Archive for the ‘Hockey Team’ category

Climate Scandals: List Of 94 Climate-Gates

August 3, 2010



Nutrition For Dummkopfs – From The Potsdam Institute For Climate Impact Research

July 1, 2010

Potsdam Research Institute says this is the best way to live to save the climate.

The German online Die Zeit has a report today, Climate Scientists Advise Eating Less Meat, admonishing westerners not to eat meat and not to drink milk, otherwise climate catastrophe will strike us violently.

This of course is all based on “science” from the alarmist, government-funded Potsdam Institute For Climate Impact Research (PIK) in Germany, where kooks like Stefan Rahmstorf and Dr. anti-scepticism Hans Joachim Schellnhuber busily examine and analyse each and every negative  impact of each and every western lifestyle sin (at PIK there is nothing positive in western lifestyles – everything is negative).

One potentially mortal sin is the human enjoyment of meat and dairy products. This unforgivable transgression has been carefully scrutinised by PIK climate-impact researcher Dr Alexander Popp, who says:

With a return to Sundays-only meat and reduced consumption of dairy products, Germans can become healthier and do the atmosphere a big favour.

Die Zeit reports, based on PIK science:

The culprits foremost are two climate-gases: methane and nitrous oxide. The first is produced by the digestion of cows and the manure they excrete. The second, and even more potent gas, nitrous oxide, results from fertilising fields.

Popp and his colleagues have calculated that emissions of the two above-mentioned gases will increase by 76% compared to 1995 if meat and dairy product consumption continues to rise at the current rate.

Only with a  changed lifestyle, one that more often refrains from meat and milk products, and one with a climate-friendly production, do the researchers say 1995 levels can be reached.

Shaking a finger, Popp admonishes that:

Today’s emissions levels of the western lifestyle are to blame, and for that reason it is to be expected that people in rich countries be the first to make lifestyle changes. ‘It’s about fulfilling the function of setting an example.’

Popp singles out the real culprits:

The lifestyle of Americans and Europeans acts as a model in developing countries, where meat and milk are status symbols, which is how it should be again for industrial countries, says Popp. For that reason, meat and milk ought not be on the dinner table every day.

So there you have it. Our tax dollars used to fund a bunch of eggheads who have nothing better to do than to gripe and moan, and to constantly nag the rest of society.

Guess what I’m having for dinner today!

Climate Scandals – More Than You Can Shake A Stick At

June 6, 2010


Gate Blowup! Come On In Gate Lovers!

May 20, 2010




Schellnhuber: Now Scepticism Is Anti-Science!

May 15, 2010


Things have really gotten desperate for the CAGWists also here in Germany. That’s what a little Climategate and Germany’s coldest winter in 46 years can do to a junk-science theory.  

Dirk Maxeiner brings up a piece appearing in the German online Frankfurter Rundschau titled: Campaign of Lies McCarthy Style Click here!  

The piece describes how more than 250 scientists, among them 11 Nobel Prize recipients, have expressed their outrage in a letter published in Science claiming they’ve been the targets of McCarthy-like attacks. The Frankfurter Rundschau says the attacks are coming from “Konservative Think-Tanks” and “Republikaner”, among them the Heartland Institute, and James Inhofe, all designed to “torpedo the urgently needed climate protection measures”, and blah blah blah.  

The tone of the piece of course is that sceptics are bad and the warmists are good. The piece also heavily bemoans the rapidly eroding public concerns of AGW as an issue, and asks: Who’s behind all that irresponsible scepticism?

Prof Hans Joachim Scellnhuber, an IPCC lead author, explains it for them. Here’s the text in German, then followed by the translation in English:   

Der Potsdamer Klimaforscher Hans-Joachim Schellnhuber, Mitunterzeichner des Science-Briefs, hält den Einfluss der Skeptiker in Deutschland für geringer als in den USA. Es handele sich dabei um sehr unterschiedliche Gruppen, sagte der Präsident des Instituts für Klimafolgen-Forschung der FR. Die meisten operierten ‘aus der sicheren Anonymität des Internets heraus. Sie versuchen erst gar nicht, bei einer sachlichen Debatte erfolgreich zu sein, sondern vielmehr grundsätzliche Zweifel an der Wissenschaft als Instrument der Wirklichkeitserklärung zu säen.” Damit fänden sie große Sympathie “bei vielen antiaufklärerischen Kräften’.  

In English:  

Potsdam climate researcher Hans-Joachim Schellnhuber, a signatory of the Science Letter, thinks the sceptics in Germany have less influence than in the USA. They involve very different groups, the Director of the Institute for Climate Impact Research told the Frankfurter Rundschau. Most of them ‘operate from the safety of anonymity in the internet. They don’t try at all to do it successfully through a factual debate; rather they attempt to sow scepticism on science being an instrument to explain reality.’  This is how they gain much sympathy ‘from the many forces of anti-science’.  

In Schellnhuber’s world, scepticism is anti-science. And if you doubt their science, then you are anti-science.

Oh, by the way, let’s not forget that reality and science for them are doctored up iStock polar bear photos and manipulated temperature curves. And who are the ones who keep running and hiding from debate?  

What about the polar bear photo in the Frankfurter Rundschau piece? The caption reads: “Polar bears searching for food”. But at least that photo, as far as I can tell, hasn’t been doctored.

Montford’s Hockey Stick Illusion

May 10, 2010

 If you haven’t picked up and read a copy of A.W. Montford’s recent Hockey Stick Illusion, then you really should do it. I’m so impressed that I’ve decided to write a chapter by chapter review, as time permits. I thought I had known most of the general Hockey Stick story, but Montford filled in lots of gaps with details I hadn’t been aware of.

Chapter 1 focuses on the roots of the global warming movement, beginning with Arrhenius, Callendar and the World Meteorological Organisation, and moves on to 1988 when James Hansen’s testified before Congress. That year the UN went on to create the IPCC. Already claims of scientific consensus we’re sprouting.

In the IPCC’s First Assessment Report (FAR) in 1990, Montford describes the 1000-year temperature graph showing how the MWP was warmer than today’s temperatures, a graph the IPCC soon came to regret. Being a real nuisance, the MWP had to go to make way for the  new desired narrative of CAGW. Geoscientist David Deming, who was a potential recruit for revising the historical record, describes how he was sent an e-mail by a prominent U of Arizona scientist with the astonishing statement:

We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.

Subsequent papers showing a warmer MWP were smacked down by science journals. Then came MBH98, and the AGW movement was on its feet and marching. The troublesome MWP had been erased and  the 20th century was made to be the warmest on record. The movement was on rails. 

Montford describes the media explosion that ensued and how the Hockey Stick was prominently featured in the IPCC third assessment report, making it THE key argument for the need to curb CO2 emissions, and making the once obscure Michael Mann a celebrated scientist. The groundwork for the greatest hoax of all time was now in place.

 There’s no shortage of intriguing detail. It’s a book that keeps the light on at night.

The Attraction Of The AGW Religion

May 9, 2010

Jo Nova found this jewel of a parody (mentioned in my previous post):

Life is beginning to lose all meaning and purpose for some, as their religion collapses. For the AGW alarmists, it was so good despising and feeling superior to all the unenlightened flat-earthers and the rest of the planet-destroying humanity, and punishing them for their behaviour.

Sadly, the infliction of punishment is one primary element that makes the AGW religion so attractive for some, especially its leaders. In this religion it’s actually a virtue to seek ways to punish and control people instead of loving them. Those who join it are promised rescue, esteem and acceptance.

Inflicting punishment is a position of power. And when it comes to inflicting punishment, there’s an eerie thing about how people just queue up to do it – especially if there’s a social mechanism in place to reward it. Psychological experiments have confirmed this time and again, just as a recent French experiment on inflicting torture on pleading victims shows:,8599,1972981,00.html

In the experiment, those who inflicted the punishment eventually came back to their senses and were later horrified to see how they had been duped into taking it to such extremes. They even had to be psychologically debriefed.