Has global warming stopped?

‘The fact is that the global temperature of 2007 is statistically the same as 2006 and every year since 2001′

For the past decade the world has not warmed. Global warming has stopped. It’s not a viewpoint or a sceptic’s inaccuracy. It’s an observational fact. Clearly the world of the past 30 years is warmer than the previous decades and there is abundant evidence (in the northern hemisphere at least) that the world is responding to those elevated temperatures. But the evidence shows that global warming as such has ceased.

I now await an insulting barrage of words from the irrepressible “Rob Nescavil” at Illinois Left Reason. The post will be complete with circular references to 100s of left/green/scientific/FOIA” sites that will refer to each other in how brilliantly correct they are.

Why, Exxon (a corporation poised to reap billions off of Al Gore’s idiotic ‘carbon trading’ schemes” is funding every one who disagrees with the proven consensus…

PROVEN I TELL YOU!!!! THERE SHALL BE NO MORE DEBATE

of Republican caused global warming.
___

What a crock of crap.
___

Look every one. I support a hefty gax tax offset by tax reductions for the working poor and middle class (Social Sec. etc.)

I support innovative ideas that tax waste heat, or waste in general. Adding $10 to the cost of dumping a yard of crap in a landfill will create massive incentives to recyle. I also don’t have problems with a well-crafted incentive structure to invest in new technologies. I’m all for a cleaner environment, and if taxing waste is better than taxing incomes, then we can kill two birds with one stone.
___

What I can’t stand or abide, is a puffed up cadre of faux intellectuals preening about with a false sense of moral superiority, blathering about how ‘the debates is over’ right about the time they start losing all the debates.

It is intellectual cowardice, pure and simple.
_____

Data

http://www.climateaudit.org/

http://www.climateaudit.org/?cat=7

http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/trc.html

Prof. Mann has recently boasted that our 2003 paper in E&E has been completely discredited. In that paper we made 10 claims. Steve has written up a scorecard that goes over the public record and reveals Mann’s claim to be at odds with the facts.

http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/climate_change/001292a_question_for_the_m.html#comments

Nature magazine, arguably the leading scientific journal in the world, published a paper this week by two widely-respected scholars — Gabriel Vecchi and Brian Soden — suggesting that global warming may have a minimal effect on hurricanes. Over two days the media — as measured by Google News — published a grand total of 3 news stories on this paper. Now contrast this with a paper published in July in a fairly obscure journal by two other respected scholars — Peter Webster and Greg Holland — suggesting that global warming has a huge effect on hurricanes. That paper resulted in 79 news stories stories over two days.

Who Fund’s the hacks at “RealClimate?”

http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/climate_change/000884holier_than_thou.html

2. Is only some money unclean? Those who are criticized for accepting industry money often observe that Jim Hansen was awarded an unrestricted cash prize of $250,000 from the Heinz Family Philanthropies.

http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/climate_change/000317a_response_to_realcl.html

1. No free passes.

RealClimate’s focus thus far is very much framed in one political direction, e.g., on attacking George Will, Senator James Inhofe, Michael Crichton, McIntyre and McKitrick, Fox News, and Myron Ebell. These criticisms are perfectly justified, but RealClimate shouldn’t give a free pass to anyone, especially those whose political agenda they may find more compelling. Here are a few items from the past week that RealClimate might have focused on:

*Worldwatch released its 2005 State of the World report and linked the 2004 Florida hurricane season and typhoons to signs of an “accelerated global warming.” There is no scientific basis for making this linkage.

Perhaps God put Al Gore on the earth to discredit (by association) numerous ideas, people, and institutions that deserve said discrediting.

This poltroon is going to take the Film Acadmey, The politically extreme Nobel Prize cabal, and 1000s of investors down with him. Just ask Howard Dean.

Scientists doubt climate change

“I find the Doomsday picture Al Gore is painting — a six-meter sea level rise, 15 times the IPCC number — entirely without merit,” said Dutch atmospheric scientist Hendrik Tennekes, one of the researchers quoted in the report by Republican staff of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

“I protest vigorously the idea that the climate reacts like a home heating system to a changed setting of the thermostat: just turn the dial, and the desired temperature will soon be reached,” Mr. Tennekes said in the report.

Sen. James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma, ranking Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, said the report debunks Mr. Gore’s claim that the “debate is over.”

Anyone who says “debate is over” should be viewed as a liar or propagandist right off the bat. Anyone who uses the absurd “funded by Exxon” argument is pretty much too stupid to be taken seriously.

Exxon is now on board with all the cash to be creamed off of “alternative energy” schemes. They may fund some skeptical think tanks, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t playing with the Feds for tax credit and “carbon credit” booty. Exxon even admits as much.

After a quick review of the report, Gore spokeswoman Kalee Kreider said 25 or 30 of the scientists may have received funding from Exxon Mobil Corp.

Exxon Mobil spokesman Gantt H. Walton dismissed the accusation, saying the company is concerned about climate-change issues and does not pay scientists to bash global-warming theories.

Slowly but surely, the lies and overstatement of the global warming propagandists are starting to unwind.

The hundreds of others in the report — climatologists, oceanographers, geologists, glaciologists, physicists and paleoclimatologists — voice varying degrees of criticism of the popular global-warming theory. Their testimony challenges the idea that the climate-change debate is “settled” and runs counter to the claim that the number of skeptical scientists is dwindling.

The report’s authors expect some of the scientists will recant their remarks under intense pressure from the public and from within professional circles to conform to the global-warming theory, a committee staffer said.

Several scientists in the report said many colleagues share their skepticism about man-made climate change but don’t speak out publicly for fear of retribution, according to the report.

“Many of my colleagues with whom I spoke share these views and report on their inability to publish their skepticism in the scientific or public media,” atmospheric scientist Nathan Paldor, professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, said in the report.

“The endless claims of a ‘consensus’ about man-made global warming grow less-and-less credible every day,” he said.

Al Gore – catatonic coverter of bad ideas. He endorses something (or is endorsed), and the credibility of the idea, person, or institution tanks. How long can Google stock endure?