If you took my earlier advice, your high schools and public libraries now have copies of Chris Horner’s
Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming. (Twenty-three weeks on the New York Times Best Sellers list!) Now I can heartily recommend an excellent book for your elementary schools’ and middle schools’ libraries, too: Holly Fretwell’s,
The Sky is Not Falling.
In 115 pages, Fretwell adeptly covers the difficult philosophies of markets, profits, and cost/benefit analysis; the alternative energy sources of nuclear, wind, and solar; the science of hurricanes, glaciers, and Arctic melting; and the policy solutions of Kyoto, CAFÉ increases, ethanol, and carbon taxes!
Use this book to protect your children’s minds from the ideas of intrepid liberals who would harm the economy, further stratifying the classes into the energy-haves and the have-nots, all to guard against a possible calamity predicted by models that can’t account for the seen reality of a decade of no temperature increase.
Reprinted from ICECAP.us
Temperature peaked in 1998 and have shown no warming for a decade now. Many scientists have been remarking about this trend for several years but no one takes heed, preferring to believe models than actual data. Here is the satellite derived global temperature trend since 1979. Note the cooling globally near the volcanically active periods of the early 1980s and 1990s. Note also the warm spike associated with the super El Nino that seemingly marked the beginning of the end of the warm Pacific trend that began in 1978.
Note the rebound cooling as a series of 3 La Ninas in 4 years helped cool the earth in the last 1990s. Temperatures rebounded a bit in the early 2000s with a slight rebound in the Pacific warmth, three El Ninos and a volcanic aerosol-free stratosphere, but the trend since 2001 has been flat and at a level considerably below the peak of 1998. This lack of warming has occurred despite the increases in carbon dioxide.
Indeed, when comparing this satellite derived temperature trend the last decade with the carbon dioxide increases as seasonally adjusted from Scripps, we find NO CORRELATION (just 0.07 r squared!!!)
See larger image here.
Global warming is over. Man was never responsible. See full blog here.
So it seems that Europe’s vaunted Emissions Trading Scheme – allowance of which under Kyoto they fought against tooth and nail, only to look at their soaring emissions and decide in 2001 was necessary, and which was unveiled in 2005 as a singular European achievement – is double-dipping, counting the emission ration coupons twice (all of which were given away to incumbent industry, anyway, but which didn’t stop the utilities from including them in the newly-spiked consumer price for electricity).
“[G]reen business think-tank E3 International claimed that around 18m allowances had been double counted, making it impossible for independent observers to verify the environmental benefits of the scheme.”
In reply, “The European Commission dismissed E3’s findings, claiming that it ‘can confirm that the number of allowances put out of circulation [retired] in 2005 and 2006 corresponds to the number of verified emissions reported by companies in 2005 and 2006… Any allegation that there would have been double counting is pertinently incorrect’.”
This is fairly rich coming from the people who continuously changed their claim(s) of what 1990 emissions were, sometimes more than once a year, even 16 years after the fact and, as luck would have it, in their favor. Also, as my colleague Iain Murray reminds me, as an institution whose auditors have failed to sign off on their accounts for 16 years in a row.
The EU's emissions trading scheme (ETS) has been accused of systematic double counting of carbon allowances by a new report released last week.
The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) just issued the final installment of its year-long scare-the-pants-off-the-public assessment of global warming.
It has been billed as the summit that could help save the planet, but the latest United Nations climate change conference on the paradise island of Bali has itself become a major contributor to global warming.
Should we be turning our turkey drippings into fuel for our cars instead of gravy?
Though a great idea, it’s still not cost competitive. But many are looking to Congress for this gravy-boat: “producers of U.S. biodiesel, traditionally made from soybeans, are fighting a joint bid by oil giant ConocoPhillips and meat processor Tyson Foods Inc. for access to a credit ($1 per gallon) for “renewable diesel” fuel they would make from animal fat,” according to Jeffrey Ball in his WSJ article, “As Energy Prices Soar, U.S. Industries Collide,” (subscription required). That tax credit is then paid by those at the bottom of this pecking order—taxpayers—after all.
And though originally promised to be economically competitive with crude oil at $50 a barrel, crude oil will now have to be at $130 a barrel before, specifically, palm-oil based biodiesel is competitive. Large amounts of petroleum products are used in the planting and harvesting of soy and the transportation of the fuel. "Biodiesel is inextricably linked to oil," said Wallace Tyner, an agricultural economist at Purdue University.
Therein lies the problem with using Tom’s fat to drive us home from Grandma’s Thanksgiving dinner.
Last month, professor Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology spoke to the 350 students at St. Marks School in Providence, R.I., on the science of global warming.
A U.N. that can't save the world from war, famine, disease and pestilence now releases a report saying global warming will cause all of the above — and it's your SUV that's doing it.
RSS Updates 
RSS E-Mail Updates 
CEI.org 