Creepy at the EPA
BPSDB
The latest Climate Denial Crock of the Week is up with Sinclair taking on the EPA censorship hoax, discussed in detail in Carlin Lives! Funnier than ever
Added to: Climate Denial Crock of the Week and Carlin Lives! Funnier than ever
APS to blame humans, not God, for climate change
Commenter John Mashey noted that “Outpouring of Scientists Rejecting Man-Made Climate Fears!” was too long and really needed to be two posts. True enough, hence APS to blame humans, not God, for climate change. So if you read the former, you need not read the new post as it is merely a cut and paste with the sole addition of:
From the APS Executive minutes “…to adopt an agnostic stance on the scientific evidence…” is the rather thin, even lame justification for the title, but I simply could not resist🙂 .
Has Hell Frozen Over?
Reality Check reports that Singer Resigns from Environmental Geology Board:
I did not mention that it actually was the well-known climate sceptic Fred S. Singer who – by asking for my opinion in a mail – evoked my attention to it. I replied to him, saying that I thought the paper was nonsense. Singer’s answer may be surprising: He agreed and announced his resignation as an Advisory Editor of Environmental Geology.
Personally I think Singer is just repositioning himself for the next stage of the Denial game, but I guess we’ll see.
More importantly, Werner has been covering the latest Chilingar et al. embarrassment (L. F. Khilyuk and G. V. Chilingar – RCwiki for the previous one):
Hooray for Dan Satterfield
Two weeks ago I’d never heard of him, now I find myself mentioning him again for two reasons. First, he has really upset Denver Weather Examiner Tony Hake by engaging Denier dreck on Twitter. Clearly I need to use Twitter more effectively … or all of us do.
Hake chooses to spin the incident as “An example why global warming alarmists are losing ground.” Just the title of that post puts the lie to Hake’s claim to being a neutral, disinterested journalist. In fact he regularly posts the most outrageous Denier fabrications as if they were legitimate news articles, completely without context, or noting that scientists have shown that his fraud de jour is bunk.
Second, I (mostly) like what Dan did with the 5-Year Average Global Temperature Anomalies – 1880 to 2008.
In Is The Planet Getting Warmer??- Here’s NASA’s Version Dan juxtaposed two screen shots from the animation:
I feel it is important to include the full animation (which he does link) and the temperature trend (below) lest it seem like cherry picking two particular years, but I find the impact of the juxtaposition to be very powerful.
Solve Climate: Top 10 Bogus Statements of the Climate Debate
SolveClimate takes down the ten main fables circulating around the current American political debate about climate. It is interesting to note that they are all about the politics and economics of taking action rather than the science or consequences of inaction.
A classic piece of Red Herring propaganda; they not only lie, but reframe the question as they do it. That way even as the opposition addresses the lies, they still aren’t getting their main message out. And the winners are:
#10 BS: The United States can’t make a firm commitment to reduce greenhouse gases until China and India do.
#9 BS: Coal will be with us for a long time to come.
#8 BS: The answer to energy security is to produce more oil, coal and gas here at home.
#7 BS: We are powerless to stop mountaintop removal.
#6 BS: Putting a price on carbon is a “national energy tax”.
#5 BS: By increasing energy prices, cap and trade will hurt consumers in the depths of a recession.
#4 BS: Consumers will pay thousands of dollars more for energy every year.
#3 BS: All of this spending on a “new energy economy” is placing a terrible debt on our children.
#2 BS: Climate action is a “growth-killing millstone”.
#1 Bogus Statement in the climate debate today: Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is a choice between “liberty or tyranny.”
Rebuttals are at Top 10 Bogus Statements of the Climate Debate
America’s Climate Choices
Vodpod videos no longer available.
more about “America’s Climate Choices“, posted with vodpod
Commenter paulm shared this site from The National Academies: “Policy advice, based on science, to guide the nation’s response to climate change. Learn about the National Academies America’s Climate Choices study from the experts who are working on it.”
There is a fair amount of documentation from the “Summit on America’s Climate Choices’ site which can be useful for education.
In northern Canada, an area of about two million square miles contains rivers that collectively move about 276 cubic miles of fresh water into the ocean every year. … This means that years of both especially low and especially high streamflow (years of particularly low and particularly high rainfall) now happen more often than they did in the middle of the 20th century. Earth Gauge
We give our consent every moment that we do not resist.
Denier “Challenge” aka Deathwatch Update: Day 282 … still no evidence.
Comment Policy
Comments that are not relevant to the post that they appear under or the evolving discussion will simply be deleted, as will links to Denier spam known to be scientific gibberish
- The “Mostly” Open Thread is for general climate discussion that is not relevant to a particular post. Spam and abuse rules still apply;
- The “Challenging the Core Science” Comment Thread is for comments that purport to challenge the core science of anthropogenic climate change.
Not bad! Although I don’t visit your blog much but I must say that you always post amazing information and the theme is quite good. Keep us updated mate! I love your blog and will keep on appreciating your effort every time I visit.