Advertisements

Polar Bears & the Sleazy New York Times

Superbly written Donna.

ERICA Goode’s unhinged attack on Dr. Crockford in the NY Times is further evidence of the totalitarian and authoritarian underpinnings that have corrupted the field of climate ‘science’. – Question the preferred wisdom of the day at your own peril! – Obey, or be persecuted and have your reputation trashed! This isn’t science, this is religion. “Belief” and “Denial” are the words of zealots, not scientists.

WHAT would it take for activists Goode and Co. to be happy? A Polar Bear population back to 1960’s extinction levels? Sadly, I believe the answer is yes! How dare their scared ‘cow’ and mascot of climate catastrophe have grown in population from some 5,000 in the 1960’s to 25,000-30,000 at present, despite rising CO2 and diminished sea-ice extent?

INCREASING polar bear numbers, directly threaten the power of activists and their lucrative climate change scare. We can’t have that now can we Erica?

Big Picture News, Informed Analysis

SPOTLIGHT: Journalistic professionalism evaporates in front of our eyes.

BIG PICTURE: When historians document the demise of the mainstream media, an article published this week by the New York Times will make an excellent case study. Titled “Climate Change Denialists Say Polar Bears Are Fine. Scientists Are Pushing Back,” it’s written by Erica Goode who isn’t just any journalist. She’s a former Environment Editor of the Times. In 2009, she “founded and led a cluster of reporters dedicated to environmental reporting.” Currently, she’s a visiting professor at Syracuse University.

Out here in the real world, a debate exists about polar bears. Will they be adversely affected by climate change or will they continue to adapt as they have historically?

Since the future hasn’t yet arrived, it’s impossible to know whose opinions will turn out to be correct. But rather than presenting a range of perspectives…

View original post 865 more words

Advertisements

PICTORIAL Guide To Sea-Level Rise Alarmism And Observed Reality

DEPICTIONS of catastrophic sea-level rise have become a useful propaganda tool for useful idiots in the Climate Crisis Industry who invent the most absurd future sea-level rise scenarios and recreate them in photoshopped horror stories that aim to shock you into belief…

THE only place where such catastrophic scenarios exist are in the warped minds of alarmist hysterics who occupy the climate controlled offices of NASA, NOAA, BoM, National Geographic and the New York Times et al. Not even worst case scenario UN IPCC RCP8.5 climate models project such doom.

Read the rest of this entry »


IT’S Official : Global Warming Alarmists Have No Credibility On Anything Climate Change

IN 2000, climate expert Dr David Viner of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) assured us that…

Read the rest of this entry »


LIFE Inside The Global Warming Bubble

AT the beginning of the Century we were told by Dr David Viner – fmr senior activist scientist at the UEA’s climatic research unit (CRU) – that Snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event,” and that “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.

SINCE Viner’s epic fail in 2000, the global temperature dial has been stubbornly stuck on Pause, with some of the ‘snowiest’ and coldest winters on record occurring over the same period, despite record and rising CO2 emissions…

2018 has been no exception with extreme cold and record snowfalls affecting vast areas of the Northern Hemisphere with rare snow touching down in areas as far south as Southern Morocco, and the Sahara desert. We’ve even seen sharks frozen to death on the shores of Cape Cod, and Iguanas frozen solid in Florida!

ALL this happening in the years that climate activists scientists tell us are the “Hottest Evah“.

IT would appear Mother Nature is speaking a different language to that of her warmist subjects living life inside the bubble of man-made global warming hysteria!

“BEAST FROM THE EAST”

UK is currently under siege from an epic Siberian cold front dubbed the “Beast from the east”…

ANTICIPATING the negative impact the “beast from the east” might have on the global warming narrative, the mainstream media has gone into full propaganda mode churning out numerous reports dismissing the sub-zero extremes on…you guessed it, “global warming”!

THIS actual headline from The Guardian’s resident climate catastrophist, George Monbiot, particularly mind-blowing…

 

IN the post-modern era of climate ‘science’ COLD = HOT…

*

THE counter-claim by climate activists scientists like Vladimir Petoukhov of the Potsdam Institute is that shrinking Arctic sea ice “could triple the probability of cold winter extremes in Europe and northern Asia”. The well-orchestrated claim jumped on and circulated by the activist press…

THIS is all a rehash of the junk science originally promoted by Jennifer Francis in 2014

THE other Hot-off-the-press weather event circulated by the media, in order to divert attention away from the brutal cold, has been the apparent “unprecedented” warmth in the Arctic. A claim expertly debunked by Paul Homewood in this must read post: Arctic Alarmists Hit New Records Of Hysteria | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

 *

 

MEANWHILE, as the climate mafia propagandisers inside their COLD = HOT bubble, the other conveniently forgotten pole, Antarctica, continues its long 40 year+ cooling trend, gaining ice mass despite record and rising CO2 levels and claims of The Hottest Years Evah

From the abstract:

Mass changes of the Antarctic ice sheet impact sea-level rise as climate changes, but recent rates have been uncertain. Ice, Cloud and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) data (2003–08) show mass gains from snow accumulation exceeded discharge losses by 82 ± 25 Gt a−1, reducing global sea-level rise by 0.23 mm a−1.

Mass gains of the Antarctic ice sheet exceed losses | Journal of Glaciology | Cambridge Core

*

DON’T MENTION “THE SUN”!

Roger Tallbloke with a final word that makes a lot more sense than the pseudoscientific, HOT = COLD, bubble-world of global warming climate change activists…

The role of the lowest solar cycle for at least a century is mostly ignored by believers in man-made global warming. There are signs of climate change, but not necessarily the kind they expect.

Icy Europe, balmy North Pole: the world upside down | Tallbloke’s Talkshop

•••

Related :

Climatism hot links :

Climate Science related :

•••

PLEASE Tip The Climatism Jar To Help Keep The Good Fight Alive!

(Still waiting for that “big oil” cheque to arrive in the mail!)

Click this link for brief info…TQ, Jamie 🙂

Donate with PayPal

•••


THE Greatest Threat To The Environment Is Not Affluence, It’s Poverty

haiti-v-dominican-republic

Border between Haiti and the Dominican Republic: Guess which country contains eco-criminals that can afford to use fossil fuels, and which country contains nature-lovers who are dependent on natural renewable organic biomass for energy? (99% of Haiti’s forests have been decimated, not for building materials, but for cooking fuel.)

WHEN the New York Times hired climate ‘Lukewarmer’ Bret Stephens as a contributing columnist in late April 2017, a collective cry of treasonous rage was heard throughout the deep-green environmental community. How dare anyone question whether we should accept absolutely every pronouncement of imminent eco-doom at face value?!

A snippet of the enraged reporting at the time from the usual suspects…

Climate Scientists Cancelling Their New York Times Subscription Over Hiring of Climate Denialist Bret Stephens

By Graham Readfearn • Thursday, April 27, 2017 – 16:59

A New York Times defence of its hiring of a climate science denialist as a leading columnist is pushing high-profile climate scientists to cancel their subscriptions.

Professor Stefan Rahmstorf, of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impacts Research in Germany, is the latest scientist to write publicly to the New York Times detailing his reasons for cancelling their subscriptions.

The NYT has hired former Wall Street Journal columnist Bret Stephens as a writer and deputy editorial page editor.

Stephens wrote several columns while at the WSJ disparaging climate science and climate scientists, which he has collectively described as a “religion” while claiming rising temeperatures may be natural.

The NYT has been defending its decision publicly, saying that “millions of people” agree with Stephens on climate science and just because their readers don’t like his opinions, that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be heard.

But the NYT defence has angered scientists.

Climate Scientists Canceling Their New York Times Subscription Over Hiring of Climate Denialist Bret Stephens | DeSmogBlog

*

Huffington Post also joined the fun…

13 Better Things To Read Than Bret Stephens’ First New York Times Column

The Gray Lady’s newest hire used his debut column to defend his record of climate science denial.

29/04/2017 9:09 AM AEST
Alexander C. Kaufman Business & Environment Reporter, HuffPost

The New York Times took a lot of heat for hiring Bret Stephens, a former opinion writer at The Wall Street Journal, as its newest columnist. There was a lot to criticize. In his storied tenure on some of the most radically conservative pages in print journalism, Stephens accused Arabs of suffering a “disease of the mind,” railed against the Black Lives Matter movement and dismissed the rise of campus rape as an “imaginary enemy.”

But Stephens’ views on climate change ― namely that the jury is still out on whether burning fossil fuels is the chief cause ― drew the widest condemnation. ThinkProgress admonished the Gray Lady for hiring an “extreme climate denier,” and famed climatologist Michael Mann backed them up in the critique. DeSmog Blog, a site whose tagline reads “clearing the PR pollution that clouds climate science,” reported on a letter from climate scientists who are canceling their subscriptions to the newspaper over its latest hire. In These Times’ headline pointedly asked: “Why the Hell did the New York Times just hire a climate denier?”

Even the Times’ own reporters publicly questioned the hire.

13 Better Things To Read Than Bret Stephens’ First New York Times Column |HuffPo

(via WUWT)

*

STEPEHENS has recently written another reasoned column in the Times that has no doubt sent the eco-freaks into another predictable tailspin!

IN the Feb 8 opinion piece, “Apocalypse Not“, Stephens argues that a healthy environment is dependent on a healthy economy first, namely a capitalist one.

“The foolish idea that capitalism is the enemy of the environment misses the point that environmentalism is itself a luxury that few poor countries can adequately afford. If you doubt this, contrast the air and water quality in New York City with that of any similar-sized city in the developing world.”

A view not shared by radical environmental groups who, including the UN, believe that in order to “save the planet” we must fundamentally change the current economic development model. Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the UN’s Framework on Climate Change (UNFCCC) herself admitted that the goal of environmentalists is to destroy capitalism.

“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years since the Industrial Revolution.” – Christiana Figueres Brussels February, 2015

FIGUERES even went so far as to affirm that Communism is the best model to fight global warming.

IN other words, the real agenda is concentrated political authority. Global warming is the hook.

GLOBAL Warming theory has long abandoned any connection it has with actual science. It is has become as ideology. A new religion. Australia’s former Prime Minister Tony Abbott likening it to, socialism masquerading as environmentalism“.

IN 2013, UN IPCC co-chair of Working Group 3 Dr. Ottmar Endenhoefer unleashed this stunning revelation…

 


HIGHLIGHTS from Stephens’ must read column in the times…

Apocalypse Not

Norman Borlaug, the 1970 Nobel Peace Prize laureate.CreditMicheline Pelletier/Sygma, via Getty Images

In 1919, the director of the U.S. Bureau of Mines offered a dire warning for the future. “Within the next two to five years the oil fields of this country will reach their maximum production, and from that time on we will face an ever-increasing decline.”

Nearly a century later, in July 2010, The Guardian ran a story with an ominous headline: “Lloyd’s adds its voice to dire ‘peak oil’ warnings.” Citing a report by the storied London insurer, the newspaper warned that businesses were “underestimating catastrophic consequences of declining oil,” including oil at $200 a barrel by 2013, a global supply crunch, and overall “economic chaos.”

I thought of these predictions on seeing the recent news that the United States is on the eve of breaking a 47-year production record by lifting more than 10 million barrels of crude a day. That’s roughly twice what the U.S. produced just a decade ago, and may even put us on track to overtake Saudi Arabia and even Russia as the world’s leading oil producer. As for global production, it rose by some 11 percent just since the Lloyd’s report, and by almost 200 percent since 1965.

Call it yet another case of Apocalypse Not.

—–

“In best-selling books and powerful speeches, Vogt argued that affluence is not our greatest achievement but our biggest problem,” Mann writes. “Our prosperity is temporary, he said, because it is based on taking more from than earth than it can give. If we continue, the unavoidable result will be devastation on a global scale, perhaps including our extinction.”

In our own day, people like Bill McKibben and Naomi Klein have made careers saying more or less the same thing. This is a world where the clock is permanently set at two minutes to midnight, and where only a radical transformation of modern society (usually combining dramatic changes in personal behavior along with a heavy dose of state intervention) can save us.

—–

The foolish idea that capitalism is the enemy of the environment misses the point that environmentalism is itself a luxury that few poor countries can adequately afford. If you doubt this, contrast the air and water quality in New York City with that of any similar-sized city in the developing world.

I fall in the Borlaugian camp. That’s worth noting because one of the more tedious criticisms by the environmental left is that people like me “don’t care about the environment.” But imputing bad faith, stupidity or greed is always a lousy argument. Even conservatives want their children to breathe.

—–

Borlaugians are environmentalists, too. They simply think the road to salvation lies not through making do with less, but rather through innovation and the conditions in which innovation tends to flourish, greater affluence and individual freedom most of all.

—–

If environmental alarmists ever wonder why more people haven’t come around to their way of thinking, it isn’t because people like me occasionally voice doubts in newspaper op-eds. It’s because too many past predictions of imminent disaster didn’t come to pass.

(Climatism bolds)

Read Stephens’ excellent piece in full here…

•••

PLEASE Tip The Climatism Jar To Help Keep The Good Fight Alive!

(Still waiting for that “big oil” cheque to arrive in the mail!)

Click this link for brief info…TQ

Donate with PayPal

•••

Related :

Climate Science related :

 


UNMASKING The Great Arctic Sea-Ice “Death Spiral” Scam

afp_g38de

More scientific evidence that polar bears are doing just fine – a 30% increase in population with some of them “as fat as pigs.”

CONTRARY to popular myth, Arctic sea ice extent is not in a “death spiral“. In fact, there has been no real shrinking of Arctic sea ice in 10 years, which also corresponds to the fact that there has been no statistically significant “global warming” for nearly 20 years.

ALL this despite record “CO2” emissions over the same period, and record hot air bloviated by the trillion dollar climate crisis industry.

THE following is a remarkable post by Tony Heller from his Deplorable Climate Science Blog showing just how corrupt and politicised the “science” of the Arctic has become via the fake-news media and – sadly – from many our most respected scientific institutions including, yes, NASA…


More Spectacular Arctic Fraud At The New York Times

 

The New York Times just published another fake climate article – this time about the Arctic.  They start the article with the claim that satellites were first used to study the Arctic in 1979.

 

Given that we traveled to the moon in 1969, it is absurd to suggest that satellites weren’t used to study the Arctic before 1979. Here is a 1964 satellite image of the Arctic which was published in National Geographic in 1965.

 

Here is a detailed National Geographic Arctic sea ice map from 1971.

 

Here is a detailed satellite image of Antarctica from 1976, also published in National Geographic.

 

The 1990 IPCC report included NOAA Arctic satellite data back to 1973, when it was much lower than 1979.

 

In a spectacular display of scientific malpractice,  NOAA now hides all of the pre-1979 peak Arctic sea ice data. By starting right at the peak, they produce a fake linear downwards trend.

 

This 1985 DOE climate change report had Arctic data back to 1925, which showed little ice from the 1930s to the 1950s.

So why did the New York Times cherry pick 1979 as their start date? Because it came at the end of three of the coldest US winters on record , and Arctic sea ice was at a century peak. The graph below combines the 1985 DOE graph with the 1990 IPCC graph.

If the New York Times authors had bothered to research their own paper, they could have found this out for themselves. It was very warm in the Arctic in 1958

 

Three years later, the New York Times reported a unanimous consensus that earth was cooling.

 

By 1970, the Arctic climate was becoming more frigid, the ice was getting “ominously thicker” – and scientists were worried about a new ice age.

 

The polar ice cap had expanded 12% by 1975, after shrinking 12% before 1958. Icelandic ports were blocked with ice for the first time in the 20th century.

By hiding all the data before the 1979 peak, the New York Times is defrauding its readers. Arctic climate is cyclical – not linear.

Ninety-five years ago, the Arctic was having a meltdown.

 

 

 

 

Eighty years ago, the Arctic was having a meltdown.

 

Sixty five years ago, the Arctic was having a meltdown.

 

Then the New York Times  went on to obscure their graph (below) to hide the fact that there has been a large increase in minimum extent since 2012. Note the “End of summer minimum” label is at the 2012 minimum – not the 2017 minimum.

 

The Arctic minimum extent has been increasing for a decade. The New York Times doesn’t want their readers to know this.

 

The New York Times is defrauding their readers at many levels. It is the fake news we have learned to expect from them.

More Spectacular Arctic Fraud At The New York Times | The Deplorable Climate Science Blog

•••

See also :

The Other (Inconvenient) Pole :

Global Warming “Pause” Related :

97% Of Climate Scientists Got it Wrong About Effects Of Global Warming, related :


NYT Blames Winter Chill on Global Warming

That didn’t take long.

…Cold, Hot, Wet, Dry, Snow, Drought, Flood ~ its all “Global Warming” !

Watts Up With That?

Boston, Massachusetts Boston, Massachusetts. By Luke Nadeau from U.S. (Flickr) [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

As temperatures plummet in Eastern states, NYT has published their usual screed on why global warming is responsible for cold winters.

Feeling a Chill? Blame the Polar Vortex. And Global Warming.

On Thursday, temperatures on the East Coast are expected to plummet, and some people — fellow journalists and weather broadcasters, we’re looking at you — may start talking about a “polar vortex.”

We thought you might want to know what the polar vortex is, and what it’s not.

(And we wanted to pre-empt the inevitable chatter about climate change that usually crops up when the thermometer drops — “It’s bone-shakingly cold, how could the Earth be warming?” We’ll tell you how.)

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/15/science/feeling-a-chill-blame-the-polar-vortex-and-global-warming.html

New York Times published similar articles blaming global warming for extreme winter…

View original post 27 more words