original)
I’ve never defended the positions of these nuts, as Chas claims. On the contrary; I’ve demanded Chas back up his claim with evidence of exactly what posters here have posted which would justify classifying any poster with these nuts. Chas has made a serious accusation. He has called unnamed posters on this blog, who “know who they are,” racists. When called upon, repeatedly, to name names, he refuses to do so, and denies he smeared posters here. An honorable man would recognize two options: Name names, and back up his smear with evidence, or apologize.
But Chas is not an honorable man. He won’t do either. To do so would admit error, and if there’s one thing Chas NEVER does, it’s admit error. This episode will go down with all the other Chas episodes. Among the highlights: the obit mistakenly attempting to out a poster with bold type, an angry STFU that means (no, I’m not making this up) ‘Stand The Floor Up’ (Riiiight). Among others. Chasisms. He makes an outrageous claim or remark, and then when called on it, squirms and denies the undeniable.
And when desperate, he writes in all caps.
And now add to that list accusing fellow posters of being anti-government racists, without a shred of evidence in support of said accusation. Without even the decency to support the charge.
You make serious accusations, you better tender serious evidence, Chas. You’ve supported your accusation with . . . nothing. Not a shred. Not a whit.
Coward.
A good laugh!
—-
“San Fran measure to name sewage plant for Bush makes Nov. ballot
Recently, it seems, voter referendums are used increasingly not so much to put in the hands of citizens crucial decisions on important issues of public policy. But they’re being used as a more compelling excuse to get certain voter groups out to the polls on election day than simply electing candidates.
Think marriage amendment and the 2004 presidential election in such places as Ohio.
Well, a new measure has now qualified for the November ballot in San Francisco. And it’ll likely help draw out city voters from the Democratic and from the Republican party, all three of them there.
It’s the measure to rename the Oceanside Water Pollution Control Plant, which treats waste water from San Francisco’s west side, the George W. Bush Sewage Plant in an effort to embarrass the president for actions such as the Iraq war.
When the president becomes the former president in January, he’ll be returning to his isolated Texas ranch near Crawford, which likely has a septic tank. So he won’t notice the change if it passes.”
– Andrew Malcolm
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/
Linda- They are also proposing a “mass flush” in the city to coincide with the swearing in of the next President on Jan. 20th.
Whooo Hooo, can we get that organized here too!? Maybe nationwide!? I love it! I also enjoyed reading about a place that has THREE Republicans! lol
An interesting opinion
——-
McCain v. Obama: Truman v. RFK?
I don’t know about you, but I am, in fact, impressed with both major presidential candidates: Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama . And I can’t remember a previous presidential election when I thought that or would have said that. Perhaps I am getting too old and my memory and my biases are fading simultaneously. But I happen to think we are particularly fortunate at this time, with the range of problems facing our nation, to have two such able candidates.
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/07/barack_obama_john_mccain.html
On his birthday we think about the man, his life, his sacrifices. This article is a brief summary of the life of a man who went from prison to president.
FACTBOX-Nelson Mandela
– Charged with capital offences in the 1963 Rivonia Trial, his statement from the dock was his political testimony.
“I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.” Mandela was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1964.
http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSL1849090
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385185
ksfarmgrrl
Posted July 17, 2008 at 12:48 pm | Permalink
Hmmmm…. who do we know here who bitches about fiat currency, the federal reserve, etc?
You poking at me Farmie? Think I am a racist or a kook? Yeah the fiat monetary system is screwed and now so are we. Yeah the Fed is a$$ raping us. That makes me a kook of a racist?
cosmos,
Haven’t heard anything back from you on
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-716-2/#comment-384981
Do you admit defeat?
It’s probably extremely important these generals be very comfortable while they plan what our very uncomfortable soldiers will accomplish next.
————
Air Force uses counterterror funds to pay for VIP ‘comfort capsules’
The U.S. Air Force has been trying to use counterterrorism funding to pay for “comfort capsules” that will allow government VIPs to enjoy “world class” travel on military transport planes, according to reports.
The Washington Post says at least four generals have been involved in discussions about the “design details” associated with this $7.6 million program, including the color of carpeting and leather chairs in the so-called SLICCs and SLIPs.
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/07/air-force-uses.html
Resident Opens Fire on Apartment Burglars
http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=8693807&nav=2CSf
“One man is hospitalized after being shot during a home burglary. It happened just after noon Thursday at the Elton Park Apartments on Elton Road in south Jackson.”
Clerk shoots at man trying to rob store
http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/breaking_news/story/522047.html
“A clerk at a local convenience store on North Kings Highway shot at a man who tried to rob the store last night, according to Myrtle Beach police officials.”
Ah, Nelson Mandella, the great African statesman. His wonderful wife Winnie.
To get a sense of the ANC and the Mandella’s techniques for handling problems you might GOOGLE ‘Maki Skosana’ this month is the 23rd aniversary of her contribution to ending apartheid in South Africa.
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385296
It seems like nobody else is willing to just spit it out, and call these wingnuts what they are…. But if I dont quit seeing their garbage here day after day after day, I will post what their bottom line REALLY means, and I wont cover up their language either…
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385361
Well, KFG —- I guess we know now who those idiots be, huh??
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385367
These “posters” are of the same mind as Bo Greitz, and Randy Weaver… And Timothy McVeigh; and the Posse Commitatus… and the various Militia groups…. such as the infamous Michigan Militia… and others….
NOW…. MANY of those people are posting daily on this very Blog…. They know who they are…
It is time to stand up to these maniacs, and let them know they arent going to get anywhere here… and that they can all go back to whatever Cuckoo’s Nest they came from…
Nuff said…
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385386
YOU know who these people are as much as I do… Why dont YOU step up and call them out??
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385407
Those on the Blog KNOW who they are
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385417
With the way you are carrying on, you are starting to act like one of TH”EM folks!! LOL Watch yourself now… Be careful…
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385607
are you worried about YOU being on the list
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385639
I take it you think you are one of them… Who knows?? MAYbe you are….
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385693
AND THERE ARE THOSE WHO POST HERE, WHO ARE PART OF THOSE GROUPS
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385698
However, there are many who post here, who ARE part of those groups, or at the very least, part of what those groups stand for… namely, ANTI Government!!
So chas, who would those bloggers be? Just antonymous nics will serve.
Gun briefing backfires in China
Three Chinese reporters attending a police briefing on the success of an anti-gun campaign were accidentally shot, media reports say.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7514322.stm
US Election issues guide
Find out the positions of Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain on key election issues:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/629/629/7436221.stm
Global cooling(sic) update:
‘NOAA: Eighth Warmest June on Record for Globe‘
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2008/jun/jun08.html
“The combined average global land and ocean surface temperatures for June 2008 ranked eighth warmest for June since worldwide records began in 1880, according to an analysis by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. Also, globally it was the ninth warmest January - June period on record.”
America’s Shooting Gallery 7.17
* KY: Videos provide glimpse of Ky. plant shooting
* MI: Detroit dad, son in critical condition after shooting
* MA: 3rd suspect arraigned in Worcester shooting
* IL: Teen’s Older Brother In Custody For Shooting Death
* CA: Gilroy man is suspect in fatal Palo Alto City Hall shooting
* MO: Double shooting at St. Louis area mall
* OH: Hurricane Katrina survivor, 17, charged in fatal Canton shooting
* CA: Woman Dies After Neighborhood Shooting
* AR: Six teens charged in Lumberton shooting death
* MI: Shooting In Battle Creek Sends 2 People To The Hospital
http://www.aps.org/
“APS Climate Change Statement
APS Position Remains Unchanged
The American Physical Society reaffirms the following position on climate change, adopted by its governing body, the APS Council, on November 18, 2007:
“Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth’s climate.”
An article at odds with this statement recently appeared in an online newsletter of the APS Forum on Physics and Society, one of 39 units of APS. The header of this newsletter carries the statement that “Opinions expressed are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the APS or of the Forum.”
This newsletter is not a journal of the APS and it is not peer reviewed.
Read: APS Climate Change Statement”
http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/07_1.cfm
“Three Chinese reporters attending a police briefing on the success of an anti-gun campaign were accidentally shot”
And they say that irony is dead.
While those generals continue planning how many millions to spend on the comfort pods for military aircraft so they can be extremely comfortable while discussing what our soldiers will accomplish next, we get this report…
——–
Electrical Risks at Iraq Bases Are Worse Than Said
“During just one six-month period — August 2006 through January 2007 — at least 283 electrical fires destroyed or damaged American military facilities in Iraq, including the military’s largest dining hall in the country…”
“And while the Pentagon has previously reported that 13 Americans have been electrocuted in Iraq, many more have been injured, some seriously, by shocks, according to the documents. A log compiled earlier this year at one building complex in Baghdad disclosed that soldiers complained of receiving electrical shocks in their living quarters on an almost daily basis.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/world/middleeast/18contractors.html?_r=1&bl&ex=1216526400&en=4bebfb6f9f18891c&ei=5087&oref=slogin
I can’t wait to hear the important difference between a “Time Horizon” and an “Arbitrary Timetable” for a drawdown. I also can’t wait to hear how said difference is important.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080718/ts_afp/usiraqdiplomacymilitary
Do you think that all-important difference will include words bush can’t quite pronounce?
CHAS
AM I ON THE LIST?
lindainks55
Posted July 18, 2008 at 10:47 am | Permalink
US Election issues guide
Find out the positions of Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain on key election issues:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/629/629/7436221.stm
—————-
Linda why do you think you need to have the BBC furnish you with a voter guide to the US election? There is some irony there. There are voters guides provided by AARP and several American publications.
LLTVET
Posted July 18, 2008 at 11:15 am | Permalink
I can’t wait to hear the important difference between a “Time Horizon” and an “Arbitrary Timetable” for a drawdown. I also can’t wait to hear how said difference is important.
———————————-
Horizons are based on events.
Timetables have arbitrary dates.
Linda, I have learned that NEOCONS aren’t that hard to deal with. As long as you let them think that they are right and that the good ideas are theirs, they can compromise and give you what you want.
You just have to let them think it was their idea to talk with Iran, not Obama’s.
You just have to let them think it was their idea to draw down troops, not moveon.org.
‘The Australian’s War on Science XV‘
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/07/the_australians_war_on_science_16.php
“The Australian continues to display its contempt for science, scientists and the scientific method. They’ve published this piece of AGW denial by David Evans. Last time I looked at Evans he was saying that new evidence since 1999 had changed his mind about global warming, with this new evidence including the fact that the world had cooled from 1940 to 1975. Apparently this was too silly even for the Australian, so he now offers us four alleged facts.”
More at link.
Sounds good to me, VET. I don’t much care who gets the credit. I’ll remember your good input.
Heck:
Chas won’t answer. He hasn’t got the guts.
”
It is a bit of a stretch to claim three centuries of awareness of greenhouse gases contributing to a possible climate warming effect is several centuries old. I think it was Arrhenius who actually made a public case of it, in just a bit over century and a decade ago.
[Jerry Mahlman]
”
Status
Noted. Text has been edited.
Emphisis mine.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Comments/wg1-commentFrameset.html
”
One could quibble with the idea that “observations … are the foundation of our science”,since
the whole IPCC enterprise is motivated by the theory of global warming due to
increasing greenhouse gases.
I’d suggest changing “the foundation” to “a foundation”.
[Dian Seidel]
”
Status:
Accepted. Text has been edited.
Emphasis mine.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Comments/wg1-commentFrameset.html
The interesting thing Regular is that it has ALWAYS been based on events. So what was the agreement? For Bush and Maliki to agree again on what they had already agreed upon?
“
“Over the last decade global land-surface sets have been able to increase the number of
stations substantially”.
Is untrue.There has been a substantial reduction
in the number of stations since 1980. see T C Peterson and R S Vose 1997 “An Overview of the Global Historical Climatology Network Temperature Database” Bulletin of the Royal Meteorological Society Vol 78, pages 2837-2849. There has been a particularly large reduction in the former Soviet Union. Delete from “decade” on line 30 to “not” on line 33 and replace with “substantial reductions in numbers of stations, and in their reliability, since 1980, have affected accuracy of recent figures”.
[Vincent Gray]
”
Status:
Noted. Text has been edited.
Emphasis mine.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Comments/wg1-commentFrameset.html
Of course, that 11:28 racist diatribe was by none other than our failed radio talk show host, MonkeyHawk.
Don’t believe me? Check out the link in his name.
http://monkeyhawk.blogspot.com/
”
Replace “Remarkable success” with “usefulness”
No model has yet succeeded in
predicting a future climate change
and until one does they cannot be considered particularly “successful”
[Vincent Gray]
”
Status:
Noted. Text has been edited.
Emphasis mine.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Comments/wg1-commentFrameset.html
Regular
You mean Monkey”boy”, the paragon of bigotry?
“Unstated here is the mega-challenge on how to properly initialize the complete climate
system in our models.
Many tricks are employed that produce an equilibrated state, but not necessarily comfortably close
”
Emphasis mine.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Comments/wg1-commentFrameset.html
GMC–
Why don’t you and Chas get a room?
Your obsession with the dude is really clogging up the bandwidth . . .
”
We always have to be very careful when we discuss “abrupt climate change”. Typically,
such “abrupt”
climate changes take decades to centuries to millenia,
e.g. thermohaline circulation slowdown/collapse(50-100 years), West Antarctic ice sheet collapse(500-1000years) ; Arctic summer sea ice melting roughly a century or so).
[Jerry Mahlman]
”
Status:
The point is well taken, although much faster changes than those cited by the reviewer are now known to occur. We will alter the text to clarify the concept of abrupt climate change.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Comments/wg1-commentFrameset.html
Don’t believe me? Check out the link in his name.
I went there. Pretty boring stuff, unles you are into baseball. What is your point? How is that proof?
“Of course, that 11:28 racist diatribe was by none other than our failed radio talk show host, MonkeyHawk.”
Or . . . someone trying to copy-cat MonkeyHawk . . .
Go to this link.
http://www.wunderground.com/blog/RickyRood/comment.html?entrynum=41&tstamp=200709
Look at the right side of te graph, modern times.
See how CO2 has skyrocketed, while temperatures do not follow. Hmmmm.
Capn
“Or . . . someone trying to copy-cat MonkeyHawk . . .”
Tough to do without his login. Not that there arent a few around here who know how to do that sort of thing.
Sol . . . we’re you being sarcastic? The temps and CO2 are very closely matched.
You’re right that recently the temp hasn’t gone up as fast as CO2, but if you look back over the millenia, you can see that often there are lags between temp and CO2 just as large or larger than the one you pointed out–and they eventually match each other.
Your graph is as close to proof positive as we can get that temps are going to be driven up no doubt sooner rather than later.
Heckler–
Wrong again.
Any poster can link to any webpage. Just ask Regular . . . he did it when he spoofed my nic.
Grunting fish have helped scientists to date the origins of vocal sounds to about 400 million years ago.
Writing in the journal Science, they say it suggests that the ability to communicate through sound emerged very early in the evolution of vertebrates.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7510443.stm
Capn,
Massively off track. The CO2 is off the graph while temperatures have actually fallen. Temperature and CO2 seem to be related, but as the graph shows, one does not drive the other.
SolDevVB posted multiple times,
“Look at the right side of te graph, modern times.
See how CO2 has skyrocketed, while temperatures do not follow. Hmmmm.”
—————
SolDevVB does NOT understand graphs.
http://www.koshland-science-museum.org/exhibitgcc/historical03.jsp
‘The lag between temperature and CO2. (Gore’s got it right.)‘
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/04/the-lag-between-temp-and-co2/
Neither does cosmos.
I’ll explain it for you.
The little blue line represents CO2. Do you see it? There you go. Now look at the right of the graph, See that little blue line is way off the graph? See how it even hit the ‘Y’ in the word ‘Today’? There you go.
Now, the little red line means temperature. Do you see, on the right, where that little blue line takes a sharp dip, then shoots right off the graph? Well that was a pretty hot time and the CO2 was shockingly lower than the temps. Now from that point what does the little red line do? Well lookie lookie. It never makes it back up to that hot time.
Basic cosmos. CO2 rose dramatically while temperature dropped. Very basic indeed.
Heckler
Posted July 18, 2008 at 11:56 am | Permalink
Capn
“Or . . . someone trying to copy-cat MonkeyHawk . . .”
Tough to do without his login. Not that there arent a few around here who know how to do that sort of thing.
========================================
Oh gee, Heckler…. Are you going to name names??? Huh?? Huh?? When you gonna name names, Heckler?? You just cant come on here, and post……… etc, etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseum……
LOL
I don’t usually think Leonard Pitts is all that great, but he hit a grand slam in this editorial about the death of irony and satire:
“But increasingly, that’s who we are in this country: ignorant, irony-impaired and petrified. So maybe we should just cancel the campaign and ask that the last intelligent person turn off the lights when he or she leaves. And bring the last book with you. Nobody here will need it.
“Somewhere between the stained blue dress and the vice president shooting a guy in the face, between Swift-boat lies and “war on terra” alibis, the absurd became the ordinary, facts became optional and satire became superfluous.
“We are beyond satire, my friends. These days, there’s nothing more ridiculous than the truth.”
http://www.kansas.com/205/story/465745.html
I think “‘war on terra’ abilis” should be in the chorus of some song, it is so good.
When satire is used to over think a problem, then it no longer becomes satire, but an ideological can of worms.
Sounds good Steven… You do the lyrics, and I will work on the music LOL
Howdy Chas, how did your burring go?
Chas
WTF are you yapping about?
blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/07/open-thread-717-2/#comment-385698
However, there are many who post here, who ARE part of those groups, or at the very least, part of what those groups stand for… namely, ANTI Government!!
So chas, who would those bloggers be? And to which group(s) do(es) s/he belong?
Interesting link, Cosmos.
Most relevant in my mind was the paragraph that pointed out that CO2 is responsible for only about 1/3rd of Global Warming and the graph is consistent with models predicting global warming of about 3 degrees C in the near term.
And before you science-deniers start whining that that’s “nothing,” remember that heat is energy. More energy means more storms–hurricanes and tornadoes and hail.
I’ve lived in Kansas for 20 years and I saw more hail in the last several years than I ever have before. Last month, it hailed three times in one day at my location.
This is perfectly consistent with more heat energy that creates bigger, more severe mesacyclonic activity.
The “100 year floods” that now seem routine along the upper Mississippi are also consistent with that pattern. Warmer air holds more moisture and dumps more rain when it does rain (as in the tropics now).
I expected your response 3 minutes ago Regular. Your slacking.
Or do I over think a problem by asking you to define the scenario that becomes said can of worms?
Still waiting on your answer on what Bush and Maliki agreed to that they didn’t agree to years ago. Or is that over thinking?
“Draft”
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/draft
“: a preliminary sketch, outline, or version ”
http://hcl.harvard.edu/collections/ipcc/
…
First Order Draft [August 15, 2005]
Second Order Draft [March 3, 2006]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_Panel_on_Climate_Change#IPCC_Fourth_Assessment_Report:_Climate_Change_2007
“The Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) was completed in early 2007.”
#
LLTVET
Posted July 18, 2008 at 12:23 pm | Permalink
I expected your response 3 minutes ago Regular. Your slacking.
Or do I over think a problem by asking you to define the scenario that becomes said can of worms?
Still waiting on your answer on what Bush and Maliki agreed to that they didn’t agree to years ago. Or is that over thinking?
———————————-
Not at all.
I was just giving you the opportunity for you to rethink your position and realize the difference between an event based system and one based on arbitrary dates.
Evidently, the simplified explanation has evaded any conceptualization you had on the matter.
You do understand the difference between events and dates do you not?
SolDevVB posted,
“Basic cosmos. CO2 rose dramatically while temperature dropped. Very basic indeed.”
—————
SolDevVB does NOT understand graphs.
http://www.koshland-science-museum.org/exhibitgcc/historical03.jsp
liar
Main Entry: li·ar
Pronunciation: \?l?(-?)r\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English l?ogere, from l?ogan to lie — more at lie
Date: before 12th century
: a person who tells lies
“Over the last decade global land-surface sets have been able to increase the number of
stations substantially”.
Is untrue.There has been a substantial reduction
in the number of stations since 1980. see T C Peterson and R S Vose 1997 “An Overview of the Global Historical Climatology Network Temperature Database” Bulletin of the Royal Meteorological Society Vol 78, pages 2837-2849. There has been a particularly large reduction in the former Soviet Union. Delete from “decade” on line 30 to “not” on line 33 and replace with “substantial reductions in numbers of stations, and in their reliability, since 1980, have affected accuracy of recent figures”.
[Vincent Gray]
”
Status:
Noted. Text has been edited.
Emphasis mine.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Comments/wg1-commentFrameset.html
cosmos believes that lies, as long as produced by the IPCC, are fine.
How many other lies did the “any one who requests a copy” reviewers miss?
Since I am not a scientist, I can only make observations… However — If the upper atmosphere is somehow cooling…. And if I remember, cool air FALLS…. Then the warmer air RISING will be shoved back down… and remain in the atmosphere, unable to escape properly…
I think that tells me I shouldnt be surprised by the increased rainfall, and the increase of heavier storms (such as hail three times in one day??)
Just an observation…. from a non-scientist…
Capn
“Warmer air holds more moisture and dumps more rain when it does rain (as in the tropics now).”
And what affect does all of that additional cloudcover and precipitation have on global temps?
Wouldnt the climate models have that info?
Oh no, that’s right, they don’t factor that type of stuff in.
And Capn, I’m not a science denier. I simply want all you Warmers to look at ALL of the relevant science. Not just the stuff that supports you’re appocolyptic view.
“namely, ANTI Government!!”
—–
Well Chas, something in the above looks very familiar to me…..what are you saying?? LOL, !!, ROFLMAO, ect.
cosmos & capn,
Yeah.. about those models…
”
Replace “Remarkable success” with “usefulness”
No model has yet succeeded in predicting a future climate change
and until one does they cannot be considered particularly “successful”
[Vincent Gray]
”
Status:
Noted. Text has been edited.
Emphasis mine.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Comments/wg1-commentFrameset.html
“Unstated here is the mega-challenge on how to properly initialize the complete climate
system in our models.
Many tricks are employed that produce an equilibrated state, but not necessarily comfortably close
”
Emphasis mine.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Comments/wg1-commentFrameset.html
Of course regular. And since they always agred to events and not arbitrary deadlines, Was there any change in their agreement?
That’s all I am asking?
How to Raise a Christian Child
1. To begin with, a Christian parent must understand that a child will never learn a lesson unless they are beaten on their naked bottoms until the imprint of the rugged cross is plainly visible on both cheeks. (Proverbs 23:13-14) A clothed bottom is less humiliating and less painful for the wicked child. In fact, the child may feel no pain at all if they are cunning enough to sin while wearing heavy jeans or khaki pants. A youngster who can sit comfortably after a Godly beating will think they have outsmarted you and tend to repeat their misdeed and feel a license to move on to more hardcore sins, like rape and blasphemy. If a child is able to sit down within three days without ointment or a bag of frozen vegetables after their punishment, you have failed as a Christian parent. A good spanking should be traumatic and something the child will remember well into adulthood.
2. Use a heavy object, a ruler is too light, a belt-buckle may cause bleeding and suspicion from liberal democrat schoolteachers if you are careless enough to allow your child to attend a public school. We suggest a heavy King James authentic cowhide leather bound Bible.
3. Find a comfortable place to sit and ask your child to come over and have a seat on your lap. Act as if there is nothing amiss. We suggest that you smile or wink at your child. If it is your daughter, say “Come on over here and sit on daddy’s lap, sweet heart. I want to talk to my little angel for a minute.” If it is your son, we suggest you say, “Hey there, sonny - how’s Dad’s little quarterback? Come on over here and sit on my lap for a minute and let’s talk about Jesus.”
4. As soon as you have the child on your lap, clench his hands so that he cannot move. Immediately flip the child over so that his stomach is across your knees. If the child struggles, give him a good whack across the back of his head and tell him to shut up. Whisper in his ear, “You’re going to get a whole lot worse from Jesus, you rebellious, hateful, little sissy!”
5. This is the point where the child may act like a little demon and start screaming. Be prepared for this wicked outburst. Have an athletic sock in your back pocket and cram it into the child’s mouth. Stuff it back until you get to the stripes at the top of the socks. Don’t worry: if the child is smart enough to remember to breath through their nose, they won’t suffocate.
6. Ready your Bible, and lift it high above your head with one hand. Keep the child secure with your free hand. Scientists agree that the most effective way of securing the child for beating is to clench the back of his neck like a turkey. If they are still struggling, we suggest you raise your voice and say something like, “I’ll give you something to squirm over, you little devil!”
7. Pull down their pants and underwear to reveal their pink little hiney. May sure both cheeks are fully exposed.
8. To ensure that the child is aware of their misdeed, and they never forget it, it is often best to smack the child across the bottom with the Bible as you speak out their misdeed. Each word would be one healthy whack across their naked hind quarters. For example: “YOU” [WHACK!] “DIDN’T” [WHACK!] “EAT” [WHACK] “YOUR” [WHACK] “BRUSSEL” [WHACK] “SPROUTS” [WHACK!] “YOU” [WHACK!] “LITTLE” [WHACK!] “DEMON!” [WACK!] and finishing off with a lighter whack, “did” [whack!] “you?” [whack!]
9. Rebuke the child in the sweet name of Jesus, toss them aside like a used Kleenex and let them roll to the floor to contemplate their sinful nature.
10. After about an hour, when the child has calmed down, have him sit on your lap again and read him some scripture verses about Hell (We recommend, Matthew 13:41-42) from the same Bible you used to beat him with. Let the child know that the punishment he received today is nothing compared to the eternal punishment of Hell where Jesus burns and cooks all the bad little boys and girls who don’t do what their daddy tells them.
#
LLTVET
Posted July 18, 2008 at 12:33 pm | Permalink
Of course regular. And since they always agred to events and not arbitrary deadlines, Was there any change in their agreement?
That’s all I am asking?
———————————–
Who knows what was said without reading a transcript or hearing a recording?
I imagine like most agreements of said nature, there were the usual “If - then and If - while” statements.
Without knowing the conditional statements, assumption of any finite solutions would be speculative at best.
As a balance to the larger than usual number of global cooling posts, a speech by Al Gore:
https://pol.moveon.org/donate/gorechallenge.html?r=3945&id=13269-3981722-expWp2x
OMGorsh! Now RedWhiteNBlue is KSMeadowlark!
no, he’s Capn’A
Nicely done Regular!!!! You are learning to over-think and use Satire. I knew you had it in you.
Heckler–
Look at places in the tropics that receive heavy rainfall.
“Cloud cover” is not associated with lower temps. Far from it.
The burning question for today, is RWNB satarizing satire? - sort of like the “God’s Pottery” act on the show Last Comic Standing?
RedWhiteNBlue is obviously one of the usual progressive Liberal posters as the text of his last post comes from the farce Web Site of the Landover Baptist Church.
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0303/spanking.html
“Cloud cover” is not associated with lower temps. Far from it.
So clouds and moisture in the air don’t effect climate?
Gotcha.
Hmmmm evidently somebody didnt think it was satirical… It is gone now LOL
#
LLTVET
Posted July 18, 2008 at 12:43 pm | Permalink
Nicely done Regular!!!! You are learning to over-think and use Satire. I knew you had it in you.
—————————-
I’m sorry you cannot handle a serious response to your query.
Conditional statements that are unknown to a viewer or reviewer cannot be speculated on without qualify all possible scenarios. Since said scenarios could be potentially infinite, it would be a waste of time.
Mixing the subject of two posts (satire and the one about the Bush/Malaki conference) appears to be your infantile response to my post.
SolDevVB posted July 18, 2008 at 12:31 pm | Permalink
“cosmos believes that lies, as long as produced by the IPCC, are fine.”
————-
SolDevVB believes that all errors made in a “not to be cited” DRAFT are “lies”.
SolDevVB cannot understand that the IPCC did not release (produce) the first and second drafts.
‘First-Order Draft
http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/7758754
“Do Not Cite or Quote”
“Draft”
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/draft
“: a preliminary sketch, outline, or version ”
http://hcl.harvard.edu/collections/ipcc/
…
First Order Draft [August 15, 2005]
Second Order Draft [March 3, 2006]
AR4 was completed in early 2007
Bush before, “If we talk about a time-table for withdrawl, the terrorists will just wait us out.”
Bush now, “Let’s talk about a time-table.”
I’d say that Bush changed his mind, but that would be to assume that he has a mind.
Worst.
President.
Ever.
So it is the contributors to the IPCC report that are liars? Would those be the peer reviewed papers you were talking about?
So a paper is peer reviewed and added to the draft. Then it take some ‘Anyone who requests a copy” reviewer to find the lie? Geez, Who writes and reviews this garbage?
Not to be cited. Ya got that right!!!
I’ve lived in Kansas for 20 years and I saw more hail in the last several years than I ever have before. Last month, it hailed three times in one day at my location.
This is perfectly consistent with more heat energy that creates bigger, more severe mesacyclonic activity. _ CapnAmerica
————–
Baloney. I’ve lived here my entire life also. I’ve seen huge dust storms, monster tornadoes, hail much larger and frequent than this spring, snow drifted over rooftops etc… It’s called Kansas weather.
Weather is not climate.
Americans should be concerned that possibly their next president, the product of Biblically forbidden interracial marriage (2 Corenthians 6:14) was born of a Muslim father and raised in Muslim schools in a region of the world where children are brainwashed into serving the mission of Al-Qaeda from the day their little heads pop out of their mothers’ lady parts. They are programmed like the Manchurian Candidate to snap back into being a militant Muslim when a secret word is said. “Now, I don’t rightly know what that secret word is. We could wind up with a president who turns into a radical Islamic extremist! For the love of Christ! We’re talking about the fate of our Nation!
Even better Regular. I especially liked how you satirized my 12:23 post. “said scenarios” was especially good.
You just can’t seem to handle when someone shows an inconsistency in your ideas, can you? I think that is what Satire is supposed to be.
The fact that Bush and Maliki was associated just made it easier for me.
Latest NOAA Press Release in Total Disagreement with NASA Satellite
16 07 2008
Joe D’Aleo, CCM, Fellow of the AMS
“It was the eighth warmest June on record for the globe, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported Wednesday in the 129 years since records began in 1880. And the first six months of the year were the ninth warmest since record keeping began in 1880, NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center reported. The planet’s average temperature for June was 60.8 degrees Fahrenheit, 0.9 degrees warmer than average for the month.
DON’T BELIEVE A WORD OF IT.”
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/latest-noaa-press-release-in-total-disagreement-with-nasa-satellite/
#
LLTVET
Posted July 18, 2008 at 1:04 pm | Permalink
Even better Regular. I especially liked how you satirized my 12:23 post. “said scenarios” was especially good.
You just can’t seem to handle when someone shows an inconsistency in your ideas, can you? I think that is what Satire is supposed to be.
The fact that Bush and Maliki was associated just made it easier for me.
————————————
It’s your life.
But it appears you always like making three left turns when you could have just made one right turn to accomplish the task.
How ’bout it, Chas. Ready to man up yet?
Provide either evidence, or apology. Name names, smart guy. I dare you. I double dare you.
You can’t. You can’t, because you were talking (or writing) out of your a**, and you posted before thinking. Now you’re caught in a dilemma. You can’t admit error, we know that. Yet you can’t support your allegations.
Hmmmm. What to do, what to do? How ’bout just deny everything - in all caps.
Have we seen that before? Nah! SURELY not!
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6189
Another story the “liberal media” won’t touch–
“Ohio Attorney Files to Lift Stay on ‘04 Election Case, Cites Allegations, Evidence of Massive Fraud by a Number of GOP Operatives”
At a press conference this morning in Columbus, Ohio, Cliff Arnebeck, lead attorney for the plaintiffs in the case of King Lincoln Bronzeville v. Blackwell, announced that he is filing a motion to “lift the stay in the case [and] proceed with targeted discovery in order to help protect the integrity of the 2008 election.”
***
“We anticipate Mr. Rove will be identified as having engaged in a corrupt, ongoing pattern of corrupt activities specifically affecting the situation here in Ohio.”
***
Arnebeck will also “be providing copies of document hold notices to the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform and the U.S. Justice Department for Karl Rove emails from the White House.”
This case has the potential to put some of the most powerful people in the country in jail, according to Arnebeck, as he was joined by a well-respected, life-long Republican computer security expert who charged that the red flags seen during Ohio’s 2004 Presidential Election would have been cause for “a fraud investigation in a bank, but it doesn’t when it comes to our vote.”
“This entire system is being programmed in secret by programmers who have no oversight by anybody,” the expert charged, as Arnebeck detailed allegations of complicity by a number of powerful GOP operatives and companies who had unique access both to the election results as reported in 2004, as well as to U.S. House and Senate computer networks even today.
____________
CONs don’t let a little thing like “majority rule” stop them from ruling the majority. Democracy is far too important to trust to the voters . . .
How about it, GMC?
Why don’t you just do what you always do–claim “victory” and gloat.
Nobody else gives a rat’s ass . . .
Regular
Posted July 18, 2008 at 12:47 pm | Permalink
RedWhiteNBlue is obviously one of the usual progressive Liberal posters as the text of his last post comes from the farce Web Site of the Landover Baptist Church.
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0303/spanking.html
**********
James is correct about this being the source for RWNB’s post, but at the above site my anti-virus program went berserk and there was some not-to-pleasant spam there. I would avoid going to this site.
cosmos_originally
Posted July 18, 2008 at 11:06 am | Permalink
Global cooling(sic) update:
‘NOAA: Eighth Warmest June on Record for Globe‘
Makes you wonder. If Co2 levels are at their highest in the last 800,000 years, why isn’t the globe hotter than it has been over the last 800,000 years?
McCain says “We have succeeded in Iraq”. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
Oh boy…… not another “Mission Accomplished” event!!
Now can we move personnel from Iraq to the real war in Afghanistan?
RWNB: They are on to you. They’re too sharp for you. You must admit that you were using satire and over thinking.
Now do you take requests? Baptists are a bit stale. Can you give us a good Catholic Rendition? You know, something like the nun praying the Rosary and telling Jesus, shut up I’m talking to your mother.
Heh, Steven, Pitts is unfortunately dead-on, though a little behind the curve. Tom Tomorrow’s ”
Sparky” declared irony officially dead a few years back, and Tomorrow complained how it was hard to create absurd cartoons these days that didn’t turn into serious headlines in a few week hence (he was referring to the Bush administration, but the principle is the same).
Re: New Yorker Magazine Cover Page
“President Obama and First Lady — as Seen From the Right-Wing Point of View” might have been the caption. Phil Klein of American Spectator nailed it: “This cartoon is intended to make fun of conservatives as ignorant racists and essentially marginalize any criticism of Obama as moronic.”
Unfortunately for the New Yorker, the cartoon misfired. Blow-ups are likely to be as pandemic in right-wing dorms this fall as were posters of “Che” Guevara in left-wing dorms in the 1970s.”
Patrick J. Buchanan
Human Events
P.S. Capn: For my part, I think Ohio was stolen, but it seems no one wants to go there. . .
“This cartoon is intended to make fun of conservatives as ignorant racists and essentially marginalize any criticism of Obama as moronic.”
Heh, more unintended irony: He’s proving his ignorance by his vapid over-reading of the cartoon, and, by unwittingly defending idiocy, underscores the point of the cartoon.
P.S. Let the right-wing students make posters if they like. I think that would be great!
#
Rage
Posted July 18, 2008 at 1:59 pm | Permalink
“This cartoon is intended to make fun of conservatives as ignorant racists and essentially marginalize any criticism of Obama as moronic.”
Heh, more unintended irony: He’s proving his ignorance by his vapid over-reading of the cartoon, and, by unwittingly defending idiocy, underscores the point of the cartoon.
———————
I know, but it’s fun to re-quote the often ridiculous Patrick J. Buchanan who has a propensity to use quotes to verify quotes of his own.