They say a pictures worth a thousand words. Can't dispute this Travels.

And a video is even better!

 

 

 

Hurry up, look outside your window, it's actually cooler than it was last year! 

BTW, Al Gore is a politician, not a reliable source.  I don't look to politicians for my information, I'd rather go to science for that.

All that ice being gone opened the North West passage, ( Making some a lot of $$$).

Anyone here know about the Grolar Bears?
Grizzly×Polar Bear Hybrid

Grizzly Bears Vs. Polar Bears

Yeah Lineage, I've seen them, it's been going on for a while!

well ML, when you finally get an education you will learn that trends are based on data collected over time.

Not only that;  these articles always seem to omit to mention that just because there is more ice

in some places does not mean there isn't LESS ice at other locations.  That's been going on for

years too.

Obama’s Lonely Climate Summit – world leaders are staying home

Anthony Watts / 11 hours ago September 16, 2014

Eric Worrall writes: The imminent climate summit in New York is rapidly turning into an utter embarrassment for President Obama and UN Secretary General Bank Ki-Moon, in addition to becoming a bit of a punishment round for national deputy leaders.

Aussie PM Tony Abbott today defended his decision not to hop on an earlier flight to America, so he could attend the UN climate conference in New York, because he has more important matters to attend to, such as running the country.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/tony-abbott-defends-skipping-un-climate-change-summit-in-new-york/story-fni0xqrb-1227060005413

Chinese President Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi  have also indicated they likely won’t attend the summit.
http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/top-leaders-from-china-india-to-skip-un-climate-change-summit/

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has indicated he will not be attending. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canada-politics/stephen-harper-to-skip-un-climate-summit-183946998.html

Even Angela Merkel, President of über green Germany, will not be attending the UN climate summit. http://notrickszone.com/2014/05/26/merkel-snubs-new-york-ban-ki-moon-climate-conference-burying-the-global-climate-agreement/

Of course, things would probably have been totally different, if the summit organisers had guaranteed that attendees would definitely not have to sit through any more boring climate presentations by former Vice President Al Gore.

another cheerful post by mr happy.

 

A History of the Disastrous Global Warming Hoax

• by Alan Caruba
• March 31, 2014

“It is the greatest deception in history and the extent of the damage has yet to be exposed and measured,” says Dr. Tim Ball in his new book, “The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science”.

 

Dr. Ball has been a climatologist for more than forty years and was one of the earliest critics of the global warming hoax that was initiated by the United Nations environmental program that was established in 1972 and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) established in 1988.

 

Several UN conferences set in motion the hoax that is based on the assertion that carbon dioxide (CO2) was causing a dramatic surge in heating the Earth. IPCC reports have continued to spread this lie through their summaries for policy makers that influenced policies that have caused nations worldwide to spend billions to reduce and restrict CO2 emissions. Manmade climate change—called anthropogenic global warming—continues to be the message though mankind plays no role whatever.

 

There is no scientific support for the UN theory.

 

CO2, despite being a minor element of the Earth’s atmosphere, is essential for all life on Earth because it is the food that nourishes all vegetation. The Earth has passed through many periods of high levels of CO2 and many cycles of warming and cooling that are part of the life of the planet.

 

“Science works by creating theories based on assumptions,” Dr. Ball notes, “then other scientists—performing their skeptical role—test them. The structure and mandate of the IPCC was in direct contradiction of this scientific method. They set out to prove the theory rather than disprove it.”

 

“The atmosphere,” Dr. Ball notes, “is three-dimensional and dynamic, so building a computer model that even approximates reality requires far more data than exists and much greater understanding of an extremely turbulent and complex system.” No computer model put forth by the IPCC in support of global warming has been accurate, nor ever could be.

 

Most of the reports were created by a small group of men working within the Climate Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia and all were members of the IPCC. The result was “a totally false picture supposedly based on science.”

 

The revelations of emails between the members of the CRU were made available in 2009 by an unknown source. Dr. Ball quotes Phil Jones, the Director of the CRU at the time of the leaks, and Tom Wigley, a former director addressing other CRU members admitting that “Many of the uncertainties surrounding the cause of climate change will never be resolved because the necessary data are lacking.”

 

The IPCC depended upon the public’s lack of knowledge regarding the science involved and the global warming hoax was greatly aided because the “mainstream media bought into and promoted the unproven theory. Scientists who challenged were denied funding and marginalized. National environmental policies were introduced based on the misleading information” of the IPCC summaries of their reports.

 

“By the time of the 2001 IPCC Third Assessment Report, the politics and hysteria about climate change had risen to a level that demanded clear evidence of a human signal,” notes Dr. Ball. “An entire industry had developed around massive funding from government. A large number of academic, political, and bureaucratic careers had evolved and depended on expansion of the evidence. Environmentalists were increasing pressure on the public and thereby politicians.”

 

The growing problem for the CRU and the entire global warming hoax was that no clear evidence existed to blame mankind for changes in the climate and still largely unknown to the public was the fact that the Earth has passed through many natural cycles of warmth and cooling. If humans were responsible, how could the CRU explain a succession of ice ages over millions of years?

 

The CRU emails revealed their growing concerns regarding a cooling cycle that had begun in the late 1990s and now, some seventeen years later, the Earth is in a widely recognized cooling cycle.

 

Moreover, the hoax was aimed at vast reductions in the use of coal, oil, and natural gas, as well as nuclear power to produce the electricity on which all modern life depends. There was advocacy of solar and wind power to replace them and nations undertook costly programs to bring about the reduction of the CO2 “fossil fuels” produced and spent billions on the “green” energy. That program is being abandoned.

 

At the heart of the hoax is a contempt for mankind and a belief that population worldwide should be reduced. The science advisor to President Obama, John Holdren, has advocated forced abortions, sterilization by introducing infertility drugs into the nation’s drinking water and food, and other totalitarian measures. “Overpopulation is still central to the use of climate change as a political vehicle,” warns Dr. Ball.

 

Given that the environmental movement has been around since the 1960s, it has taken decades for the public to grasp its intent and the torrents of lies that have been used to advance it. “More people,” notes Dr. Ball, “are starting to understand that what they’re told about climate change by academia, the mass media, and the government is wrong, especially the propaganda coming from the UN and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”

 

“Ridiculous claims—like the science is settled or the debate is over—triggered a growing realization that something was wrong.”  When the global warming advocates began to tell people that cooling is caused by warming, the public has realized how absurd the entire UN climate change argument has been.

 

Worse, however, has been “the deliberate deceptions, misinformation, manipulation of records and misapplying scientific method and research” to pursue a political objective. Much of this is clearly unlawful, but it is unlikely that any of those who perpetrated the hoax will ever be punished and, in the case of Al Gore and the IPCC, they shared a Nobel Peace Prize!

 

We are all in debt to Dr. Ball and a score of his fellow scientists who exposed the lies and debunked the hoax; their numbers are growing with thousands of scientists signing petitions and participating in international conferences to expose this massive global deception.

 

[Originally published at Warning Signs]

A History of the Disastrous Global Warming Hoax

• by Alan Caruba
• March 31, 2014

“It is the greatest deception in history and the extent of the damage has yet to be exposed and measured,” says Dr. Tim Ball in his new book, “The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science”.

 

Dr. Ball has been a climatologist for more than forty years and was one of the earliest critics of the global warming hoax that was initiated by the United Nations environmental program that was established in 1972 and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) established in 1988.

 

Several UN conferences set in motion the hoax that is based on the assertion that carbon dioxide (CO2) was causing a dramatic surge in heating the Earth. IPCC reports have continued to spread this lie through their summaries for policy makers that influenced policies that have caused nations worldwide to spend billions to reduce and restrict CO2 emissions. Manmade climate change—called anthropogenic global warming—continues to be the message though mankind plays no role whatever.

 

There is no scientific support for the UN theory.

 

CO2, despite being a minor element of the Earth’s atmosphere, is essential for all life on Earth because it is the food that nourishes all vegetation. The Earth has passed through many periods of high levels of CO2 and many cycles of warming and cooling that are part of the life of the planet.

 

“Science works by creating theories based on assumptions,” Dr. Ball notes, “then other scientists—performing their skeptical role—test them. The structure and mandate of the IPCC was in direct contradiction of this scientific method. They set out to prove the theory rather than disprove it.”

 

“The atmosphere,” Dr. Ball notes, “is three-dimensional and dynamic, so building a computer model that even approximates reality requires far more data than exists and much greater understanding of an extremely turbulent and complex system.” No computer model put forth by the IPCC in support of global warming has been accurate, nor ever could be.

 

Most of the reports were created by a small group of men working within the Climate Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia and all were members of the IPCC. The result was “a totally false picture supposedly based on science.”

 

The revelations of emails between the members of the CRU were made available in 2009 by an unknown source. Dr. Ball quotes Phil Jones, the Director of the CRU at the time of the leaks, and Tom Wigley, a former director addressing other CRU members admitting that “Many of the uncertainties surrounding the cause of climate change will never be resolved because the necessary data are lacking.”

 

The IPCC depended upon the public’s lack of knowledge regarding the science involved and the global warming hoax was greatly aided because the “mainstream media bought into and promoted the unproven theory. Scientists who challenged were denied funding and marginalized. National environmental policies were introduced based on the misleading information” of the IPCC summaries of their reports.

 

“By the time of the 2001 IPCC Third Assessment Report, the politics and hysteria about climate change had risen to a level that demanded clear evidence of a human signal,” notes Dr. Ball. “An entire industry had developed around massive funding from government. A large number of academic, political, and bureaucratic careers had evolved and depended on expansion of the evidence. Environmentalists were increasing pressure on the public and thereby politicians.”

 

The growing problem for the CRU and the entire global warming hoax was that no clear evidence existed to blame mankind for changes in the climate and still largely unknown to the public was the fact that the Earth has passed through many natural cycles of warmth and cooling. If humans were responsible, how could the CRU explain a succession of ice ages over millions of years?

 

The CRU emails revealed their growing concerns regarding a cooling cycle that had begun in the late 1990s and now, some seventeen years later, the Earth is in a widely recognized cooling cycle.

 

Moreover, the hoax was aimed at vast reductions in the use of coal, oil, and natural gas, as well as nuclear power to produce the electricity on which all modern life depends. There was advocacy of solar and wind power to replace them and nations undertook costly programs to bring about the reduction of the CO2 “fossil fuels” produced and spent billions on the “green” energy. That program is being abandoned.

 

At the heart of the hoax is a contempt for mankind and a belief that population worldwide should be reduced. The science advisor to President Obama, John Holdren, has advocated forced abortions, sterilization by introducing infertility drugs into the nation’s drinking water and food, and other totalitarian measures. “Overpopulation is still central to the use of climate change as a political vehicle,” warns Dr. Ball.

 

Given that the environmental movement has been around since the 1960s, it has taken decades for the public to grasp its intent and the torrents of lies that have been used to advance it. “More people,” notes Dr. Ball, “are starting to understand that what they’re told about climate change by academia, the mass media, and the government is wrong, especially the propaganda coming from the UN and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”

 

“Ridiculous claims—like the science is settled or the debate is over—triggered a growing realization that something was wrong.”  When the global warming advocates began to tell people that cooling is caused by warming, the public has realized how absurd the entire UN climate change argument has been.

 

Worse, however, has been “the deliberate deceptions, misinformation, manipulation of records and misapplying scientific method and research” to pursue a political objective. Much of this is clearly unlawful, but it is unlikely that any of those who perpetrated the hoax will ever be punished and, in the case of Al Gore and the IPCC, they shared a Nobel Peace Prize!

 

We are all in debt to Dr. Ball and a score of his fellow scientists who exposed the lies and debunked the hoax; their numbers are growing with thousands of scientists signing petitions and participating in international conferences to expose this massive global deception.

 

another one of your experts?

 

Credential fudging and climate denial and resume stretcher

Ball has been represented in the media as a climatologist (Canada's first, don'tcha know?) who has held a professorship for upward of twenty-eight years. However, he carefully omits this in his curriculum vitae.^[2] In fact, he was a professor of geography with a focus in historical climate who retired in 1996. When the Calgary Herald published a letter^[3] that questioned the credentials listed for Ball (in an article in which Ball attacked Tim Flannery^[4]) Ball sued for libel, while admitting that he had not been a professor for twenty-eight years.^[5] (Don't think too hard about that or it might make your head hurt.) Before the suit was dropped (against 3 defendants), Tim Lambert of Deltoid dared Ball to sue him, too.^[6] Lambert also expressed doubt over the relevance of Ball's research:

“”However, hardly any of those 51 publications are in scientific journals but include things like gardening magazines. I looked in Web of Science and could only find four papers by Ball, all on historical climatology, none on climate and atmosphere. I don't see how Ball can possibly win his case, but I guess that's not the point.[7]

Eli Rabett has created the "Tim Ball Award for Resume Stretching" in his honor.^[8]

Even within the deniosphere, Ball hasn't come up with anything new or impressive. All he does is constantly repeat points refuted a thousand times about solar cycles and how carbon dioxide is plant food. For example, take a look at his ingenious "refutation" of rising sea levels where he just puts some ice cubes in a glass and lets them melt.

Creationism

Ball also seems to be a creationist of some sort. In an op-ed in Canada Free Press, he wrote:

“”Even though it is still just a theory and not a law 148 years after it was first proposed, Darwinian evolution is the only view allowed in schools. Why? Such censorship suggests fear of other ideas, a measure of indefensibility.[9]

On his website, he attacks Richard Dawkins and claims science, evolution, and environmentalism are religions. He also believes that the Bible's predictions have been just as verified as those made by science:

“”Perhaps the ultimate irony[10] is that the biblical views on nature, human roles and responsibilities are as logical as any other including modern environmentalism.[11]

When you take his global warming denialism together with creationism and his admiration for Immanuel Velikovsky,^[12] there's clear evidence for crank magnetism.

Tim Ball's reading list

Ball recommends some great reading for all the warmists:

“”There are three Web sites I have some respect for. One is the one I helped set up by a group of very frustrated professional scientists who are retired. That’s called Friendsofscience.org. It has deliberately tried to focus on the science only. The second site that I think provides the science side of it very, very well is CO2Science.org, and that’s run by Sherwood Idso, who is the world expert on the relationship between plant growth and CO2. The third, which is a little more irreverent and maybe still slightly on the technical side for the general public, is JunkScience.com.[13]

 More lawsuits

In 2011, Ball found himself at the receiving end of a couple of libel suits. In February, University of Victoria climatologist Andrew Weaver filed a lawsuit against Ball for his op-eds that accused Weaver of incompetence and corruption. In March, Penn State climatologist Michael Mann filed a lawsuit against Ball and his think tank for publishing statements on their websites that claimed Mann was complicit in a "cover-up" of Climategate and that he had committed scientific fraud.^[14]

Since the suits were launched Canada Free Press has retracted one of the interviews with Ball on the website.^[15] Furthermore, they seem to have scrubbed a good deal of Ball's articles and Ball-related material.^[16]

So, is Ball the alter-ego of Shtal ?