Katherine Hayhoe demonstrates that she will say anything for attention.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
- EPA Climate Change Arrest
- Nothing Nuclear Winter Can’t Fix
Recent Comments
- arn on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Disillusioned on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Gamecock on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- czechlist on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Jehzsa on “pushing nature past its limits”
- arn on Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- dm on Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- dm on “pushing nature past its limits”
That is what happens when these scientist mistake a natural cause for a anthropogenic one.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273117713005474
“Possible reasons for the temporal instability of long-term effects of solar activity (SA) and galactic cosmic ray (GCR) variations on the lower atmosphere circulation were studied. It was shown that the detected earlier ?60-year oscillations of the amplitude and sign of SA/GCR effects on the troposphere pressure at high and middle latitudes (Veretenenko and Ogurtsov, Adv.Space Res., 2012) are closely related to the state of a cyclonic vortex forming in the polar stratosphere. The intensity of the vortex was found to reveal a roughly 60-year periodicity affecting the evolution of the large-scale atmospheric circulation and the character of SA/GCR effects. An intensification of both Arctic anticyclones and mid-latitudinal cyclones associated with an increase of GCR fluxes at minima of the 11-year solar cycles is observed in the epochs of a strong polar vortex. In the epochs of a weak polar vortex SA/GCR effects on the development of baric systems at middle and high latitudes were found to change the sign. The results obtained provide evidence that the mechanism of solar activity and cosmic ray influences on the lower atmosphere circulation involves changes in the evolution of the stratospheric polar vortex.”
Thanks for the info Corey
The alarmists are so dogmatic that they do not consider anything other than the AGW meme.
I love it. They aren’t wrong. The climate is not getting hot or cold when they say it’s supposed to. Are they at fault… No! It’s the climate’s fault fore being temporally unstable and that ignorant climate simply doesn’t understand that it should be following the GCM’s.
Wait…..
I thought this was a “settled science”……
😉
The Boulder Daily Camera reports that Katherine will be speaking at the Chautauqua Auditorium on Friday, September 5 at 7:30PM. Folks living near Boulder might want to drop by and discuss this with her.
Thanks for letting me know. I’m in Fort Collins this week and having dinner with Bill Gray on Friday. Maybe we will go see that.
OH, to be a fly on the wall to watch if you and Dr Gray get to ask questions.
i admire your optimism gail ,sceptics being allowed to ask questions at a warmist propaganda event . my ,whatever next 😉
You’re welcome. FWIW, ticket price for the event is $12. That’s less than half they’re charging for comedian Steve Wright and less than a night of readings of the work of Edgar Allen Poe.
I’ve learned that to never question anything at one of those meetings.
When I say “hey” you say “ho”
😀
I’m easy to please …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiiOpHEAda4
The CAGW message used to be Global Warming. Now it is Cooling caused by warming. Bogus with some use of scientific words to confuse the layman. Here is Andrew Fazekas with the newest BS story. Quote: As global temperatures are predicted to rise in coming years, the expansive ice packs, particularly those in the seas off the coast of Russia, will melt away and leave behind ever-larger areas of open water that won’t have a chance to freeze over during the winter months.
These uncovered seas end up releasing energy into the atmosphere, which leads to a weakening of our jet stream, according to the study published in the journal Nature Communications.
Their results point to a decreased sea-ice cover during November and December north of Siberia that appears to be tied to low temperatures in Canada and the U.S. in January and February of this year.
Arctic seas appear to reach their lowest levels in the month of September, and this study found that 2012 saw the lowest ice levels ever recorded. And while levels are slightly higher this year, they are still 40 per cent lower than they were in the 1970’s, Colorado-based climate researcher Mark Serreze told The Associated Press. Unquote.
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/geekquinox/more-frequent-bouts-of-polar-vortex-events-in-the-years-212548738.html#more-id
Yes, that may be what Mark Serreze told the press, but it is not true. Piers Corbyn says that during the year without a summer, 1816, there was not much ice in the polar region. Extreme cold American winters are caused by declining solar activity and not by melting ice in Russia, which by the way is not melting, but people are told that it is melting and nobody goes there to check.
But for the CAGW scare the truth is not important. Lies, told often enough, will finally be believed. The MSM are being very cooperative in this respect.
For the MSM bad news is good news and good news is no news!
The MSM is owned by the Bankers and the bankers have a vested interest in Carbon Trading:
The goal of Carbon Trading was to set up a worldwide trade in Carbon Credits (CCs), designed around a standard market mechanism, so that greenhouse gas producers could be penalised while greenhouse gas consumers could be rewarded. The easiest way to ‘consume’ CO2 is with trees so now The World Bank is deporting farmers form their farmland.
Carbon trading does nothing but move money out of the pockets of the poor and middle class into the pockets of the wealthy. It is a colossal Ponzi scheme that produces NOTHING!
Al Gore has already collected his winnings and left the building. link
The dirty little secret is that because the Warmists almost never publish error bars with their charts or predictions, and because the numbers are often posted to one or more decimal places, that people have a misconception of precision that simply doesn’t exist.
The real error bars are so overwhelmingly large that almost anything would be encompassed within the statement that “observed changes are consistent with those expected to be caused by global warming”.
The huge error bars in both the measurement and the predictions make it so that even if their predictions are fundamentally wrong it takes literally decades for temps to vary enough to leave the error bars and refute them.
Katherine and her alarmist friends simply make it up as they go along.
When I glanced quickly at this I misread the name of the organization as the “Union of Cornered Scientists”. A premonition.
Union of Cornered Scammers is a bit closer to reality…there’s not much that’s scientific about that group.
Heh.
There are some fierce members I would not try to corner. Kenji comes to mind:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/oct/07/european-biofuels-target-us-scientists#comment-12739638
Some interesting research on defecting fraud;
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26127#.VAm5wMJ0yUk
Have you ever read a paper that applies numerous exaggerations and few diminishing qualifiers?
Anything that overstates the certainty of the data?