• Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
  • default color
  • green color
  • red color

The Right Conservative News Sites | Right Side News

Saturday
Mar 20th
Climate Realists Meet on Climate Change Print E-mail
Written by Joseph D'Aleo   
Saturday, 14 March 2009 06:21
March 14, 2009
Heartland Meeting of Climate "Realists" a Huge Success

By Joseph D'Aleo
ICECAP.us

Over 800 scientists and economists from 24 countries were in attendance this week at the Second Annual ICCC in New York City organized by the Heartland and with 60 co-sponsoring organizations including Icecap. They heard talks by 80 scientists from 14 countries. The opening remarks were made by the Heartland's Joe Bast.

The presentations of the keynote speakers which included Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic and the European Union, Dr. Richard Lindzen, Astronaut Harrison Schmidt, former Hansen boss Dr. John Theon, Former Governor Dr. John Sununu, Dr. Arthur Robinson, Dr. Bob Carter, Lord Monckton, and Dr. Willie Soon ARE NOW all available on the Heartland ICCC 2009 web site. The others were all videotaped and will be made available over upcoming weeks. THE POWERPOINTS ARE NOW ALREADY LOADED for all the excellent talks. Sections from the talks will be combined into other videos that tell the real climate story and distributed to decision makers and schools and groups that care about the truth or wish to hear both sides of the story.

One of the major outputs was Anthony Watt's report on the surface station project. He documented the results of the siting survey of the US climate network. He and his team of volunteers are now 75% through the climate network and only 11% of the stations meet the government's own published standards. He had a wonderful publication that will be widely distributed to decision makers.

The success of the conference was proof positive that we have won the battle of the science despite the media's and alarmist blog proclamations and resistance to even acknowledge we exist.

To counter us and try and feed the hungry media and keep the world in a state of alarm, there has been a flurry of recent bogus papers that should never have passed peer review by Solomon and Steig/Mann.

Meanwhile grant toting scientists are meeting in Copenhagen to scare monger and present more total nonsense, huge exaggerations and outright contrived model based fabrications (here, here, here, here and here) to try and save their movement and keep the gravy train of money flowing.  See in this ICCC paper by Astronaut Harrison Schmitt how the alarmists intentionally attempt to mislead. Even Andy Revkin in the New York Times dotearth blog worries this doom mongering by the alarmists in Copenhagen is bordering on "climate porn" and will backfire.

Despite the desperation on the part of the alarmist community, the irony is that the public is coming around to our side in droves (here and here and here) even as the media tries to promote the alarmist drivel and ignore us and the rapidly increasing body of peer review science that has been debunked the greenhouse warming theory while proclaiming we "climate realists" are in disarray and in decline.

The alarmist blogs and media are doing their thing claiming the difference on opinion among the many attendees of the ICCC was proof we were without a consistent message and therefore without credibility compared to the alarmists for whom AGW has become a religion and whose bible is the IPCC report and who worship at the alter of the climate models.  In reality with an issue as complex as science, there are many different factors and the fact that we are not monolithic in our beliefs and tend to rely much more on actual data instead of models is proof that we are the real scientists. We are in fact more energized and motivated than ever before.

We also recognize the lack of coverage represents the media?s attempt not to derail any Cap-and-Trade (in reality Tax-and-Trade) legislation that the they and the environmental groups with their billions of dollars have pushed onto the table that has been eagerly adopted by politicians who always will embrace potential for more taxes and the excuse of being able to create green jobs and many corporation who see profit potential from selling green products. Just ask Arnold how well that environmental green agenda is working in California.

Yes we admit there may be thousands of new green jobs created but it will be at the expense of many millions of real jobs and the cost of thousands of dollars in hidden taxes and inflated energy costs for the average family. As Vaclav Klaus stated so well global warming is not a scientific theory it is a political ideology.

We all left the conference buoyed by what we accomplished in the last year, published in the journals and the progress made in the court of public opinion. Yet we all worry: Although we've won the science battle, unless we can enlist your support to speak out en masse to the decision makers, we could lose the political battle, thanks to the agenda of this administration, corrupt leaders in congress, and the media's complicity. That will be tragic to the great citizens of the U.S. and the world turning a faltering recession into a serious worldwide long-lasting depression. See PDF here. See this compilation of stories about the meeting and recent related findings from Marc Morano here Also see this follow-up story from the Australian on how 90% of the scientists at the Japan Geoscience Union symposium last year, do not believe the IPCC report
-----------------------------------------
ICECAP, International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project, is the portal to all things climate for elected officials and staffers, journalists, scientists, educators and the public. It provides access to a new and growing global society of respected scientists and journalists that are not deniers that our climate is dynamic (the only constant in nature is change) and that man plays a role in climate change through urbanization, land use changes and the introduction of greenhouse gases and aerosols, but who also believe that natural cycles such as those in the sun and oceans are also important contributors to the global changes in our climate and weather. We worry the sole focus on greenhouse gases and the unwise reliance on imperfect climate models while ignoring real data may leave civilization unprepared for a sudden climate shift that history tells us will occur again, very possibly soon. 

Trackback(0)
Comments (5)Add Comment
0
Change of seasons
written by RichieRich, March 14, 2009
It doesn't matter what drivel liberals come up with because they aren't accountable to anyone. Global warming is a prime example. The climate alarmist have been milking taxpayers for decades from global cooling in the 70's to global warming in the 21st. century.

I want whatever portion of my taxes that went to pay for these doomsday evangelist's back. The media doesn't have a problem covering the wall street rip offs but what about these people who have ripped off the world to the tune of trillions of dollars. Why aren't they headline news?.
0
Individuals CAN prevent Global Warming
written by JER0ME, March 16, 2009
I am not completely convinced CO2 has anything to do with Global Warming. That notwithstanding, I am certain that reducing our reliance on fossil fuels is both a good idea and necessary, for a large number of obvious reasons.

The good news is that we can all make a difference. It goes way beyond buying a few (polluting) low energy light bulbs, and will have a real impact if even half of those concerned about Global Warming follow the proposals. The beauty is that even if only half do this, it makes no difference what the rest do! Renewable energy will become cheaper than fossil fuels with enough investment in the technology, and everyone will move over naturally!

Firstly, buy renewable energy.

As far as I am aware, you have the choice to buy renewable electricity in all developed countries. If you cannot now, you should campaign for that inalienable right immediately. Currently our own household buys 25% of our electricity as renewable, costing us about US$33 extra per year. 100% would cost US$183)*.

Some argue that if millions of householders (and industries, I would hope) buy renewable energy, there will not be enough. If you do not buy it, there will NEVER be enough. If you do, the money will be used to INVEST in infrastructure for future renewable energy, so making the expense just as effective.

Merely by choosing to buy this, you are immediately and directly investing in the renewable energy industry, and sending a powerful and undeniable message to those who matter, the people who actually generate electricity, not environmentalists or politicians who may have different agenda.

Secondly, stop investing in 'Big Oil' and 'Big Coal'.

It comes as a shock to many ordinary citizens to be told that the huge greedy corporations actually make money for THEM, not for some faceless consortium. Sure, corporate flunkies may make millions of dollars, but WE, as investors, make billions, and even trillions. Their huge payouts and ma*sive junkets are insignificant compared to the profits the companies make for their investors.

You may well think that you do not invest in these companies, but if you have a pension or investment fund, you almost certainly do. These funds will, quite obviously, be invested in the very companies that make the most profits and returns for their investors. All these corporations are doing is actually acting effectively YOUR instruction, ie to get the best possible return. If WE stop investing in them, they fail, and will be forced to change their practices to survive in a capitalist environment.

The answer is to choose ethical investments (there may be different names). Talk to your financial adviser and make the switch now. ONLY YOU control your investments. Make the choice and stop letting others do it for you.

You control the future, not governments or environmentalists.

The message is that YOU control the future of energy production with your wallets. The bad news is that it will cost, but nothing the environmentalists or governments will ever do about this issue will cost you less than this, and most of what they want to do will take control away from you and waste most of your expenditure in bureaucratic bungling and misguided foolishness, in my opinion. This simple two-step approach has all the potential to work and with no complex side effects that I can see immediately. It has a direct and immediate effect.

It is so rare that we are able to do something so straightforward in this complex world. If Global Warming concerns you, I urge you to put your money where your mouth is, and make an immediate difference TODAY, before the power is taken away from you.

* Based on a usage of 5,000 kWh of electricity.
Source: http://www.originenergy.com.au...#extracost

http://www.carbonclimate.info/2009/03/individuals-can-prevent-global-warming.html
0
...
written by Roger, March 17, 2009
I've chosen to have 100% of my electricity come from solar, and it is more expensive. I think that people who oppose climate change prevention measures do so out of a desire to maintain the status quo, for they have an investment in that.

Now there's the "global warming" gravy train that attracts a lot of funding, taking some resources away from the status quo. But the good news for the status quo people is that the warming people are just as likely to be incompetent and corrupt as they are, so all that really will happen is a shift in the location of the money.

Sorry for being cynical, I have had a hard day.
0
Status quo
written by RichieRich, March 17, 2009
I've chosen to have 100% of my electricity come from solar, and it is more expensive. I think that people who oppose climate change prevention measures do so out of a desire to maintain the status quo, for they have an investment in that.


That's your choice. I'm not a fan of the status quo either but one would have to find fault with the current status. Running around claiming the earth is doomed with nothing more then manipulated data, fraudulent claims and attack dog mentality tells me that the status quo is just fine.

Every energy source has a negative enviornmental impact so why pour trillions of dollars into alternative energy when one is no better then the other. I'm not insinuating that developing alternative energy is not a good idea and doesn't have some futuristic need but let's move forward with some fact's please. The only reason I see to develope aternative energy is because of the obvious depletion at some point of the current sources.

Look what happen a couple years ago with Ethenol. Pouring billions into ethenol and come to find out it takes 1 1/2 gallons of fossil fuel to produce a gallon of ethenol. Corn based products and byproducts shotup in price and so on. If this country stopped buying oil tomorrow there would be a 9/11 every week in this country. It's not that simple!.
0
Ethanol debacle
written by eauboy, March 28, 2009
Good comments RichieRich. Ethanol is truly a disaster where alternative fuel is concerned. However, the huge push for it did additional damage in that is gave a major green light for the expansion of genetically modified corn. So while it may be downsliding as the "energy savior" it will now be rampant in food stocks. GMO crops will be a disaster in their own right where nutrition is concerned. Aside from nutrient deficiency, is the ability of Multi-national agri-biz to control the food supply of the world. One example in particular is Monsanto's development of GMO seed stock that is self destructive. This means that seeds from this type of GMO crop will not grow in subsequent seasons, thereby forcing farmers to purchase new seed stock every year...from Monsanto of course (it's contractual). Another GMO development is herbicide resistant crops. These crops are designed to withstand large amounts of herbicides without themselves being killed. The obvious issue being...we eventually eat the stuff. What becomes even more of concern is that even a farmer that chooses not to use such seeds can be affected through cross pollination of his crop by near by GMO users. Eventually, GMO crops will become a majority, regardless of intentions. Long term use of GMO foods has not been established. But it is known that since plants take on new traits, our bodies don't recognize them as food, and will eliminate them, thereby depriving us of nutrition.

Sorry to digress from the energy discussion, but I had to get the word out about the even darker side of ethanol. As far as energy and climate change are concerned, solar and wind power are OK for residential use...if one chooses. They are great alternatives for folks that live in remote areas. However, oil and coal are still essential for industry. The only real and practical alternative where large amounts of energy are concerned is nuclear. It's definitely abundant, and it's clean. One "mico" nuclear plant can produce the energy of 10,000 wind machines with a huge reduction in real estate...not to mention the minor issue of countryside asthetics. Wind farms will soon be as unsightly a blight as billboards.

Incidentally, reasearch done by at least 2 research groups (real objective scientists) has shown that periodic temperature increases occured BEFORE the increase of carbon. So much for the evil "carbon footprint".

Write comment

busy
Last Updated on Saturday, 14 March 2009 07:15
 
Right Side News on Facebook

Search the RSN Database of 7,000+ Articles

takingbackamerica-2

 

feedNuts Feed Profile

Exit Sign