Since my blog has moved, I can no longer use Bloggers "Follower" gadget. If you are a part of NetWorked blogs, which includes a Facebook page, you can follow through NetworkedBlogs, and I can follow you back. Please come to my new blog - MaggiesNotebook.com, see the NetworkedBlogs widget in the right sidebar and click follow. I will follow back.
"I learned that in extreme situations when human lives and dignity are at state, neutrality is a sin. It helps the killers, not the victims." Elie Wiesel, Holocaust Survivor who lost his family in the Holocaust - Nobel Prize Author
Socialism - Liberalism Quotation
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened." – Norman Thomas
Phelim McAleer, a filmmaker and journalist has done a lot of heavy lifting to get the lies about global warning out to the world. Along with Ann McElhinney, McAleer exposes the hypocrisy of Avatar director, James Cameron. Cameron has told us we must "do with less," and donated $1 million to defeat California's Prop 23, which will suspend The Global Warning Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). New video below.
James Cameron
The very successful and very wealthy Progressive, James Cameron lives quite the lifestyle, and is not at all bothered that you do not, and cannot if extreme and fraudulent green legislation continues to cripple our country. Backing up my "fraudulent" accusation is the news that California lied about emission in the state by 340% to get their "landmark Diesel Law," which among other things, will require every vehicle to have a motor produced no earlier than 2010. The second video is McAleer questioning Al Gore (it's priceless)
Leftist physicist Dr. Denis Rancourt, a former professor and environmental science researcher has bailed on his fellow global warmers, saying the movement is nothing more than a "corrupt social phenomenon," and "an imaginary problem of the First World middleclass." At the same time, the InterAcademy Council has released a damning report on the inefficiencies of the University of East Anglia (UEA) Climate Research Unit (CRU), and the U.N.'s InterGovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). See Dr. Rancourt in a video below.
Dr. Denis Rancourt
The climate change fraud created a firestorm of interest, public amazement, and prompted a deeper investigation after David Holland of the InterAcademy Council tried unsuccessfully to get the IPCC and the CRU to submit the science behind their findings. When emails were released showing a maniacal quest using flawed and tampered-with research to show man-made global warming, the InterAcademy Council (IAC) determined the learn the truth, even as the IPCC did all it could not to co-operate.
Rancourt expresses hostility for Al Gore's "documentary" An Inconvenient Truth. Just my guess, but as a scientist, he is likely hostile about Al's Nobel as well. The film made him ill. [paraphrased]
David Holland is releasing the findings of the IAC investigation. According to Holland, The University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit is "not fit for the purpose," and he suggests "substantial" changes be made.
The IAC, which comprises the world’s top science academies including the UK’s Royal Society, made recommendations to the IPCC to “enhance its credibility and independence” after the Himalayan glaciers report, which severely damaged the reputation of climate science.
It condemned the panel – set up by the UN to ensure world leaders had the best scientific advice on climate change – for its “slow and inadequate response” after the damaging errors emerged.
Among the blunders in the 2007 report were claims that 55 per cent of the Netherlands was below sea level when the figure is 26 per cent.
It also claimed that water supplies for between 75 million and 250 million people in Africa will be at risk by 2020 due to climate change, but the real range is between 90 and 220 million.
The claim that glaciers would melt by 2035 was also rejected.
Professor Julian Dowdeswell of Cambridge University said: “The average glacier is 1,000ft thick so to melt one at 15ft a year would take 60 years. That is faster than anything we are seeing now so the idea of losing it all by 2035 is unrealistic.”
In yesterday’s report, the IAC said: “The IPCC needs to reform its management structure and strengthen its procedures to handle ever larger and increasingly complex climate assessments as well as the more intense public scrutiny coming from a world grappling with how to respond to climate change.”
The review also cast doubt on the future of IPCC chairman Dr Rajendra Pachauri.
Earlier this year, the Daily Express reported how he had no climate science qualifications but held a PhD in economics and was a former railway engineer.
Dr Pachauri has been accused of a conflict of interest, which he denies, after it emerged that he has business interests attracting millions of pounds in funding. One, the Energy Research Institute, is set to receive up to £10million in grants from taxpayers over the next five years.
Speaking after the review was released yesterday, Dr Pachauri said: “We have the highest confidence in the science behind our assessments.
“The scientific community agrees that climate change is real. Greenhouse gases have increased as a result of human activities and now far exceed pre-industrial values.”
The IPCC's Dr. Pachauri remains adamant that he is uniquely qualified and there is no conflict of interest while he raises funds for his own Energy Research Institute. He also says the warmers have "the highest confidence in the science behind their assessments," even though that science is shown to be manipulated, lied about and the "scientists" entirely corrupt. More at Climate Science. More at Watts Up With That? More at AllPainNoGain.
Dr. Denis Rancourt on the Lies of Global Warming (video)
Al and Tipper Gore have purchased a mansion with an ocean view on 1.5 acres with six fireplaces, a swimming pool, spa and fountains and - Oprah lives in the neighborhood. The price tag: $8,875,000. The global warming lie, and especially the fear-mongering insistence that the "oceans would rise" and displace man, land and life, has been profitable for the Gore's. Source: Los Angeles Times
In June 2008, soon-to-be president, Barack Obama, magnanimously assured all of us: "This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow...." but there was no sea level rise. It was all a hoax...a ruse...a money-making scheme, and scientists have now withdrawn their claims. Read
more on sea levels not rising here.
April 19, 2009: PORT-OF-SPAIN, Trinidad and Tobago -- Caribbean nations face "very, very
scary" rises in sea level and intensifying hurricanes, and Florida,
Louisiana and even northern California could be overrun with rising
water levels due to global warming triggered by carbon-based greenhouse
gases, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said Saturday.
Sea Rise
June 30, 2009: The global warming promoting website
RealClimate.org, is under fire yet again from a prominent scientist for
presenting incorrect climate information.
Climatologist Dr. Roger Pielke
Sr. publicly rebuked the website in a June 30, 2009
article for "erroneously
communicating the reality of the how the climate system is actually
behaving." Pielke, the former Colorado State Climatologist and currently
a senior scientist at the University of Colorado in Boulder, countered Real
Climate's claim that warming was "progressing faster than
expected" with the latest data on sea level rise, ocean heat content and
Arctic ice.
Sea levels are not rising, and Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth" has turned out to be inconveniently untruthful. He claimed in the film, for which he won an Oscar and and a Nobel Peace prize, that sea levels could rise up to 20 feet. But in November 2009, Gore told a meeting of Middle Eastern countries the oceans would rise 67 metres, or 220 feet:
“Each one metre of sea level rise is associated with 100 million climate
refugees in the world,” the Nobel laureate told a business forum in Dubai, which could see its famous man-made islands disappear under the waves if his prediction prove true.
“The North Pole ice cap is 40 percent gone already and could be
completely and totally gone in the winter months in the next 5 to 10
years,” he warned.
If the North Pole were to melt it could increase sea levels by 67
metres, Gore said, speaking in the heart of an oil-rich region not known
for its regard for the environment.
The inconvenient truth is, Liberals all over the world have made Al Gore a gazillionaire. He and others continue to suck billions out of world governments and taxpayer monies, and Al and Tipper continue to leave their gargantuan carbon footprint on the world.
Michael Mann, the sidekick to Professor Phil Jones and No. 2 man in the ClimateGate scandal is threatening to sue YouTube for a wildly popular video satire of Mann's hockey-stick graph, now proven to be inaccurate, and known as 'Hide the Decline.' See the offending video below.
The parody video, titled "Hide the Decline," had more than 500,000 viewers on YouTube and received national attention when Rush Limbaugh played it on his radio show. It features a cat with a guitar, a talking tree, and a dancing figure sporting the image of Professor Mann. It's the use of his image that Mann is complaining about, arguing that the video supports "efforts to sell various products and merchandise."
"The guy is crazy to threaten legal action," said Jeff Davis, the President of No Cap and Trade, a large organization that includes the group Mann is threatening to sue, Minnesotans for Global Warming. "A lawsuit would give us full discovery -- and there's a lot to look at in his work."
Follows some background on Michael Mann and his work on climate change, more commonly known as ClimateGate (from a previous article highlighting all of the Global Warming Bullies). The following are emails that unfortunately, for climate scientists, got into the wrong hands, exposing their brash acts to change and distort and hide the truth of data:
Michael E. Mann is an Associate Professor at Pennsylvania State University in the Department of Meteorology and Earth and Environmental Systems Institute. Mann is the creator of the "hockey stick" graph reconstructions of millions of years of tree ring data. He is a lead author to the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Report (IPCC).
*) [Withholding of information/data] "I did this knowing that Phil and I are likely to have to respond to more crap criticism from the idiots in the near future, so best to clean up the code and provide to some of my close colleagues in case the want to test it, etc. Please feel free to use this code for your own internal purposes, but don't pass it along where it may get into the hands of the wrong people."
*) [Using a website to control the message, hide dissent] "Anyway, I wanted you guys to know that you're free to use RC [RealClimate.org - A supposed neutral climate change website] Rein any way you think would be helpful. Gavin and I are going to be careful about what comments we screen through,and we'll be very careful to answer any questions that come up to any extent we can."
*) [Using a website to control the message, hide dissent] "On the other hand, you might want to visit the thread and post replies yourself. We can hold comments up in the queue and contact you about whether or not you think they should be screened through or not, and if so, any comments you'd like us to include."
*) [Corrupting the peer-review process] "I think we have to stop considering "Climate Research" as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to or cite papers in, this journal."
Regulations.gov is having a contest and paying a reward with taxpayer monies, but that is the least of the irony. The administration wants you to make a video to hype Obama's right, and the right of his regime, to make regulations. A video titled Rulemaking Matters! will pay the winner $2500 to tell America why government regulations are a good and necessary thing.
Cass Sunstein, Regulatory Czar - regulating your life
To ease your mind, I feel certain the $2500 is offered responsibly, and will only be paid to a winner who actually pays federal taxes - don't you think?
Remember when Congress refused to create law that declared carbon dioxide a pollutant, and the EPA just declared it so, with Obama's blessing. It didn't become law, it became a regulation. Of the declaration, The Heritage Foundation said "Cap and trade, a climate treaty and EPA regulations are the three ugly step-sisters of climate policy. Since ClimateGate, we now know, without a doubt, what we suspected all along, that human-induced climate change is a lie.
You'll hear in this instructional video that Congress should make the laws (yes, they should, as well as deciding not to make a law - certainly just as valid), but the video says that the "regulators will then decide how the law works. If you watch Glenn Beck, you know he says Cass Sunstein, The Regulatory Czar, is the most dangerous man in American because he can regulate about anything and everything, as he pleases.
Federal agencies develop and issue hundreds of rules and regulations every year to implement statutes written by Congress. Almost every aspect of an individual’s life is touched by federal regulations....With a short 60 to 90 second video, citizens should capture public imagination and use creativity, artistic expression and innovation to explain why regulations are important to everyone,...
Over at regulations.com you can access some 106,055 "Public Submissions" - suggestions of proposed regulations. It will warm your heart to see just how engaged the public is in regulating you and yours.
So, as MensNewsDaily says, we will have a plethora of "Rulemaking Matters" videos posted to YouTube that don't have a chance of winning, but will be propaganda. The Left-wing blogs will have enough propaganda and homage to Cass Sunstein and Climate Change to get them to Fall, and we will all be clear about just how necessary regulations are to the happiness and well being of Barack Obama et al.
Okay, Drudge has up this provocative link: "Obama Science Czar tell students: We can't be #1 indefinitely.... The server is overwhelmed as every conservative blogger wants a piece of this. But the Obama science czar, Dr. John Holden, has prompted plenty of discussion without this headline that I must assume means exactly what it says: America can't always be No. 1 in...(then pick your category and insert it here). Whatever he is saying today to our students, this is a man who believes we should have a planetary regime - a "superagency for population...regulating all food on the international market...The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world...." That's who is talking to your kids today.
John Holdren - Science Czar
To the chagrin of Holden, opponents have taken him at his word. In 1977, about 5 years after he published the suggestion that zero population growth was a good idea, he co- authored with Paul and Anne Erlich, Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment. Here are snippets:
..."coercive," "involuntary fertility control, including "a program of sterlizing women after their second or third child," [which doctors would be expected to do right after a woman gives birth].
"Unfortunately, such a program therefore is not practical for most less developed countries," [due to a lack of physicians present at the time of birth].
Those who criticized Holdren and the Erlichs are accused of "misreading" their writings. They "described" draconian measures, but did not "recommend them, they say.
Yet in 1972, in a paper titled Population and the American Predicament: The Case Against Complacency, (Pages 31-35) John Holdren not only suggests Zero Population Growth, but Zero Economic Growth as well: (Holdren's paper was included in a series of papers featuring at least 12 authors all examining Growth vs. No Growth).
Most students of contemporary American problems seem to have agreed, at least, a that the costs of long-continued population growth would considerably outweigh the benefits;...Do the potential consequences of continued population growth in the United States justify systematic measures to hold fertility at replacement level...?
Should such measures be used to push fertility well below replacement, if it does not drop that far without them, in order to bring the attainment of Zero Population Growth (ZPG) closer than seventy years hence and to render the intervening population increment smaller than some 70 million?...Should there be zero economic growth as well as zero population growth?
Holdren argues that the U.S. population in 1972 of 210 million "is too many" and the "280 million projected in 2040 "is likely to be much too many...(today our population is 309 million), and he says:
"accordingly, a continued decline in fertility to well below replacement should be encouraged with the aim of achieving ZPG before the year 2000...."
It will be no surprise to you that John Holdren is one of the leading advocates of global warming - an obnoxiously loud alarmist - who believes the overpopulated earth ls leading to the demise of the environment. Dr. Tim Ball and Jidi McLeod, writing for Canada Free Press don't hold back in characterizing John Holdren as "another snake...slithering out from the ongoing [ClimateGate] controversy:
In fact, according to files released by CEU hacker or whistleblower, Holdren is involved in what Canada Free Press columnist and noted Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball terms:
"a truculent and nasty manner that provides a brief demonstration of his lack of understanding, commitment on faith and willingness to ridicule and bully people."
Dr. Tim Ball
Ball is alleging that two scientists, Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon, were "authors of excellent work confirming the existence of the Medieval Warm Period," - well-sourced work - which did not fit with the theory that warmists were using to demonstrate that the 20th century was the warmest ever. According to Ball, and now ClimateGate has borne this out, the Climate Research Unit knew their theories of "the 20th Century the warmest ever" were untrue. Baliunas and Soon "destroyed their credibility" - especially that of Hockey Stick developer, Michael Mann," and then Baliunas "politely" withdrew from the climate studies.
Holdren sent a series of emails claiming credit for re-educating a blogger who often quoted Soon and Baliunas - and who was considered a supporter of theirs. In otherwords, he denigrated two entirely credible scientists - Soon and Baliunas.
The thing to remember about Holdren, no matter what we finally hear about his claims that American cannot be No. 1 forever, is that he is willing to sacrifice human life to save the planet, and he thinks a planetary regime is the way to control it all. Holdren was a perfect fit for the Obama administration, which views
total control their personal domaine. For the quote in the first paragraph read a very detailed report on Holdren, his own words and see snapshots of his book at ZombieTime.
As the true loons of global warming pretend that ClimateGate has not happened, we learn that Artic Sea ice is "about to hit normal," for the first time since 2001, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center for this time of year. The U.S. Senate is finally demanding explanation from NASA about their roll in global warming and their flawed climate data.
There's a lot of ClimateGate news out. The following compilation comes through the amazing Climate Depot. Here are some discussions you might be interested in:
Why Climate Models Lie: Article says "climate scientists have been less than truthful" about their data. We certainly know this to be true after ClimateGate, but this is a good overview of deceptions we can attribute to faulty (inaccurate) computer data.
NASA was able to put a man on the moon, but the space agency can't tell you what the temperature was when it did. By its own admission, NASA's temperature records are in even worse shape than the besmirched ClimateGate data.
Christopher Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute says of NASA's four temperature data sets, "three out of the four...stink." Anyway we look at it, NASA employees are government employees, and it pains me to put it that way.
Whitewashing Professor Jones and CRU: Across the pond, where all the data was accumulated and supposedly "organized" by climate-fraud-once-considered-guru, Professor Phil Jones, we learn that Jones and his fraudulent allies have escaped the whole debacle with their reputations "intact." The thing to remember here is that they escaped prosecution because of a 6-month statute of limitations law.
The report makes the amazing statement that 'The scientific reputation of Professor Jones and CRU remains intact," making the reader wonder what such a committee would consider enough to damage a Warming scientist's reputation - nothing it would seem!
Fifteen states are suing the EPA to stop their roll-out of environmental regulations that as yet, are an unsubstantiated need. Remember that Congress failed to pass a law to control greenhouse gases, so Obama handed over control to the EPA under the Clean Air Act.
The states claim that the EPA is using data from the disgraced United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and known these days as the ClimateGate Panel. The plaintiffs want the data verified - and hopefully, they will accept nothing from anyone considered a climate scientist over the past 15 years.
At least 15 states including Florida, Indiana, South Carolina have filed petitions in Washington, D.C., and have joined petitions filed earlier by Virginia, Texas and Alabama.
The Obama administration has long said it would attack greenhouse gas emissions with EPA regulation if Congress failed to pass a climate bill.
The EPA is set to issue regulations later this month that would require autos and light trucks to increase energy efficiency. That would trigger rules on large emitters like power plants requiring them to get permits showing they are using the best technology available to reduce emissions [ID:nN17158103].
The state petitions call for the EPA to reopen hearings on the so-called "endangerment finding" the agency issued last year declaring the emissions dangerous to people.
"If EPA doesn't reopen the hearings we will move forward to try to stop them from regulating greenhouse gases," said Brian Gottstein, an assistant to Virginia's Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli.
The U.N. climate panel, the IPCC has made things up and ignored other "things,"...again. This time, the IPCC claimed tourism had been down significantly due to wildfires - "millions of dollars," of losses according to this decidedly unscientific panel.
Wildfires
The source used by the IPCC was British Columbia Tourism newsletter, which said:
It is possible that the stronger performance of regions far from the fires is due to travellers who changed their plans to visit these regions instead of those heavily affected by the forest fires.
Obviously, the newsletter was not saying that tourism was down, but that tourism in the area of the forest fires had simply moved to regions farther away from the fires.
ClimateQuotes has been following the story for awhile now, and has all the reference links, including spelling errors made by the "scientists." ClimateQuotes cites the exact IPCC sections and the discussion that happened around the wildfires and tourism. The IPCC claims are incorrect and the bottom line is, they knew it and refused to do anything about it.
I'm sure it's a noble cause for Californians to lose their jobs due to the state's has insane, needless green standards. Fall on your own sword, Californians - after all, each of you are just cheeky enough to insist on driving and bar-b-queing, and turning on the lights when it's dark - and you know you don't all use CFL's. Shame on you for existing.
Dr. Phil Jones, the head perpetrator in the ClimateGate scandal made his first public appearance since we learned that he had manipulated climate change data and he admitted that 40 percent of his warming data from the last 60 years was due to urban influences. If he admits to 40 percent, the reality is the percentage is probably much higher.
Phil Jones
The fragile and contentious house of climate change came tumbling down when citizens began to exercise their "right to know" on both sides of the Atlantic through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Jones refused to comply, directed those under him to ignore the requests, while at the same time he directed them to change some data, and eventually, his emails were hacked and placed on line.
Things have not been good for the disgraced Jones lately, who admitted yet another astonishing piece information when asked how often scientists asked to see his "raw data, methodology and computer codes." He replied "NEVER." Remarkable when you realize that climate change is about funding projects from the pockets of taxpayers, directly to the Al Gores and Phil Joneses of the world community.
Appearing before the U.K.'s Science and Technology Committee, onlookers say Jones' hands were trembling and he was pale. Appropriate for a man who used broad strokes to impose daunting climate change technology not only on his country, but on all the industrialized world.
Today, the UK Guardian said Jones admitted that "radically different finding" in his research, which Jones said showed "a slightly different conclusion" proved that urban influences played a big part in global warming:
But for the first time he did concede publicly that when he tried to
repeat the 1990 study in 2008, he came up with radically different
findings. Or, as he put it, "a slightly different conclusion". Fully 40%
of warming there in the past 60 years was due to urban influences.
"It's something we need to consider," he said.
Jones said he ignored the FOIA's because among climate scientists, it was not "standard practice" to release information and the data was "publicly available from American websites.
Watts Up With That says huh uh. Jones' claim that it was "not standard practice" to release data is not truthful, and prints documents proving Jones shared information when the requester was known not to be a skeptic, and kept information from those who were.
The Institute of Physics lashed out against Jones in the hearing, and had already submitted a 13-paragraph document to Parliament concerning the impropriety of Jones' actions. The following are some telling snippets of that document:
1) unless the disclosed e-mails are proved to be
forgeries or adaptations, worrying implications arise for the integrity
of
scientific research in this field and for the credibility of the
scientific
method as practised in this context.
2) The CRU e-mails as published on the internet provide prima facie
evidence of determined and co-ordinated refusals to comply with
honourable
scientific traditions and freedom of information law.
4) Published reconstructions may represent only a part of the raw data
available
and may be sensitive to the choices made and the statistical techniques
used.
Different choices, omissions or statistical processes may lead to
different
conclusions. This possibility was evidently the reason behind some of
the
(rejected) requests for further information.
5) The e-mails reveal doubts as to the reliability of some of the
reconstructions
and raise questions as to the way in which they have been represented;
for
example, the apparent suppression, in graphics widely used by the IPCC, of proxy results for recent decades
that do
not agree with contemporary instrumental temperature measurements.
6) There is also reason for concern at the intolerance to challenge
displayed in
the e-mails.
This impedes the process of scientific 'self correction', which is vital
to the
integrity of the scientific process...
7) ...The e-mails illustrate the
possibility of networks of like-minded researchers effectively excluding
newcomers. Requiring data to be electronically accessible to all, at the
time
of publication, would remove this possibility.
10) ...most of the e-mails were exchanged with researchers in
a number of other leading institutions involved in the formulation of
the IPCC's conclusions on
climate change. In so far as
those scientists were complicit in the alleged scientific malpractices,
there
is need for a wider inquiry into the integrity of the scientific process
in
this field.
Dr. Phil Jones was forced to step down as the head of the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit for at least the duration of the investigation.
Al Gore recently lamented that we can't wish away climate change just because some inaccuracies have been found - referring to the full blown ClimateGate scandal sweeping the entire globe. The climate-magnet says there are "at least two" oopsees! in ClimateGate, just for full disclosure, I suppose. But, Al, Al, Al, there are so many more than two, and they aren't mistakes. They are purposeful manipulations of data, and the inclusion of unsupported stats - meaning no peer review. What a piece of work you are; you make Charlie Rangel's ethics look laudable.
See a video below.
Al Gore
In his New York Times editorial, Gore said no matter ClimateGate, we still face "an unimaginable calamity requiring large-scale, preventative measures to protect human civilization...." Of course we do (eye roll). What a diva.
He lashed out at America, and our reluctance to roll over on carbon emission regulations. We are guilty of "exploitive behavior in the marketplace," he said, and we label those trying to fix our behavior, and make the reforms, "socialists. Mr. Gore is distressed.
Our "rule of law as an instrument of human redemption" is at stake, he says. We have a "hubris of market fundamentalism." That hubris led to the "democracy sphere" being pummeled by "the market sphere." Damn capitalism!
Mr. Gore's message goes far beyond climate change. Anyone thinking God wasn't looking our for this country in the Gore-Bush election should think again (don't ask me where God was looking in November 2008).
But Gore buys carbon offsets to cover his footprint. In other words, he pays some amount figured to value a ton of carbon emissions, and whomever he buys the carbon offset (carbon credit) from, pays young boys in third world countries to plant trees in that amount, or something similar. If the trees die, are burned off, plowed under, or the money for trees magically ends up in someone's pocket, nothing is offsetting anything.
Under the radar is Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX). While on the Board of the charitable Joyce Foundation, Barack Obama helped award more than $1 million in grants to test the viability of a carbon credit market, and then to launch the privately-owned concern. Gore's partner, Maurice Strong, (more about him a few paragraphs down) is on the Board of CCX. Obama's Cap and Trade legislation will likely be a boon to CCX. Maybe it's a Chicago-thing.
...if the day ever comes when federal government regulations require greenhouse-gas emitters -- and that’s almost everyone -- to participate in cap-and-trade, then those who have created a market for the exchange of carbon credits are in a position to control the outcomes. And that moves Al Gore [and Maurice Strong] front and center.
But here's the kicker. Gore really is on the cutting edge of carbon emissions, because he buys his carbon credits from his own company, Generation Investment Management (GIM)...but it is how he buys the credits from himself that is interesting, and it comes down to this: he buys stock in his own company, and the company loans money to other wealthy individuals or company's who are investing in green technology of some kind. And Gore and company's stock conceivably rises and the profits roll in. More about this below.
In his New York Times op-ed, Gore "wishes" man-made global warming was an illusion - and of course, it is just that, but you and I don't have the intelligence to know it, and to realize that this industry is his personal cash cow...he was the first, and he has the profile.
In the op-ed:
1) Gore admits the U.N. climate change panel, the IPCC, published a "flawed" "over-estimate" of the melting rate of Himayalan glaciers. But it was not an "over-estimate," or an "exaggeration," as Gore says. It was a magazine interview with one climate scientist - no evidence to support the claim, and zero evidence cited.
Yet, the IPCC treated Dr. Syed Hasnain's comments as science and published them under protests from other experts in the filed of glacierology.
Now it appears that conflict of interest charges are about to go to a
higher level.
The “IPCC 2035 glacier error” has been used to solicit funds for new
projects, and guess where the money goes?
This PDF File is from the EU’s HighNoon
website, and shows how the EU set up a project to
research the ‘rapid retreat’ of glaciers in the Himalayas based on the
bogus IPCC report. Some of the EU taxpayers’ money put into this
project has gone to TERI, which is run by Dr. Rajendra Pachauri.
2) Gore regrets the inaccurate information about the Netherlands - which raised the ire of Dutch officials, who said the IPCC's vaunted 2007 report on climate change may "invalidate all claims that the last decades were the hottest ever...."
3) He says it is "worth noting" that scientists "probably underestimated the range of sea-level rise in this century," whatever the word "underestimated" means to him. The oceans are not rising. In 2008, soon-to-be president, Barack Obama said "this was the moment the oceans began to slow...., but no, the oceans never began to rise. The claims of rising oceans have been withdrawn. Nature Magazine published the article making the claims, and now, for the first ever, have retracted the data.
4) Gore mentions the "stolen" e-mail messages from the U.K.'s University of East Anglia, which showed that all manner of data had been manipulated to show false results. After many ignored Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for certain data controlled by leading scientist, Phil Jones, (Gore calls the requests "an onslaught of hostile, make-work demands from climate skeptics) - it appears someone on the inside leaked the telling emails. Gore says Jones and his buddies "may not have adequately followed the requirements of the FOIA" laws. Right. What about the inaccurate data and the efforts to "hide the decline." And then there's the Fudge Factor. Gore doesn't go there.
But keep in mind that Chris Horner, a writer and researcher, has been forced to sue NASA - right here in the U.S., not the U.K., for copies of warming data that he suspects is cooked by the NASA scientist. And this unfortunate quote from Hansen surfaced today - ...a team of Government scientists has concluded that there has been no significant change in average temperature or rainfall in the U.S. over that entire period [going back nearly 100 years].
So, Gore himself mentions five mistakes, but fails to mention theses:
1) Mountain ice data in the Andes, Alps and in Africa has been discredited. This time, the IPCC accepted a geography student's dissertation as gospel and published it, and then accepted further data from a mountain climber. Both were considered "authoritative assessment,"by the IPCC. They were no such thing.
2) The emails from University of East Anglia (UEA) showed deception in numerous areas, not just one. One of import is American Michael Mann's "hockey stick graph," which omitted the period of Medieval Warming to show more recent warming as the warmest ever. That little adventure by Phil Jones and Michael Mann is known as "hide the decline," taken from an email between the two men. It wasn't a mistake. It was manipulation and deception.
4) The media has been at the heart of every piece of bogus reporting. No challenges...just adoration for these imperious scientists with one goal, to keep the funds flowing in their direction. Where is the vetting from the media? If they are not capable of ferreting out untruths, they have also refused to print dissenting viewpoints. When the hacked emails were made public, no one reported it but the Brits, conservative blogs and FOXNews. From Tom Bethell, The American Spectator:
Here, the betrayers of science have found that public opinion is easily manipulated, especially with press cooperation. The principles that, starting in the 17th century, turned science into one of the great human enterprises can be subverted. Most Americans—most people in the world—know so little about these things that the methods of science can be twisted with hardly anyone noticing.
Today, many scientists and opinion leaders think that if an elite consensus in favor of certain “policies” can be generated, the underlying science must be right. The corrupt system of “peer review” will reliably exclude dissenters, and if the naysayers continue making themselves heard they will be called denialists, tools of right-wing talk radio, etc.
5) Weather data from China was manipulated, and an American scientist at the University of Albany, Dr. Wei-Chyung Wang was a Jones collaborator.
Al Gore is the Chairman of the Board of Alliance for Climate Protection, and Chairman of Generation Investment Management (GIM). Gore and his silent partner, Maurice Strong, a former senior adviser to U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, got their groove on back in 1995. Gore, in a speech, trumpeted the exceptional work of Massachusetts-based Molten Metal Technology, Inc. (MMTI). Seems they invented a process for recycling metals from waste in.
In his speech, he failed to note that Strong owned MMTI, along with other close associates like his former top Senate aide, Peter Knight, who is the President of GIM (read about Knight below), and failed to mention that MMTI received in excess of $25 million in Department of Energy grants, but completely failed to prove that their methodology - how to recycle metals - actually worked. Nevermind. They would receive another $8 million in federal funds.
Gore's stock in MMTI soared. When the DOE began to catch on, and Strong and Gore knew that their golden goose had laid the last of its golden eggs, they sold off over $15 million in shares at the high price - then a few days later, quietly on a Sunday, announced the lethal news and left shareholders watching the stock plummet to $5.00 a share from $35.00. Lawsuits followed.
Now about top aide, former lobbyist, former Bill Clinton campaign manager, and current president of MMTI: An investigation was underway to determine how a gift of stock worth $20,000 from MMTI ended up in Peter Knight's son's ownership. Janet Reno came along and shut-down the look-see. It's convoluted but the bottom line is, Franklin Haney, III, the chairman of MMTI, was indicted on 42 counts charging him with making illegal donations to the 1996 Clinton-Gore campaign.
Henry Paulson, Bush's Treasury Secretary and former Goldman Sachs CEO, is Gore's co-founder at Generation Investment Management (GIM). Other GIM co-founders also have a background with Goldman Sach.
From Human Events (linked below and a few paragraphs up):
...as GIM chairman, Gore has not been forthcoming, according to Forbes magazine. Little is known about his firm’s finances, where it gets funding and what projects it supports
An Arkansas company, Winrock International, has an employee sitting on the IPCC panel. Winrock provides "carbon-advisory services."
Winrock has received government grants from the EPA, USAID and the Departments of Labor, State and Commerce, as well as from the Nature Conservancy (whose chairman used to be Henry Paulson).
I'll end with another quote from Human Events - October 2007:
The bulletin of the World Rainforest Movement says that members of a United Nations-sponsored group called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stand to gain by approving Gore’s carbon-trading enterprise.
The IPCC has devised what it says is a scientific measure of the impact of greenhouse gases on global warming. In fact, the critics charge, the IPCC sanctions a mechanism that mainly promotes the sham concept of carbon exchange.
Thanks to Scotty Starnes Blog for the video reminding us that we cannot control Mother Nature.
FAIR USE: This blog may contain copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner or may be authorized or licensed for publication at this site only. Permission to copy, republish or reproduce such material must be obtained from the original copyright owner.
Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Important Notice
Patrons of this Blog are advised that they will be held responsible for any unlawful, harassing, libelous, abusive, threatening, or harmful material of any kind or nature posted by their respective ISP. Patrons are cautioned not to transmit via comments, including links to any material that encourages conduct that could constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or otherwise violate any applicable local, state, national or international law or regulation. Comments here are typically unmoderated and unedited. The fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes the site owner's endorsement of commenters' views.
![Twitter](<a href="http://www.twitter.com/maggiesnotebook"><img src="http://twitter-badges.s3.amazonaws.com/follow_me-b.png" alt="Follow maggiesnotebook on Twitter"/></a>){kind=small}
