Samtidigt som FN:s IPCC och de elitistiska multimiljardärerna med sina hangarounds predikar religionen om CO2-skatt på fisande kor, så har det Arktiska istäcket i hemlighet plötsligt växt med över 29% på bara ett år... (De 60% som först rapporterades verkar dock ha varit "ett typografiskt misstag" från NASA-finansierade "National Snow and Ice Data Centre" (NSIDC)...
***
---GLOBAL NEDKYLNING PÅGÅR!---
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
is a scientific intergovernmental body,[1][2] set up at the request of member governments.[3] It was first established in 1988 by two United Nations organizations, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and later endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly through Resolution 43/53.[...]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_Panel_on_Climate_Change
***
IPPC avslöjat:
- Ledarna för sekten i "klimatkyrkan" blir rikare varje gång som en ko fiser...
***
Publicerad den 27 sep 2013
Publicerad den 27 sep 2013
SHOW NOTES AND MP3: http://www.corbettreport.com/?p=8066
The IPCC has released its latest assessment of the state of climate science, and this time it's even more dire than their 2007 assessment. Global warming is "unequivocal" and humans are the "dominant cause" to a certainty of 95%. But how are these uncertainties calculated? And how does the IPCC process work anyway? Join us this week on The Corbett Report as we dissect the latest IPCC hype and examine the organizations processes and conclusions.
***
The IPCC has released its latest assessment of the state of climate science, and this time it's even more dire than their 2007 assessment. Global warming is "unequivocal" and humans are the "dominant cause" to a certainty of 95%. But how are these uncertainties calculated? And how does the IPCC process work anyway? Join us this week on The Corbett Report as we dissect the latest IPCC hype and examine the organizations processes and conclusions.
***
Documentation (Corbett video)
***
| CNN Hypes the IPCC AR4 Report | |
| Time Reference: | 01:14 |
| BBC Hypes the IPCC AR4 Report | |
| Time Reference: | 01:25 |
| ABC Hypes the IPCC AR4 Report | |
| Time Reference: | 01:33 |
| Global Hypes the IPCC AR4 Report | |
| Time Reference: | 01:47 |
| ABC Hypes the IPCC AR4 Report (again) | |
| Time Reference: | 02:08 |
| Episode 110 – Climategate | ||
| Time Reference: | 04:08 | |
| Climategate: Dr. Tim Ball on the hacked CRU emails | |
| Time Reference: | 04:16 |
| Climategate is Still the Issue | |
| Time Reference: | 04:19 |
| Crimatologists Found Guilty of Hiding Data | |
| Time Reference: | 05:04 |
| Climate CONsensus, Carbon CONtrols, Truther CONvicted – Sunday Update | |
| Time Reference: | 32:56 |
| The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Expert | |
| Time Reference: | 09:44 |
| Author Donna Laframboise on The Bolt Report | |
| Time Reference: | 10:00 |
| Interview 434 – Donna Laframboise | |
| Time Reference: | 13:09 |
| CNN Hypes the IPCC’s AR5 Report | |
| Time Reference: | 13:52 |
| Sky Hypes the IPCC’s AR5 Report | |
| Time Reference: | 14:17 |
| Sky Hypes the IPCC’s AR5 Report | |
| Time Reference: | 14:25 |
| Democracy Now Hypes the IPCC’s AR5 Report | |
| Time Reference: | 15:06 |
| IPCC models getting mushy | |
| Time Reference: | 17:58 |
| Judith Curry: Leaked IPCC report discussed in the MSM | |
| Time Reference: | 22:18 |
| The 2009 Video Archive DVD | |
| Time Reference: | 33:24 |
| Episode 087 – The UN Doesn’t Love You | |
| Time Reference: | 41:25 |
| JudithCurry.com | |
| Time Reference: | 42:15 |
| ClimateAudit.org | |
| Time Reference: | 42:18 |
| WattsUpWithThat.com | |
| Time Reference: | 42:21 |
| “Trees” by Red Tail Hawk | |
| Time Reference: | 44:50 |
- The Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific has remained blocked by pack-ice all year. More than 20 yachts that had planned to sail it have been left ice-bound and a cruise ship attempting the route was forced to turn back.
- Some eminent scientists now believe the world is heading for a period of cooling that will not end until the middle of this century – a process that would expose computer forecasts of imminent catastrophic warming as dangerously misleading.
The disclosure comes 11 months after The Mail on Sunday triggered intense political and scientific debate by revealing that:
Global warming has ‘paused’ since the beginning of 1997...
– an event that the computer models used by climate experts failed to predict.
In March, this newspaper further revealed that temperatures are about to drop below the level that the models forecast with ‘90 per cent certainty’.
The pause – which has now been accepted as real by every major climate research centre – is important, because the models’ predictions of ever-increasing global temperatures have made many of the world’s economies divert billions of pounds into ‘green’ measures to counter climate change.
Those predictions now appear gravely flawed.
The continuing furore caused by The Mail on Sunday’s revelations – which will now be amplified by the return of the Arctic ice sheet – has forced the UN’s climate change body to reconsider its position.
The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was due in October to start publishing its Fifth Assessment Report – a huge three-volume study issued every six or seven years. It will hold a pre-summit in Stockholm later this month.
- THERE WON'T BE ANY ICE AT ALL!!!
...HOW THE BBC PREDICTED CHAOS IN 2007
Only six years ago, the BBC reported that the Arctic would be ice-free in summer by 2013, citing a scientist in the US who claimed this was a ‘conservative’ forecast. Perhaps it was their confidence that led more than 20 yachts to try to sail the Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific this summer. As of last week, all these vessels were stuck in the ice, some at the eastern end of the passage in Prince Regent Inlet, others further west at Cape Bathurst.
Shipping experts said the only way these vessels were likely to be freed was by the icebreakers of the Canadian coastguard. According to the official Canadian government website, the Northwest Passage has remained ice-bound and impassable all summer.
The BBC’s 2007 report quoted scientist Professor Wieslaw Maslowski, who based his views on super-computer models and the fact that ‘we use a high-resolution regional model for the Arctic Ocean and sea ice’.
He was confident his results were ‘much more realistic’ than other projections, which ‘underestimate the amount of heat delivered to the sea ice’. Also quoted was Cambridge University expert
Professor Peter Wadhams. He backed Professor Maslowski, saying his model was ‘more efficient’ than others because it ‘takes account of processes that happen internally in the ice’.
He added: ‘This is not a cycle; not just a fluctuation. In the end, it will all just melt away quite suddenly.’[...]
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/And-global-COOLING-Return-Arctic-ice-cap-grows-29-year.html#ixzz2gEWJb7oZ
***
***
***
Publicerad den 29 sep 2013
Publicerad den 29 sep 2013
TRANSCRIPT AND SOURCES: http://www.corbettreport.com/?p=8071
In this inaugural edition of "Global Warming Minute," James Corbett of corbettreport.com dissects the news from the new ipcc report that "scientists" are "95% certain" that climate change is manmade.
In this inaugural edition of "Global Warming Minute," James Corbett of corbettreport.com dissects the news from the new ipcc report that "scientists" are "95% certain" that climate change is manmade.
In recent days, you’ve probably heard ad nauseum that the UN’s new IPCC report claims that it is “95% certain” that humans are causing climate change.
95% is a very specific number. So where does it come from?
The IPCC uses a “likelihood scale” that assigns percentages to various phrases, ranging from “exceptionally unlikely” (0-1% probability) to “virtually certain” (99-100% probability).
This sounds like it is based on a precise scientific measurement or well-defined statistical process, but when it comes to deciding how likely it is that climate change is manmade, this is in fact a subjective decision that is made by the report’s authors.
According to the IPCC: “The approaches used in detection and attribution research […] cannot fully account for all uncertainties, and thus ultimately expert judgment is required to give a calibrated assessment of whether a specific cause is responsible for a given climate change.”
In other words, the “95% probability” that is making all of the headlines is nothing more than an arbitrary number decided on in closed door meetings between the report authors. Still, it serves an important propaganda purpose in giving a veneer of scientific credibility to the decision, one that a media that never bothers to explain these decisions to you thinks you will be too stupid to figure out for yourself:
So how reliable is the IPCC process in general?
***
***
***- Ledande klimatforskare var även kriminella bluffmakare - de raderade och dolde sina forskningsresultat för att inte avslöja klimatbluffen
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1246661/New-scandal-Climate-Gate-scientists-accused-hiding-data-global-warming-sceptics.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1246661/New-scandal-Climate-Gate-scientists-accused-hiding-data-global-warming-sceptics.html
***
***
***
---CLIMATEGATE---
The Telegrph 2009
This scandal could well be "the greatest in modern science". Emails – exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:
***
Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.
[...] Perhaps the most damaging revelations – the scientific equivalent of the Telegraph's MPs' expenses scandal – are those concerning the way Warmist scientists may variously have manipulated or suppressed evidence in order to support their cause.
Here are a few tasters:
Manipulation of evidence:
And, perhaps most reprehensibly, a long series of communications discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process. How, in other words, to create a scientific climate in which anyone who disagrees with AGW can be written off as a crank, whose views do not have a scrap of authority.[...]
***
This scandal could well be "the greatest in modern science". Emails – exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:
***
Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.
[...] Perhaps the most damaging revelations – the scientific equivalent of the Telegraph's MPs' expenses scandal – are those concerning the way Warmist scientists may variously have manipulated or suppressed evidence in order to support their cause.
Here are a few tasters:
Manipulation of evidence:
I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.Private doubts about whether the world really is heating up:
***
The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.Suppression of evidence:
***
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Sceptic scientists:
Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.
Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.
We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.
***
Next time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beatAttempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP):
the crap out of him. Very tempted.
***
……Phil and I have recently submitted a paper using about a dozen NH records that fit this category, and many of which are available nearly 2K back–I think that trying to adopt a timeframe of 2K, rather than the usual 1K, addresses a good earlier point that Peck made w/ regard to the memo, that it would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”, even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back….
And, perhaps most reprehensibly, a long series of communications discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process. How, in other words, to create a scientific climate in which anyone who disagrees with AGW can be written off as a crank, whose views do not have a scrap of authority.[...]
***
---Möte i Klimatkyrkan:---
Miljardär och extrem miljöbov: Al Gore
Video publicerad den 8 maj 2013
From publicly disclosed filings, Al Gore's worth can be estimated at over $200 million, much more than what he was worth when he was in office. The man largely responsible for a global awareness of climate change did not make his fortune from green technologies, however. The Resident (aka Lori Harfenist) explores the real story...
***
*
*** -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Vidareläsning:
http://undermattans.blogspot.com/2013/06/nasa-co2-kyler-atmosfaren.html
http://undermattans.blogspot.com/2013/05/co2-religionen-som-gor-bankirerna-annu.html
http://undermattans.blogspot.com/2013/05/miljardaren-al-gores-trovardighet.html
***
KLIMATBLUFFEN för elitens CO2-skatt fortsätter - ...samtidigt som en ny istid närmar sig
Highly toxic squalene MF59 adjuvant that caused Gulf War syndrome in military servicemen now being added to some civilian flu vaccines http://www.naturalnews.com/042241_Gulf_War_syndrome_flu_vaccines_MF59.html
SvaraRadera