Advertisements

AUSSIE CliSci Budget Woes

IF the “science is settled”, what’s the point of continuing further climate research? Research that always begins with the pre-conceived notion that human emissions are causing X so we need to spend Y and you need to do Z in order to avert disaster 100 years from now, “based on our high-tech model simulations”.

RESEARCH to study natural variation, important for climate predictions for agricultural industry and emergency services etc is scoffed at and simply NOT granted.

SO, the $1.6 BILLION will again be spent purely on activist CO2-centric ‘science’ fermenting the ‘warming’ scare in order to maintain and even increase funding if the new problem discovered is bigger than the last one. The scare self-perpetuates.

WHAT a joke.

AUSTRALIA should cut all climate ‘science’ funding or at least dedicate 50% to natural variation studies that look at variables like maybe…the Sun! The real driver of climate change.

Watts Up With That?

News Brief by Kip Hansen

aus_dollarAustralian climate scientists are whinging about the newly announced Federal budget for 2019.  Who can blame them?

The total to be spent on climate-related research has been reduced to the abysmally low sum of AU$1.6 billion for the next fiscal year which begins 1 July 2018. [Yes, that is billion with a B].

While 1.6 billion Australian dollars (just over 1.2 billion US dollars @ today’s exchange rates) may seem like a lot of research money for a country that doesn’t have the necessity of maintaining fleets of satellites or ocean-going research buoys, but it is a very sharp reduction from the AU$3 billion they were allotted  for the current year.

All this according to a report from Science News , which quotes Martin Rice, an environmental scientist and head of research for the Sydney-based Climate Council of Australia as saying;

“Once again, [the budget]…

View original post 85 more words

Advertisements

CLAIM : Climate Change Could Trigger Volcanic Eruptions Across The World

Volcano CO2 CLIMATISM


COLOURLESS, odourless, tasteless, non-reactive, trace gas and plant food ‘carbon dioxide’ – the miracle molecule that, according to ‘scientists’, causes these phenomena, amongst a million other things (see link 20) !

  1. Incredible shrinking sheep
  2. Boy Scout tornado deaths
  3. Lobster Cannibalism
  4. Longer days
  5. Shorter days
  6. Collapse of gingerbread houses in Sweden
  7. Surge in fatal shark attacks
  8. Bigger tuna fish
  9. Fish shrinkage
  10. Glacier grows (California)
  11. Glaciers on Snowden
  12. WAR!!
  13. Longer days
  14. Shorter days
  15. Screwed-up love making
  16. The Sinking of The Titanic
  17. No more red-haired people
  18. Pear-shaped women
  19. Incontinent, impotent bald guys with extra hair growing from his toes
  20. A few other things caused by global warming…

AND now, according to ‘esteemed’ taxpayer funded climate ‘scientists’, carbon dioxide has the power to shift tectonic plates summoning deadly Volcanoes!

WOW! What a gas.

ALL of a sudden, taxing and demonising this essential trace gas that plants use as food to grow and create oxygen, makes a whole lotta sense! Not.

*

HUMOROUS observation via Ms. Donna on Twitter :

*

TAXPAYER funded ‘scientists’ should be studying the effects of Volcanoes on our climate, not the other way around!

The effect of volcanoes on climate and climate on volcanoes

by Javier

The effect of volcanoes on climate

The relationship between volcanoes and climate is a very complex one. From reading the media one gets the impression that they are some sort of climatic wild card. They are used to explain the cooling after the Pinatubo eruption, or the Little Ice Age cooling as a detriment to the solar hypothesis. But they are also used to explain the warming leading to mass extinctions in the distant past.

Excellent read here via WUWT …

•••

Related :

See also :

“Hottest Year Evahh” related :

Origins Of The Global Warming Scam :

•••

PLEASE Donate To Climatism To HELP Keep The Good Fight Alive!

(Climate rationalists are still waiting for that “big oil” cheque to arrive in the mail!)

Click link for more info…TQ! Jamie.

Donate with PayPal

•••


THE SUN : Climate Control Knob, Enemy Of The Climate Cult

THE SUN and Planets 2000px-Planets2013

THE Sun is 4.6 billion years old.

THE Sun has surface area is 11,990 times that of the Earth’s. Its diameter is around 1,392,000 kilometres (865,000 miles), about 110 times wider than Earth’s.

THE mass of the Sun is approximately 330,000 times greater than that of Earth. You can fit 1.3 million earths into it.

THE Sun contains 99.86% of the mass in the Solar System.

THE Sun generates huge amounts of energy by combining hydrogen nuclei into helium. This process is called nuclear fusion.

THE Sun’s surface temperature is ‎5,500 °C.

THE Sun’s core is around 13600000 degrees Celsius.

LIGHT from the Sun reaches Earth in 8 minutes and 20 seconds.

THE Aurora Borealis and Aurora Australis are caused by the interaction of solar winds with Earth’s atmosphere. The solar wind is contains charged particles such as electrons and protons. They escape the Sun’s intense gravity because of their high kinetic energy and the high temperature of the Sun’s corona (a type of plasma atmosphere that extends into space).

*

ALL that power and life-sustaining magnificence! And yet, the Sun is completely dismissed as a key driver of climate by the climate crisis industry. Why? Because, you cannot control the Sun, therefore you would be laughed out of town if you tried to tax voters for climate changes or weather extremes caused by the Sun.

THEREFORE, your lifestyle and emissions are to blame – CO2 the patsy – tax away and obey!

“Scientists now claim that a 0.0001 mole fraction increase in CO2 over the past century controls the climate.  This is because the Sun can’t be controlled, scientists can’t pretend they know how to prevent bad weather, and politicians can’t use sunspots as an excuse to raise taxes and control energy policy.” – Tony Heller

*

CLIMATE alarmist outfit Union Of Concerned Scientists recognises the Sun as a key driver of climate only up until the late 1970’s, before politics, ideology, power and control entered the ‘science’ of climate. The late 1970’s also corresponds nicely with a cyclical rise in global temps following the well-catalogued 70’s “global cooling” scare :

“Over the time-scale of millions of years, the change in solar intensity is a critical factor influencing climate (e.g., ice ages).  However, changes in the rate of solar heating over the last century cannot account for the magnitude of the rise in global mean temperature since the late 1970s.” – Union Of Concerned Scientists

BIAS BY OMISSION

WHAT the “Union Of Concerned Scientists” won’t show you is that there have been similar warming periods of equal magnitude before the era of ‘human emissions’…

THE 2013 UN IPCC report claimed with at least 95 percent certainty that human activities – chiefly the burning of fossil fuels – are the main cause of warming since the 1950s.

“Drafts seen by Reuters of the study by the U.N. panel of experts, due to be published next month, say it is at least 95 percent likely that human activities – chiefly the burning of fossil fuels – are the main cause of warming since the 1950s.”

Experts surer of manmade global warming but local … | Reuters

IDENTICAL WARMING TRENDS

THE 64 thousand dollar questions for IPCC cheerleaders:

  1. Which side is which time period?
  2. What caused the warming before CO2 became an issue to be essentially identical to the period when it is claimed to be the main driver?
  3. How is the IPCC 95% certain one side is caused by man and the other is not?

Read the rest of this entry »


EXCLUSIVE: Bringing the stunning hypocrisy of a climate conference out into the open

“Follow the money, because that’s really all climate change policy, sustainability, and science seems to be about these days.”

Spot-on Anthony. Great investigative post exposing the serial eco-hypocrites. Though, not sure how “Exclusive” it is owing to your disturbingly true observation that “there is a constant merry-go-round of academic conferences scheduled all over the world every year which they are required to attend to maintain their academic status – and also to get free vacations, of course. There are dozens of conferences like this every year, year after year, all over the planet, all similarly purposeless and unnecessary – part of the endless academic gravy train of grants and free travel.”

WAY to go Eric and Co…!

Watts Up With That?

Some hypocritical findings after attending a climate conference at the University of California at Berkeley

UC Berkeley is just a short drive away, about three hours.

We are often told by the “holier than thou” types who lecture us on the evils of modern energy consumption that we should travel less, reduce our use of fossil fuels, have less children or no children, and suggesting we even kill ourselves for the betterment of the planet.

However, these same people don’t seem to practice what they preach. First, let’s set the stage. For example Eric Holthaus, who is meteorologist and staff writer for Grist (formerly Slate) wailed that he will have a vasectomy to prevent population growth.

holthaus-vasectomy

Then he said, kids are OK while telling the world how “fucked up it is”, and announces his first child with this tweet:

He’s now reportedly got two children and is…

View original post 843 more words


Where, Exactly, Is The Man-made Climate Problem?

Watts Up With That?

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

Posted without comment, except a hat tip to Dave Burton and Willie Soon …

hadcrut4 two-panel test.png

There is no statistical difference between the two trends. Well, I guess that qualifies as a comment …

Best to everyone on a day full of sunshine,

w.

My Usual Request: Quote the exact words that you’re discussing, so we can all understand who and what you are referring to.

UPDATE: I’m sure Willis won’t mind that I added “Man-made Climate” to the title, because search engines aren’t as smart and interpretive as he and I – Anthony

View original post


Green Shock: Entire Forests Being Murdered to Produce Wood Pellet Biomass

Dellers’ book title sums up the mad and destructive hypocrisy of the climate change cult perfectly: “Greens: Killing The Earth To Save It”! An excellent read at that.

Watts Up With That?

Man holds chainsaw in forest Man holds chainsaw in forest. By U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Breitbart / James Delingpole – Greens have discovered to their horror that producing renewable wood pellet biomass requires a large supply of dead trees.

Hardwood forests cut down to feed Drax Power plant, Channel 4 Dispatches claims

Brendan Montague | 16th April 2018

A Dispatches investigation has uncovered evidence of hardwood forests being chopped down to provide ‘green energy’ for the UK. Experts say unique habitats rich in wildlife are under threat as Britain’s power stations switch from burning coal to wood, writes BRENDAN MONTAGUE

Huge areas of hardwood forest in the state of Virginia are being chainsawed to create ‘biomass’ energy in Britain as the government attempts to reach targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in efforts to tackle climate change, an investigation by Channel 4 Dispatches…

View original post 192 more words


Can Humans Melt the Antarctic Icecap?

“My goal here is to show the enormous energy levels involved and how ridiculous it is to blame humans for any significant ice melt.“ – (Julius Sanks is an engineer and manager with experience developing weather forecasting systems and environmental satellites.)

Good read…

Watts Up With That?

Can we puny humans produce enough energy to melt the huge icecap? Some math helps.

Antarctic ice on October 6, 2015

Guest essay by Julius Sanks

When discussing climate with people who do not have technical backgrounds, I have learned much of the climate discussion is a foreign language to them.

Phrases like “Dalton minimum” or “Atlantic multidecadal oscillation” make their eyes glaze over. Once, after I explained what causes wind, the reply was, “my head hurts.” So, I no longer try to explain atmospheric science. Besides, I am an engineer, not a meteorologist. I have had better luck by sharing simple examples that let people reach conclusions on their own about human versus natural influence. Telling them I can show them the math if they want to see it adds credibility, because few, if any, alarmist publications intended for the general public include any math to support their claims. Describing…

View original post 1,881 more words