Need to know????

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by nwagner;441836BTW ML, have you heard of the WI Sierra Club chapter's laughable alternative proposal for that distaterous coal power plant proposal? The one that asserts that we can replace the plant with a +$2 billion network of solar panels along our low solar output state.[URL="http://smiley.smileycentral.com/download/index.jhtml?partner=ZSzeb098_ZSYYYYYYKUUS&utm_id=7 926"

[/url]

I was aware the the PUC turned down the application for the new "clean coal" plant but not the alternatives.

We will have much higher electric rates soon. The "greens" are in control and they only accept solar and wind which are the too most expensive ways to produce electricity.

Arnold from CA just raised the bar by mandating energy compaines produce 33% of their energy from renewable(and expensive) sources.

I'm sure it will be in our area soon.

[nwagner]

Originally Posted by mlarson

I was aware the the PUC turned down the application for the new "clean coal" plant but not the alternatives.

We will have much higher electric rates soon. The "greens" are in control and they only accept solar and wind which are the too most expensive ways to produce electricity.

Arnold from CA just raised the bar by mandating energy compaines produce 33% of their energy from renewable(and expensive) sources.

I'm sure it will be in our area soon.

And just think, these are the same idiots that are fighting a proposed huge wind farm near the Horicon Marsh because it might kill a few birds and because the experience of a handful (probably not even a dozen) of tree huggers would not like seeing them in the distant background of the trails.

[nwagner]

Originally Posted by mlarson

We will have much higher electric rates soon. The "greens" are in control and they only accept solar and wind which are the too most expensive ways to produce electricity.

You forgot to mention cow poop.

[Michael Larson]

Category: CO2 is life


Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is Not Pollution

"CO2 for different people has different attractions. After all, what is it? - it’s not a pollutant, it’s a product of every living creature’s breathing, it’s the product of all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and photosynthesis, it’s a product of all industrial burning, it’s a product of driving – I mean, if you ever wanted a leverage point to control everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream. So it has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality."

Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Atmospheric Science, MIT

Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is not pollution and Global Warming has nothing to do with pollution.

The average person has been misled and is confused about what the current Global Warming debate is about, greenhouse gases. None of which has anything to do with air pollution.

People are confusing Smog, Carbon Monoxide (CO) and the pollutants in car exhaust with the life supporting, essential trace gas in our atmosphere, Carbon Dioxide (CO2). Pollution is already regulated under the Clean Air Act and regulating Carbon Dioxide (CO2) will do absolutely nothing to make the air you breath "cleaner". Regulating Carbon Dioxide (CO2) through either 'Carbon Taxes' or 'Cap and Trade' policies will simply make energy (electricity, gasoline, diesel fuel, propane, heating oil ect...) much more expensive and severely cripple the economy.

[Michael Larson]

Category: Global Warming Over? (Let's really look at the science)

Scientists urge caution on global warming
By: Erika Lovley
November 25, 2008 01:22 PM EST

Climate change skeptics on Capitol Hill are quietly watching a growing accumulation of global cooling science and other findings that could signal that the science behind global warming may still be too shaky to warrant cap-and-trade legislation.

While the new Obama administration promises aggressive, forward-thinking environmental policies, Weather Channel co-founder Joseph D’Aleo and other scientists are organizing lobbying efforts to take aim at the cap-and-trade bill that Democrats plan to unveil in January.

So far, members of Congress have not been keen to publicly back the global cooling theory. But both senators from Oklahoma, Republicans Tom Coburn and Jim Inhofe, have often expressed doubts about how much of a role man-made emissions play.

“We want the debate to be about science, not fear and hypocrisy. We hope next year’s wave of new politics means a return to science,” said Coburn aide John Hart. “It’s the old kind of politics that doesn’t consider any dissenting opinions.”

-----
Data from the same source shows that during five of the past seven decades, including this one, average U.S. temperatures have gone down. And the almanac predicted that the next year will see a period of cooling.

“We’re worried that people are too focused on carbon dioxide as the culprit,” D’Aleo said. “Recent warming has stopped since 1998, and we want to stop draconian measures that will hurt already spiraling downward economics. We’re environmentalists and conservationists at heart, but we don’t think that carbon is responsible for hurricanes.”

[Michael Larson]

Category:Quieting the voices of dissent

The price of dissent on global warming
David Bellamy | November 25, 2008

WHEN I first stuck my head above the parapet to say I didn't believe what we were being told about global warming, I had no idea what the consequences would be. I am a scientist and I have to follow the directions of science, but when I see that the truth is being covered up I have to voice my opinions.

According to official data, in every year since 1998, world temperatures have been getting colder, and in 2002 Arctic ice actually increased. Why, then, do we not hear about that? The sad fact is that since I said I didn't believe human beings caused global warming, I've not been allowed to make a television program.

My absence has been noticed, because wherever I go I meet people who say: "I grew up with you on the television, where are you now?" ...........

I've seen evidence, which I believe, that says there has not been a rise in global temperature since 1998, despite the increase in carbon dioxide being pumped into the atmosphere. This makes me think the global warmers are telling lies: CO2 is not the driver. The idiot fringe has accused me of being like a Holocaust denier, which is ludicrous.

Climate change is all about cycles. It's a natural thing and has always happened. When the Romans lived in Britain they were growing very good red grapes and making wine on the borders of Scotland. It was evidently a lot warmer.

If you were sitting next to me 10,000 years ago, we'd be under ice. So thank God for global warming for ending that ice age; we wouldn't be here otherwise.

People such as former American vice-president Al Gore say that millions of us will die because of global warming, which I think is a pretty stupid thing to say if you've got no proof. And my opinion is that there is absolutely no proof that CO2 has anything to do with any impending catastrophe. The science has, quite simply, gone awry.

In fact, it's not even science any more; it's anti-science.

There's no proof, it's just projections, and if you look at the models people such as Gore use, you can see they cherry-pick the ones that support their beliefs. To date, the way the so-called Greens and the BBC, the Royal Society and even political parties have handled this smacks of McCarthyism at its worst.

Global warming is part of a natural cycle and there's nothing we can actually do to stop these cycles. The world is now facing spending a vast amount of money in tax to try to solve a problem that doesn't actually exist.

[Michael Larson]

Category:Trusting Models and "Science"

Even though the computer models have never yielded a single result that matches observations, any criticism of the models is met with some sort of complex justification that is beyond the comprehension of the general public so it is readily accepted by the masses and those questioning the validity of the models are vilified by the promoters of the AGW agenda as skeptics and deniers who are in the pockets of big oil.

The sole support for AGW is the climate models, and the sole support for the climate models with respect to CO2 is the forcing parameter. There is no actual physical rational for the forcing parameter, because it was simply contrived from the assumption that observed warming of 0.6C was due entirely to a 100ppmv increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration. There was never any verification of this parameter either by theory or observation. There is no justification for this parameter based on the physical properties of CO2, because the molecular configuration of the CO2 molecule precludes any significant effect from CO2 beyond a concentration of 300ppmv, and the current concentration is 386ppmv. more(PDF)

[Michael Larson]

Category: Sea Level Rise or Lack Thereof

Defying Predictions, Sea Level Rise Begins to Slow

World's oceans rise slower since 2005, fail to display predicted accelerating trend.

Satellite altimetry data indicates that the rate at which the world's oceans are rising has slowed significantly since 2005. Before the decrease, sea level had been rising by more than 3mm/year, which corresponds to an increase of about one foot per century. Since 2005, however, the rate has been closer to 2mm/year.
The decrease is significant as global climate models predict sea level rise to accelerate as atmospheric CO2 continues to increase. In the 1990s, when such acceleration appeared to be occurring, some scientists pointed to it as confirmation the models were operating correctly.


--------------------
Anyone still want to trust computer models and the politician's dependence on them to promote the green agenda?

[Kenneth Lott]

oooh!... 2mm a year is scary... I am going to buy me a house boat and some hip waders!

[Michael Larson]

Global Warming Alarmist Predictions Go Splat!!

Andrew Bolt
December 19, 2008 12:00am

GLOBAL warming preachers have had a shocking 2008. So many of their predictions this year went splat.

Here's their problem: they've been scaring us for so long that it's now possible to check if things are turning out as hot as they warned.

And good news! I bring you Christmas cheer - the top 10 warming predictions to hit the wall this year.

Top Ten Failed Predictions List

[Kenneth Lott]

They have the bases covered Michael, I've heard them say that Global Warming may cause colder temps.

[Michael Larson]

Category:Unbelievable

Greenpeace out to scare the little kiddies at Christmas.

Santa commercial

[Michael Larson]

Category: Put a fork in it, it's done.

2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved

The first, on May 21, headed "Climate change threat to Alpine ski resorts" , reported that the entire Alpine "winter sports industry" could soon "grind to a halt for lack of snow". The second, on December 19, headed "The Alps have best snow conditions in a generation" , reported that this winter's Alpine snowfalls "look set to beat all records by New Year's Day".

Easily one of the most important stories of 2008 has been all the evidence suggesting that this may be looked back on as the year when there was a turning point in the great worldwide panic over man-made global warming. Just when politicians in Europe and America have been adopting the most costly and damaging measures politicians have ever proposed, to combat this supposed menace, the tide has turned in three significant respects.

First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare. Last winter, as temperatures plummeted, many parts of the world had snowfalls on a scale not seen for decades. This winter, with the whole of Canada and half the US under snow, looks likely to be even worse. After several years flatlining, global temperatures have dropped sharply enough to cancel out much of their net rise in the 20th century. more

[Brian A. MacNeish]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Category: Put a fork in it, it's done.

2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved

The first, on May 21, headed "Climate change threat to Alpine ski resorts" , reported that the entire Alpine "winter sports industry" could soon "grind to a halt for lack of snow". The second, on December 19, headed "The Alps have best snow conditions in a generation" , reported that this winter's Alpine snowfalls "look set to beat all records by New Year's Day".

Easily one of the most important stories of 2008 has been all the evidence suggesting that this may be looked back on as the year when there was a turning point in the great worldwide panic over man-made global warming. Just when politicians in Europe and America have been adopting the most costly and damaging measures politicians have ever proposed, to combat this supposed menace, the tide has turned in three significant respects.

First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare. Last winter, as temperatures plummeted, many parts of the world had snowfalls on a scale not seen for decades. This winter, with the whole of Canada and half the US under snow, looks likely to be even worse. After several years flatlining, global temperatures have dropped sharply enough to cancel out much of their net rise in the 20th century. more

Let's look at the big picture, not just one year that does not indicate a trend......a bit myopic, Michael!! Part of the early predictions regarding GW was that there would be more and larger extremes in weather........could this be what's happening now?

From Bloomberg:

La Nina Cools World, Making 2008 10th-Warmest Year (Update2)

Email | Print | A A A



By Alex Morales
Dec. 16 (Bloomberg) -- The global average temperature fell in 2008 as Pacific Ocean winds caused by the La Nina weather phenomenon helped cool the planet.
The worldwide average measured 14.31 degrees Celsius (57.76 Fahrenheit) from January to November, the U.K. government forecaster, the Met Office, said today in a report. That was 0.1 degree below 2007 and 0.21 degree lower than in 1998, the hottest year since global measurements began in the 1800s.
The cooling in 2008 may represent a short-term reversal in an overall warming trend that scientists say is changing the world’s rainfall patterns, melting ice caps and intensifying floods and droughts.
“We don’t expect every year to be a record-breaker,” Peter Stott, head of climate monitoring at the Met Office in the southwestern English city of Exeter, said yesterday in a telephone interview. The 2008 measurement “doesn’t show that global warming has slowed,” he said.
This year, still set to be the 10th-warmest on record, was tempered by La Nina, a phenomenon whereby equatorial winds off South America blow westward across the Pacific, making colder water deep in the ocean well up. A cooler surface on the world’s largest ocean lowers the temperatures of surrounding continents.

Goddard Institute:
In a separate report, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies said today that the year from Dec. 1, 2007, to Nov. 30 was the coolest since 2000, partly due to La Nina. It was also the ninth-warmest year since 1880, with all nine occurring from 1998 to 2008, said the institute, part of the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
“We understand why the temperatures were depressed this year, and that’s because of the La Nina effect in the Pacific,” Stott said. “Because the Pacific is such a big ocean that means that globally the temperature gets depressed by a bit.”
Rising global temperatures since the 1850s are blamed by scientists largely on emissions of greenhouse gases from vehicles, power plants, factories and deforestation.
Delegates from 189 nations met this month for two weeks of debate in Poznan, Poland, midway through two years of negotiations to craft a treaty to fight global warming by limiting manmade greenhouse-gas emissions.
The Met Office figures are compiled from thousands of measurements throughout the year at sea and on every continent, Stott said. The average is unlikely to change dramatically in December, Stott said.
Though 1998 was the hottest year on record, the average temperature for the 2000s is about 0.2 degree higher than the 1990s, Stott said. The past 12 years have been among the 14 warmest on record, according to Met Office figures.
“There’s a whole wealth of evidence right now that shows global warming is largely caused by humans,” Stott said. One cooler year “is not a sign that global warming has slowed.”
To contact the reporter on this story: Alex Morales in London at amorales2@bloomberg.net.

[Michael Larson]

Welcome back to the conversations Brian.

What would it take for you to accept that the world is no longer heating up despite the apocalyptic and false predictions to the contrary?

more fun facts:

minimal and decreasing annual sea level rise

flat or decreasing temps since 1998

increasing world ice mass more

extremely low and decreasing sunspot activity(coincidence?)