climaterealists's blog

BY 2030, climate change will indirectly cause nearly one million deaths a year and inflict $US157 billion ($161.21 billion) in damage in terms of today's economy, according to estimates presented at UN talks.

The biggest misery will be heaped on more than 50 of the world's poorest countries, but the United States will pay the highest economic bill, it said.

"In less than 20 years, almost all countries in the world will realise high vulnerability to climate impact as the planet heats up,'' the report warned.

The study, compiled by a humanitarian research organisation and climate-vulnerable countries, assessed how 184 nations will be affected in four areas: health, weather disasters, the loss of human habitat through desertification and rising seas, and economic stress.

Those facing "acute'' exposure are 54 poor or very poor countries, including India. They will suffer disproportionately to others, although they are least to blame for the man-made greenhouse gases that drive climate change, it said.

Arctic Ice A Classic False Scare Dr. Tim Ball  Thursday, December 2, 2010  

All the scares generated by the false climate science promoted by political agendas disappear from the mainstream media and are rarely heard of again. There's no follow up in the mainstream media, no apologies for providing false or inadequate information.

Nasty old Mother Nature causes the demise by going about her normal business. As the old advertisement said, it's not nice to fool with Mother Nature. The Northern Hemisphere winter is already proving once again that global warming is another undelivered government promise. 

The sequence begins with identification of an issue. This occurs in several ways including reporters scanning science journals for articles to sensationalize; a scientist or Environmental group publicizing an issue. If the story catches, they'll push it from various angles. If it loses traction, they bring in a different scientific angle or raise the level of potential damage.

Arctic Ice A Classic False Scare

Melting Arctic ice grabbed attention and became a major part of Gore's propaganda movie An Inconvenient Truth. Dying polar bears grabbed emotions and rising sea levels flooded fertile land inhabited by much of the world's poor people. Context quickly appeared as historic reconstructions of Arctic temperatures and the natural annual variation of ice amounts showed everything within normal variability. Polar bear experts, like Mitch Taylor, debunked the endangered polar bear claims. What to do? Everyone is familiar with the dangers of thin ice so spread the claim the ice is thinning rapidly and as usual intimate it is unnatural.

The Telegraph   29 November 2010   by James Delingpole

As the latest round of UN-sponsored climate talks opened in Cancun today, ’scientists’ had a stark message on the threat posed by Man Made Global Warming. It is now so severe that only by exterminating ourselves like the vile parasite we are can we hope to leave a planet fit for habitation by generations as yet unborn, ’scientists’ say.

The radical measures being proposed by ’scientists’ include:

1. Compulsory consumption of ground-up tiger’s whiskers.

2. Jonestown-style “eco parties” where kids can join in the fun by drinking poisoned Kool-Aid (or similar locally popular beverage: eg Irn Bru in Scotland; Badoit or San Pellegrino in Notting Hill, etc).

3. Natural death safaris in Africa, North America, Australia and even Antarctica where you can re-enter the ecosystem through the bowels of your killer predator of choice: Lion; Grizzly; Great White or Leopard Seal.

An article by John Droz, jr

Physicist and Environmental Advocate

22 July 2009

A look at computer modelling and the IPCC- excellent reading.

To read this pdf file please click here.

The Telegraph 26 November 2010, by James Delingpole

An email reaches me from the office of Sir Edward Acton, Vice Chancellor of the University of East Anglia. Apparently in my blogs I have expressed “inaccurate and vituperative views” about certain members of his hugely distinguished and globally admired seat of learning, and unless I apologise and retract he will report me to the Press Complaints Commission.

As you can imagine I am keen as mustard to soothe the wounded feelings of Sir Edward and his world-renowned staff, but not if it means retracting statements which are patently true. For example, Sir Edward takes exception to my description of Prof Phil Jones, the head of his Climatic Research Unit, as “disgraced, FOI-breaching, email-deleting, scientific-method-abusing.” Clearly poor Sir Edward has not been kept in the loop by his minions, so I’d better break the sad news about something really quite embarrassing that happened to his university last year. It was a story called Climategate and involved numerous leaked emails, many of which showed the aforementioned Prof Jones in a not-altogether flattering light.

Canada Free Press

by Alan Caruba 25 November 2010

 For a brief period I subscribed to The Economist, the London-based internationally distributed magazine, but I stopped as it became obvious that its editors are idiots and the general purpose of the magazine is to ignore any and all facts that might contradict their obsession with “global warming” and now “climate change.”  

Last year, The Economist had a cover that said, “Stop Climate Change.” That’s like saying stop the Earth from circumnavigating the Sun. The issue came out about the same time as the entire fictitious infrastructure of “global warming” came undone and resulted in the collapse of the last United Nations conference of liars who had gathered in Copenhagen to impose the purchase, sale and trade of “carbon credits” on the world ..

The Telegraph- November 19 2010

by James Delingpole

Watermelons: green on the outside, red on the inside. This is the theme of my forthcoming book on the controlling,  poisonously misanthropic and aggressively socialistic instincts of the modern environmental movement. So how very generous that two of that movement’s leading lights should have chosen the anniversary of Climategate to prove my point entirely.

The first comes courtesy of German economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer who has openly admitted what some of us have been saying for some time: that “Climate Change” has nothing to do with man’s modest and thoroughly unthreatening contribution to global mean temperatures, nor even with the plight of baby polar bears so sweet you could almost hug them if you didn’t know they’d take your arm off in a trice. All it is, really, is a Marxist exercise in minority grievance-mongering and wealth redistribution on a global scale.

The Telegraph- 26 September 2010

by James Delingpole

Bilderberg. Whether you believe it’s part of a sinister conspiracy which will lead inexorably to one world government or whether you think it’s just an innocent high-level talking shop, there’s one thing that can’t be denied: it knows which way the wind is blowing. (Hat tips: Will/NoIdea/Ozboy)

At its June meeting in Sitges, Spain (unreported and held in camera, as is Bilderberg’s way), some of the world’s most powerful CEOs rubbed shoulders with notable academics and leading politicians. They included: the chairman of Fiat, the Irish Attorney General Paul Gallagher, the US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, Henry Kissinger, Bill Gates, Dick Perle, the Queen of the Netherlands, the editor of the Economist…. Definitely not Z-list, in other words.

Which is what makes one particular item on the group’s discussion agenda so tremendously significant. See if you can spot the one I mean:

The 58th Bilderberg Meeting will be held in Sitges, Spain 3 – 6 June 2010. The Conference will deal mainly with Financial Reform, Security, Cyber Technology, Energy, Pakistan, Afghanistan, World Food Problem, Global Cooling, Social Networking, Medical Science, EU-US relations.

The Brown Daily Herald, 7 September 2010
 Dominic Mhiripiri

 The mainstream alarmist posturing on climate change by the likes of Al
Gore, regardless of whether it meets the demands of scientific accuracy
or not, is resetting political priorities and imposing billions of
dollars in costs for governments the world over.

Sustained inquiry, debate and scrutiny around the dealings of those
involved - from scientific practitioners to powerful policymakers - are
not only inevitable, but are also absolute imperatives. The taxpayer,
after all, funds most of the climate research and his life is vastly
affected by the domestic and international policies that it shapes. In
particular, emerging economies across the world grapple with the burden
of international pressures to "green up" versus their own aspirations to
fully industrialize.

In that regard, the sensational November 2009 revelation of deplorable
practices by leading climate change scientists cannot have been some
blind chase driven by ideology, but a significant and irreversible turn
in one of the greatest geopolitical debates of all time. Notwithstanding
the supposed exonerations of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) scientists
in question, their behavior remains unscrupulous. Moreover, for those
manning the frontiers of an issue with such enormous global
implications, "hiding the temperature decline" and destroying emails
with critical evidence strikes me as just outright unacceptable.