“If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth
as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
– Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh,
patron of the World Wildlife Fund
Prince Charles blames the Syrian civil war on trace gas carbon dioxide
The Prince of Wales has said climate change may have been a factor in the emergence of civil war in Syria.
Prince Charles said he was one of those who warned many years ago that there would be rising conflict over scarce resources if the issue was not tackled.
In Syria, the prince said, a drought lasting several years meant that many people were forced off the land.
Syria has experienced drought before. In the 1930’s, Yo-Yo’s were to blame
In the 1870s, Syrian drought had something to do with Christian imperfection
See also :
Prince Charles related :
- No Global Warming Since Prince Charles And Princess Diana Got Divorced During Summer, 1996 | Climatism
- “In Searching For A New Enemy To Unite Us, We Came Up With The Threat Of Global Warming” | Climatism
By Paul Homewood
NOAA inform us that last month was another “hottest evah”.
Note how a huge swathe of South America has been labelled as “record warmest”. And what is this based on?
View original post 120 more words
More massive NASA GISS temperature data
Struggling to keep up with what is now a literal widespread cancer of worldwide ‘cooling the past and warming the present’ undertaken by NASA and NOAA to fit their ‘global warming’ narrative.
And the simple question must be asked and cannot be underestimated:
If land-based measurements are so accurate, or ‘more’ accurate than satellite data (according to NASA/NOAA and warmists), why then are massive adjustments required?!
By Paul Homewood
A quick update to my post on Brazilian temperature trends.
Ian George spotted that the original trends, based on unadjusted GHCN V2 data, for Quixeramobim, up to 2011, looked like this:
The current GISS graph, based on GHCN V3 Adjusted data, is:
The adjustments that GHCN have made are massive, and have turned a cooling trend into a rapidly warming one.
Was there anything wrong with the original record? I don’t know, but anybody who claims that they can accurately measure what the temperatures really were is a fraud.
Britain Laments: Wind Power Sends Power Prices Skyward, Risks Total Grid Collapse & Fails to Cut CO2 EmissionsPosted: November 23, 2015
The global warming scare has been cover for a massive transfer of funds from taxpayers to green carpetbaggers, thanks to headline-seeking politicians trying to take credit for “solving” a problem that doesn’t exist.
The uselessness of ‘unreliable’ wind and solar energy, hastily rolled out to “save the planet”, is being slowly and painfully discovered at enormous cost to western economies and to the environment.
Sceptics have been warning of this for years. However, deep-green “save the planet” sanctimony has largely triumphed in the echelons of the political, media and social elite.
A good maxim to remember: The only difference between conservatives (sceptics) and the Left (warming alarmists’) is time … and lots and lots and lots of other-peoples-money.
In a ‘don’t say we didn’t warn you’ piece, Matt Ridley nails down precisley why THESE THINGS DON’T WORK – on any level. Over to Matt.
Wind power makes electricity expensive and unreliable without cutting emissions
13 November 2015
By preventing investment in gas, the dash for wind has done real harm
My Times article on wind power is below. An astonishingly poor attack on the article was made in The Guardian by Mark Lynas.
He failed to address all the main points I made: he failed to challenge the argument that wind power has not cut emissions, failed to challenge the argument that wind power has raised the cost of electricity, he failed to challenge my argument that wind speeds are correlated across Europe. And he made a hash of attempting to criticise…
View original post 1,279 more words
The #RoadToParis being paved lavishly with breathtaking misinformation and (obligatory) temperature data fraud.
Are there any limits to the brazen levels of government climate propaganda and scientific malfeasance?
By SETH BORENSTEIN Nov. 22, 2015 10:51 AM EST
federal ground-based data, which scientists said is more reliable than satellites
Ground data is more reliable than satellites? Consider Greenland. Satellites used tens of millions of temperature readings in Greenland last month. NOAA used zero actual readings in Greenland.
Global warming theory is based on troposphere temperatures which satellites measure, not urban heat islands and data tampering by criminals at NASA and NOAA.
NASA has known for 25 years that satellites are more accurate than surface temperatures, and that surface temperature measurements should be replaced.
The same criminals who claim (when convenient) that surface temperatures are more accurate, also feel the need to massively adjust them (when convenient) – because of their gross inaccuracies.
View original post 31 more words
“The Obama administration is rewriting Indiana history, US history and world history – while perverting and destroying science. Their intent and the outcome of this can’t possibly be good.”
Amen to that.
Congress is focused on one small aspect of NOAA’s temperature fraud – the changes they made to eliminate the hiatus ahead of Paris. This was needed by the White House to give Obama a big lie to push his agenda in Paris. The hiatus killed their whole story.
But that is just the tip of the iceberg. Look at the massive fraud NOAA is engaged in at Indiana. They show Indiana warming at 0.1F (0.05 rounded up) per century. Note the large spike after 1999.
Their actual thermometer data shows the exact opposite – that Indiana is cooling by 0.10 degrees per decade since 1895.
They accomplish this fraud by cooling all temperatures before 2000, and warming all temperatures after 2000. They are tampering with data at a rate of 0.14 degrees per century, almost three times as large as their claimed trend
View original post 204 more words