AGW deniers and Kochbots look away: We’re headed for extinction via global climate change

91 comments on “AGW deniers and Kochbots look away: We’re headed for extinction via global climate change
  1. Mervyn King says:

    Yes, course we are.

  2. NoEffingWay says:

    Bawahahahahahahahahahaha. That Max, he’s crazy.
    Thanks for the laugh.

  3. SilverCondom says:

    Right on target, Max. Only ppl with brain damage or trolls won’t see it.
    Does not matter though, human species disappear.

  4. Kwai Chang says:

    (ugh)

  5. Kwai Chang says:

    (intermission…)

  6. bammbamm says:

    Ahh well, too late. I guess we might as well “party out”.

  7. rawnrawn says:

    does the 400 comment get an ounce of silver?

  8. F. Beard says:

    Suede shoes! I used to love suede shoes! Thanks Max, for the memory jolt. Now what were you saying?

  9. dg says:

    Repeat after me: there has been no warming since 1995, there has been no warming since 1995, there has been no warming since 1995.

    http://goo.gl/9AMQh

  10. Adam Randolph says:

    There are two kinds of brains. The brains that GET science, the brains that KNOW that Noah’s Ark type stuff is rubbish, the brains that CAN reason are in the minority. And, alas, the brains that DON’T GET science, the brains that KNOW that there are 72 virgins waiting in heaven after the suicide bombing is carried out, the brains that CAN’T reason are in the majority.

  11. F. Beard says:

    the brains that CAN’T reason are in the majority. Adam Randolph

    Then evolution does not work?

  12. dont worry people, i have an on/off switch for the sun, i fitted a dimmer to it to and have it working on a timer so i dont have to turn it on and off manually.. go about your day, be happy and let those who believe in it worry for al our souls : )
    you two are so comical!

  13. t-rex and the slick pig says:

    iam your planetary consumer(word of the day), iam your kRochbot. just remember it is only evolution, as one species adapts another must die. psss, buy silver.

  14. Youri Carma says:

    Rockefellers, Al gore and Pachauri making ‘fortune’ from carbon trading firms.

    Rockefellers Exxon Mobil now supports carbon tax

    The Rockefellers, Obama and the Carbon Trading Scam

  15. t-rex and the slick pig says:

    yes beard, evolution does work, the monkey the man then the gun

  16. Mishopshno says:

    Time to rename your show:
    On the Ledge

  17. Trevor Morgan says:

    So I am soon to be a stiff with silver in safe storage. We buy if we are all to die???

  18. Robert Mockan says:

    Where did I put the comic section of the newspaper?
    Oh, never mind. This post will suffice for my morning laugh.
    The author needs less contemplation of “mirror” neurons, and a larger knowledge base.

    (Psst. Got a moment? Self awareness, that little bird that go tweet-tweet, that we like to elevate to the unified field theory of the “meaning of life”, is a JOKE! Extinction by global climate change? LOL! There will be people someday living in space colonies, on other worlds, organic “minds” replaced by synthetic “minds”, and all programmed to NEVER EVER stop believing in their destiny. Extinction? NEVER HAPPEN! And certainly NOT by climate change.)

    Read about the more recent meaning of life, and (possibly) weep. All the illusions and delusions of the MATRIX always existed, after all. In human history. And all of them will fade away with the currents of time.

    http://edge.org/conversation/mirror-neurons-and-the-brain-in-the-vat

  19. Robert Baird says:

    Is this article peer reviewed ?!!!

  20. Bruce says:

    Mishopshno | August 20, 2011 at 8:35 pm |
    Time to rename your show:
    On the Ledge

    ———
    It’s my understanding that Max has signed on for 12 episodes of “Fry a Denier”, starting next month.

  21. Al Kyder says:

    @ F .Beard ; Then evolution does not work?

    Thats a bit fatalistic . Maybe the humans are devolving? They can still count but can no longer think.

  22. t-rex and the slick pig says:

    hey morgan, pss silver is in reference to what is fiat currency, it will die and another form will come to pass. hopefully a gold standard or some variation of. and yes you can compare the statement to how the nature of science truely works, it is only evolution like it or not. just dont call it fascism f beard

  23. Al Kyder says:

    @ Bruce

    I see no evidence of the undefeated truth warrior being defeated. ~got sauce

  24. Angelo says:

    This article is so much more guff. With all the cutbacks in everything due the crisis, we are trying to make a conspiracy out of cuts to a few of these irrelevant bozos.

    The facts reported are incorrect. The world has been much warmer during the history of life on our planet. All real indicators are for cooler years ahead.

    Tough love, silver & thermals.

  25. F. Beard says:

    Maybe the humans are devolving? Al Kyder

    Afraid so. Only species with a sufficient population size and reproduction rate such as bacteria, viruses and maybe termites can beat the odds since the overwhelming majority of mutations are deadly.

  26. Trevor Morgan says:

    Yes, but if these Jeremiad prophesies are inevitable why buy anything. Silver may make pretty grave goods but with all of us crocked who’s there to bury us?
    No, I buy silver on the working hypothesis that somehow a good portion of us will muddle through somehow…

  27. Basil says:

    As usual, roll out the Exxon and Koch Bros sponsored mental midgets and buffoons. I have seen more intellectual capacity in men carved from bananas.

  28. Youri Carma says:

    Climategate Deniers getting desperate aahahahaahah Now ET’s wonna kill us lOlz

    Bizarre, craptastic theory from the Guardian, Penn State, and NASA: “ET will kill us because global warming will tip them off that we are a bad species”

    So we don’t have to kill ourselves after all ROFL!

    First the governments deny that ET’s exists at all and know they say they do exist but they wonna kill us over AGW ahahaahahaahahahaahah!

  29. Youri Carma says:

    To expand on the hilarious ET issue:

    If the ET’s are so concerned about AGW why don’t they give us zero-point energy.

  30. t-rex and the slick pig says:

    jeremaid? who or what the hell is that? i cant drink the holy water it will only make me sick. yes you are on track with the “muddle through”. you will be happy in the end, pss buy silver.

  31. acomfortablehat says:

    The majority of the “brains that cannot reason” are entrapped within a degreed, economic religion, pillared with money, politics and yet another, type of religion. It’s a contrivance designed by KINGS for the maintenance of KINGS, with no scientific input or relationship to the natural environment. The subconscious easily over takes, the creative mind under such regimes.

    Evolution is and will continue to work fine, with or without us … Nature does not give a rat’s ass about your life form, your stash, your religion, or lack thereof. There was life long before either or any. There was methinks, a lack of potable water at the time of these mimicked, writings … the bastards were all drunk from the distilled grape … and I say given the logic, good for them, could not have got through it without it! “The spirit”

    Having said that, the information has value if treated as information not an “answer” in a world crazy for answers.

  32. Robert Mockan says:

    @ Youri Carma

    When I was growing up every body who read science fiction new that
    BEMs always want to kill us. (Bug Eyed Monsters).

    Getting into UFOlogy it was the Greys, then the Reptilians.

    Now it is ETs?

    Any particular species of ETs, or do they ALL want to kill, disintegrate, dissolve, turn us into zombies, have us for dinner, what ever?

  33. Youri Carma says:

    Pachauri’s Lucrative World of Climate Change

    What Pachauri calls “business opportunities” are termed by others “financial disaster.” Companies from developed countries that export operations to places like India leave unemployment at home and reap a hefty profit from selling their carbon permits in the global carbon trading market. Consider what happened to 1,700 steel workers from Teesside in northeast England. They lost their jobs when the steel giant Corus announced plans to close two plants and expand operations in India through its parent company, the Tata Group. After the move, Tata sold its English carbon permits for £1.2 billion, as reported by the Express.

  34. Steve_D says:

    @Youri

    Because they are on Al Gore’s side and want the whole of humanity to pay Al Gore a fee before they reveal it to us. Isn’t that right Max.

  35. Youri Carma says:

    @Robert Mockan

    ET’s don’t want to kill us cause if so we allready be dead. On the contrary they saved us from a major Meteorite impact.

    UFO collided with Tunguska Meteorite to save Earth http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/6868/56

  36. Bev says:

    Please note from Naomi Klein and Amy Goodman and others:

    http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2011/06/invitation-washington-d-c

    Invitation to Washington D.C.

    By Maude Barlow, Wendell Berry, Tom Goldtooth, Danny Glover, James Hansen, Wes Jackson, Naomi Klein, Bill McKibben, George Poitras, Gus Speth, and David Suzuki – June 23rd, 2011

    Dear Friends,

    This will be a slightly longer letter than common for the internet age—it’s serious stuff.

    The short version is we want you to consider doing something hard: coming to Washington in the hottest and stickiest weeks of the summer and engaging in civil disobedience that will quite possibly get you arrested.

    The full version goes like this:

    As you know, the planet is steadily warming: 2010 was the warmest year on record, and we’ve seen the resulting chaos in almost every corner of the earth.

    And as you also know, our democracy is increasingly controlled by special interests interested only in their short-term profit.

    These two trends collide this summer in Washington, where the State Department and the White House have to decide whether to grant a certificate of ‘national interest’ to some of the biggest fossil fuel players on earth. These corporations want to build the so-called ‘Keystone XL Pipeline’ from Canada’s tar sands to Texas refineries.

    To call this project a horror is serious understatement. The tar sands have wrecked huge parts of Alberta, disrupting ways of life in indigenous communities—First Nations communities in Canada, and tribes along the pipeline route in the U.S. have demanded the destruction cease. The pipeline crosses crucial areas like the Oglalla Aquifer where a spill would be disastrous—and though the pipeline companies insist they are using ‘state of the art’ technologies that should leak only once every 7 years, the precursor pipeline and its pumping stations have leaked a dozen times in the past year. These local impacts alone would be cause enough to block such a plan. But the Keystone Pipeline would also be a fifteen hundred mile fuse to the biggest carbon bomb on the continent, a way to make it easier and faster to trigger the final overheating of our planet, the one place to which we are all indigenous.

    How much carbon lies in the recoverable tar sands of Alberta? A recent calculation from some of our foremost scientists puts the figure at about 200 parts per million. Even with the new pipeline they won’t be able to burn that much overnight—but each development like this makes it easier to get more oil out. As the climatologist Jim Hansen (one of the signatories to this letter) explained, if we have any chance of getting back to a stable climate “the principal requirement is that coal emissions must be phased out by 2030 and unconventional fossil fuels, such as tar sands, must be left in the ground.” In other words, he added, “if the tar sands are thrown into the mix it is essentially game over.” The Keystone pipeline is an essential part of the game. “Unless we get increased market access, like with Keystone XL, we’re going to be stuck,” said Ralph Glass, an economist and vice-president at AJM Petroleum Consultants in Calgary, told a Canadian newspaper last week.

    Given all that, you’d suspect that there’s no way the Obama administration would ever permit this pipeline. But in the last few months the administration has signed pieces of paper opening much of Alaska to oil drilling, and permitting coal-mining on federal land in Wyoming that will produce as much CO2 as 300 powerplants operating at full bore.

    And Secretary of State Clinton has already said she’s ‘inclined’ to recommend the pipeline go forward. Partly it’s because of the political commotion over high gas prices, though more tar sands oil would do nothing to change that picture. But it’s also because of intense pressure from industry. The US Chamber of Commerce—a bigger funder of political campaigns than the RNC and DNC combined—has demanded that the administration “move quickly to approve the Keystone XL pipeline,” which is not so surprising—they’ve also told the U.S. EPA that if the planet warms that will be okay because humans can ‘adapt their physiology’ to cope. The Koch Brothers, needless to say, are also backing the plan, and may reap huge profits from it.

    So we’re pretty sure that without serious pressure the Keystone Pipeline will get its permit from Washington. A wonderful coalition of environmental groups has built a strong campaign across the continent—from Cree and Dene indigenous leaders to Nebraska farmers, they’ve spoken out strongly against the destruction of their land. We need to join them, and to say even if our own homes won’t be crossed by this pipeline, our joint home—the earth—will be wrecked by the carbon that pours down it.

    And we need to say something else, too: it’s time to stop letting corporate power make the most important decisions our planet faces. We don’t have the money to compete with those corporations, but we do have our bodies, and beginning in mid August many of us will use them. We will, each day, march on the White House, risking arrest with our trespass. We will do it in dignified fashion, demonstrating that in this case we are the conservatives, and that our foes—who would change the composition of the atmosphere are dangerous radicals. Come dressed as if for a business meeting—this is, in fact, serious business.

    And another sartorial tip—if you wore an Obama button during the 2008 campaign, why not wear it again? We very much still want to believe in the promise of that young Senator who told us that with his election the ‘rise of the oceans would begin to slow and the planet start to heal.’ We don’t understand what combination of bureaucratic obstinacy and insider dealing has derailed those efforts, but we remember his request that his supporters continue on after the election to pressure his government for change. We’ll do what we can.

    And one more thing: we don’t just want college kids to be the participants in this fight. They’ve led the way so far on climate change—10,000 came to DC for the Powershift gathering earlier this spring. They’ve marched this month in West Virginia to protest mountaintop removal; a young man named Tim DeChristopher faces sentencing this summer in Utah for his creative protest.

    Now it’s time for people who’ve spent their lives pouring carbon into the atmosphere to step up too, just as many of us did in earlier battles for civil rights or for peace. Most of us signing this letter are veterans of this work, and we think it’s past time for elders to behave like elders. One thing we don’t want is a smash up: if you can’t control your passions, this action is not for you.

    This won’t be a one-shot day of action. We plan for it to continue for several weeks, till the administration understands we won’t go away. Not all of us can actually get arrested—half the signatories to this letter live in Canada, and might well find our entry into the U.S. barred. But we will be making plans for sympathy demonstrations outside Canadian consulates in the U.S., and U.S. consulates in Canada—the decision-makers need to know they’re being watched.

    Twenty years of patiently explaining the climate crisis to our leaders hasn’t worked. Maybe moral witness will help. You have to start somewhere, and we choose here and now.

    If you think you might want to be a part of this action, we need you to sign up here.

    As plans solidify in the next few weeks we’ll be in touch with you to arrange nonviolence training; our colleagues at a variety of environmental and democracy campaigns will be coordinating the actual arrangements.

    We know we’re asking a lot. You should think long and hard on it, and pray if you’re the praying type. But to us, it’s as much privilege as burden to get to join this fight in the most serious possible way. We hope you’ll join us.

    Maude Barlow – Chair, Council of Canadian
    Wendell Berry – Author and Farmer
    Tom Goldtooth – Director, Indigenous Environmental Network
    Danny Glover – Actor
    James Hansen – NASA Climate Scientist
    Wes Jackson – Agronomist, President of the Land Insitute
    Naomi Klein – Author and Journalist
    Bill McKibben – Writer and Environmentalist
    George Poitras – Mikisew Cree Indigenous First Nation
    Gus Speth – Environmental Lawyer and Activist
    David Suzuki – Scientist, Environmentalist and Broadcaster

    P.S. Please pass this letter on to anyone else you think might be interested. We realize that what we’re asking isn’t easy, and we’re very grateful that you’re willing even to consider it. See you in Washington!

    ……..

    http://www.tarsandsaction.org/sign-up/

    ………..

    http://www.democracynow.org/2011/8/19/a_debate_should_the_us_approve

    A Debate: Should the U.S. Approve TransCanada’s Massive Keystone XL Tar Sands Oil Pipeline?

    JUAN GONZALEZ: An estimated 2,000 environmental activists from across the continent plan to gather in Washington, D.C., tomorrow to launch a two-week protest against a massive oil pipeline that would carry tar sands oil from Alberta, Canada, to the Gulf of Mexico. TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline would cross the Yellowstone River, as well as the Ogallala Aquifer, the largest freshwater aquifer in the United States.

    Organizers have called the protest to pressure the Obama administration as it prepares to decide on whether to approve the pipeline’s construction. In a call to action signed by environmental activist Bill McKibben, the NASA climate scientist James Hansen, and the author and journalist Naomi Klein, the activists write, quote: “The Keystone Pipeline would […] be a fifteen hundred mile fuse to the biggest carbon bomb on the continent, a way to make it easier and faster to trigger the final overheating of our planet, the one place to which we are all indigenous.”

    AMY GOODMAN: Over the next two weeks, demonstrators say they’ll hold sit-ins, commit other acts of civil disobedience outside the White House every day. In a videotaped message, the actor and activist Mark Ruffalo voiced his support for the protests.

    MARK RUFFALO: Up north, where the tar sands are located, native people’s homelands have already been wrecked. All that new oil will worsen global warming. It’s time for us to get off fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are over. This August, hundreds of people are joining together in a sit-in at the White House to show President Obama he has the support to stand up against the gas, oil and coal industry and deny these permits to the tar sands pipeline.

    JUAN GONZALEZ: As activists gather in Washington to oppose the pipeline, the oil industry is ramping up its campaign to garner support for the project. On Thursday, the American Petroleum Institute held a conference call with union leaders that emphasized the Keystone XL’s purported economic benefits. Supporters say the pipeline will create some 20,000 construction jobs, and the company behind it, TransCanada, has already signed agreements to employ the members of four international unions if the project is approved.

    AMY GOODMAN: The Obama administration is also under pressure from the Republican-controlled House, which last month passed a measure that would force a decision on the Keystone XL by November 1st. Republican Congress Member Ted Poe, whose home state of Texas hosts the refineries that would receive the tar sands oil, urged President Obama to back the pipeline.

    REP. TED POE: To me, an easy choice for this administration: either they can force Americans to continue to rely on unfriendly foreign countries for our energy, like Venezuela and the Middle Eastern dictators, by depriving Americans of a reliable source of oil at a time when gas prices are around $4, or they can work with our friends in the north to supply over 1.4 million barrels of oil per day. Pipelines are the proven and safe, efficient source of energy. Best of all, this project creates thousands of jobs at a time when unemployment in this country is 9.2 percent.

    AMY GOODMAN: Texas Republican Congress Member Ted Poe.

    As the Obama administration faces both industry pressure on one side and sustained grassroots protest on the other, we turn now to a debate on the Keystone XL with two guests. Cindy Schild is refining issues manager at the American Petroleum Institute, took part in the conference call Thursday with business and labor leaders to support the Keystone XL. And Jane Kleeb is a leading activist opposed to the Keystone pipeline, executive director of Bold Nebraska, a group taking part in the Washington protests, where both of our guests are right now, in D.C.

    Cindy Schild, Jane Kleeb, thanks so much for being with us. Cindy Schild, let’s start with you. Why do you think the XL pipeline is so important? Talk about its significance.

    CINDY SCHILD: This is the largest shovel-ready project that we have right now at a time, again, as you heard Congressman Poe say, we need jobs in this country. You’ve seen Obama out this week on his tour saying that, you know, he’s ready to sign off on jobs. I cannot stress the importance enough of what this means to our country. You’ve got—this project alone can impact 20,000 American workers—and not just the workers. That impacts their families. We have this opportunity. You have a permit ready to be approved, after a thorough assessment. So we’re waiting. The President is going to see this on his desk soon. So it has great impacts for the American economy, as well as energy security from a source right next door, our friendly neighbor, Canada.

    JUAN GONZALEZ: And Cindy Schild, this agreement that you have with the labor unions, which unions signed onto this? And how long are these jobs expected to last, these construction jobs on the line?

    CINDY SCHILD: The agreement itself that was referenced yesterday by the Teamsters is between the unions and TransCanada, the company proposing this project, so I can’t speak to the labor agreement specifics itself. But you are talking about any type of workers from folks in building trades, pipefitters, people that will be building the equipment to support the pipeline or move equipment to the pipeline, as well as, obviously, those building on the pipeline itself. So, you’re talking—the pipeline will take about two years to build, and then there will be obviously the jobs that will come from it afterwards, for maintenance, etc.

    AMY GOODMAN: Jane Kleeb—Jane Kleeb is also with us. Jane, you represent Bold Nebraska, but you’re in D.C. You’re going to be part of these two weeks of protests. What are your concerns about the pipeline?

    JANE KLEEB: You know, we have a lot of concerns, and it’s not the traditional kind of Big Environment versus Big Oil, which is what I know the kind of oil industry is what they want this argument to be. We have a bunch of farmers and ranchers, conservatives, even some folks that are part of the Tea Party, that will be part of the Nebraska delegation coming here, because we’re concerned that this pipeline is crossing the Nebraska Sand Hills. The Nebraska Sand Hills are a very fragile ecosystem. They’re literally made of sand, where a lot of our ag and cattle are raised. And so, to have a pipeline kind of cross that fragile ecosystem is just mind-boggling. And you have Republican state senator—Republican U.S. Senator Mike Johanns, as well as U.S. Senator Ben Nelson, who both agree that this pipeline should not go through the Sand Hills. But TransCanada continues to be arrogant and continues to be very bullheaded and essentially say that they will not change the route.

    And it’s one of the reasons we’re here, essentially, to say to President Obama, “You have the power. And you promised us on the campaign trail that when you got elected, you were going to begin to heal the planet, that you were going to put policies in place to heal the planet.” Allowing this pipeline to cross the Sand Hills, and obviously cross the Ogallala Aquifer, our cleanest source of water, not only for drinking, but for agriculture, our main economic activity in our state, is just unconscionable. And so, Obama has a choice. He has a choice of whether he’s going to stand with landowners like Randy, who are refusing to give in to TransCanada’s demands and threats of eminent domain on his land that’s been in his family’s hands for generations, or he can decide to say no. He can just say no to TransCanada. And that’s why we’re here in D.C. this week.

    JUAN GONZALEZ: And the decision to stretch it out over two weeks of protests, what specifically do you envision in the development of these protests?

    JANE KLEEB: When folks were trying to, you know, think about what type of action could we do on such a serious issue, we decided that the action had to be serious, as well, and that it couldn’t just be a rally with celebrity spokespeople and one day of action. So this is a sustained action. You’ll have about 100 to 200 folks every day gathering in Lafayette Park and then engaging in civil disobedience. And there will not be smiles or peace signs waived at any cameras that are there. This is our land, and this is our water. And API can give as many talking points as they want, but we are not going to essentially let a foreign oil company tell American landowners what they can and cannot do with their land. And we’re not going to let them threaten our water.

    And despite what API and TransCanada says, that this will be the safest pipeline ever built, we know that TransCanada’s first Keystone pipeline, that also goes through our state, has already had 12 leaks in 12 months. And we also know that a UNL scientist, Dr. Stansbury, did a report that said that there would be 91 leaks on the Keystone XL pipeline, that could potentially put 6.5 million gallons of tar sands oil in the Ogallala Aquifer and essentially contaminate our drinking water. And it’s just not acceptable. So Nebraskans, across party lines, across the state, are standing up and saying, “No pipeline.”

    AMY GOODMAN: TransCanada CEO Russell Girling spoke to Fox Business in March about efforts to expand the Keystone pipeline. He admitted the project would greatly benefit his company and shareholders.

    FOX BUSINESS: What would this mean, with the expansion successful, for your shareholders? Would that mean more cash flow? Could it mean more dividends?

    RUSSELL GIRLING: This is a big project for our company and part of our growth going forward. And so, obviously, it’s a—it would be a good investment for our shareholders. It would bring in additional cash flow and earnings, and hopefully result of improved dividends going forward.

    AMY GOODMAN: Cindy Schild, why is the American Petroleum Institute, your organization, TransCanada, pushing so hard for this pipeline? What financial interests do you have invested in it being approved? How will you benefit?

    CINDY SCHILD: API doesn’t have a financial interest in the pipeline. I mean, we’re looking out for, again, energy security, national security. We also see supply flexibility and reliability benefits to being able to bring the third largest resource base from Canada, and our number one trading partner, down to our largest refining center in the Gulf. This is at a time where imports are declining from our typical resource base. We get most of our imports from there, that region. A lot of our imports are declining from places like Mexico and Venezuela. Canada has the ability to fill that gap. We currently do not have the ability to bring oil down from Canada to the Gulf Coast. Our refineries have invested to be able to refine this oil from Canada. So, you look at the flexibility in hurricane-type situations we experienced in 2005. This creates that ability to provide and fill in that gap, get that flexibility, as well as national security.

    And, you know, getting to some of Jane’s points, the—90 percent of the easements have been signed off by now—

    JANE KLEEB: That’s actually not true.

    CINDY SCHILD: —by landowners.

    JANE KLEEB: That’s not true.

    CINDY SCHILD: And, you know, API’s talking points, there’s lots of talking points out there. There’s over 20,000 miles of pipe already under the aquifer.

    JANE KLEEB: Also not true.

    CINDY SCHILD: And it’s not API’s talking points that talk about the safety of this pipeline. The State Department has made those points. So, you know, we can’t mix messages and where the facts are coming from. So we need to be clear on these points, as well.

    JANE KLEEB: You’re actually—

    JUAN GONZALEZ: Jane Kleeb, your response?

    JANE KLEEB: You are actually misleading—you’re misleading the public that is watching this.

    CINDY SCHILD: I am not misleading the public.

    JANE KLEEB: Yes, you are. Do you know how many crude oil pipelines cross the Sand Hills? How many?

    CINDY SCHILD: How many talking points came from API, or is that from the State Department?

    JANE KLEEB: How many crude oil pipelines? Zero. Zero cross the Sand Hills, because it is a really fragile ecosystem. And there is only five percent of the pipelines in Nebraska are crude oil pipelines. And the majority of that is TransCanada’s first pipeline that went through our state, that essentially went through our state without a lot of citizens knowing. And this is not about national security. This is not about energy independence for America.

    CINDY SCHILD: No, it’s really about—

    JANE KLEEB: This is about the Canadian economy and how much they have invested in the dirtiest fuel on the planet.

    CINDY SCHILD: This is—this is about—this is about jobs. And when you really look at it—

    JANE KLEEB: It’s not about jobs. And you guys come out with a different jobs number every time.

    CINDY SCHILD: When you look at it—

    JANE KLEEB: Today you say 20,000.

    CINDY SCHILD: No, it’s—

    JANE KLEEB: Two days ago, it was 325,000.

    CINDY SCHILD: No, there are two different—

    JANE KLEEB: No amount of jobs—

    CINDY SCHILD: There are two different numbers. And if you want to break it down a different way, if you look at—and this is from the U.S. Census Bureau or—as well as the Canadian Statistics Bureau. When you look at the reciprocity between the United States and Canada, the benefits are intangible. For every dollar spent on imported goods from Canada, 90 percent is going back to the U.S. economy, so 90 cents on the dollar. I mean, there are benefits between trading partners within North America that you’re not going to see from trading in other countries. And that’s just a fact and the way it is. And we’ve got to keep it within North America in order to be able to excel in the future.

    JANE KLEEB: If TransCanada was serious about this energy coming to the United States, which is what they, you know, put in all of their slick ads and their fancy radio ads, then why won’t they guarantee that this oil is for the United States? And we know the answer: because they want access to the port in order to sell it on the international market to the highest bidder—

    CINDY SCHILD: Why would you develop a pipeline to—

    JANE KLEEB: —which is China.

    CINDY SCHILD: Why would you develop a pipeline to bring it to the Gulf? That makes no sense to invest that sort—

    JANE KLEEB: Because you want access to the port. So then—so if you’re—

    CINDY SCHILD: Why wouldn’t you go to Seattle?

    JANE KLEEB: So, here—

    CINDY SCHILD: Why wouldn’t you go to the West Coast, to Canada? Why would you go all the way down?

    JANE KLEEB: You guys have plans for that, actually. If you look on TransCanada’s website, you have plans to crisscross the United States eventually with your dirty oil pipelines.

    CINDY SCHILD: They should—they—

    JANE KLEEB: So this is why we need to stop it now, because this is not about energy—

    CINDY SCHILD: Canada is absolutely going to be looking—

    JANE KLEEB: Excuse me, are you going to let me talk, or are you just going to continue with your kind of, you know, fancy talking points here?

    CINDY SCHILD: Alright, I’m—

    JANE KLEEB: So, this is not about energy security for the United States, because if it were, then we would be building refineries in the United States. But all Canada wants to do is get access to our ports in order to ship this oil off to China. That is what this is about.

    CINDY SCHILD: It makes no sense.

    JANE KLEEB: Yes, it does.

    JUAN GONZALEZ: If I can—

    JANE KLEEB: And there’s plenty of energy experts that agree.

    JUAN GONZALEZ: Jane—Jane, can you hold it for one second?

    JANE KLEEB: And TransCanada agrees.

    JUAN GONZALEZ: Jane, for one second, I’d like to ask Cindy Schild to respond to the issue of the potential environmental dangers. It’s only been a year since we had the blowout in the Gulf on a blowout preventer that was supposed to prevent any possibilities of a spill into the Gulf. Your response to the issue of the concerns about the potential environmental hazards of this line?

    CINDY SCHILD: Sure. I mean, safety is a top priority, and pipelines have been the safest mode of transportation. We certainly take every incident seriously and try to learn from every incident and investigate every incident. New standards have been put in place since the offshore incident. And based on the State Department’s assessment, the three assessments on the environmental review, the recent review has indicated that this pipeline will exceed all other standards. There’s 57 special conditions within this permit, should it be approved, and has stated that it—the State Department has stated that it will be state of the art, that its safety will exceed all others.

    AMY GOODMAN: Earlier this year—

    JANE KLEEB: Can I also talk about safety?

    AMY GOODMAN: Just before, Jane, earlier this year, ExxonMobil faced mounting criticism of its cleanup efforts after one of its oil pipelines ruptured and leaked 42,000 gallons of crude oil into Montana’s Yellowstone River. Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer insisted the Keystone XL pipeline will be safer and not vulnerable to similar catastrophes. And Jane Kleeb, I’ll get your response to both Governor Schweitzer, as well. This is Governor Schweitzer speaking on PBS.

    GOV. BRIAN SCHWEITZER: Actually, in my conversations with TransCanada, the company who’s proposed the Keystone XL, they’ve assured me that, A, they use this boring technique so that none of these pipelines will be laid into these riverbeds, and secondly, instead of having humans involved in the shutoff devices—you see, this device that was placed along the Yellowstone River was actually controlled out of Houston, Texas. Yeah, you got it: in Montana, they had controls in Houston, Texas. And after some seven minutes, they started shutting the pipeline down. It took about 30 minutes. TransCanada has explained to me that across every river and stream in Montana, that they would have automatic shutdown valves and backed-up systems by humans, so that this kind of catastrophe would not and could not occur. First, the pipeline is not in the river, and secondly, there are automatic, immediate shutdown systems, which ExxonMobil did not have in the Silvertip.

    AMY GOODMAN: That’s Governor Brian Schweitzer of Montana. Jane Kleeb of Bold Nebraska, your response?

    JANE KLEEB: Well, unfortunately, Governor Schweitzer is actually being misled by TransCanada. And if you listen to his words, he talks about TransCanada’s assurances. And I can tell you that farmers and ranchers in Nebraska do not feel good about TransCanada’s assurances. And we brought two folks from North Dakota to Nebraska to talk to our state elected officials, because one of the folks, Bob, he was on site for TransCanada’s first spill in North Dakota that essentially sprung a 60-story—a 60-foot-high geiser of oil. And when he called in to TransCanada’s, you know, 1-800 line, which is what they were told to do when they see something go wrong on the pipeline, TransCanada said that “This must be a prank call, because it’s not showing up on our sensors.” And so, you can have all the fancy sensors in the world, but practical experience with TransCanada has shown us that they don’t have the safest pipelines ever built.

    And, you know, our first responders along the route of the pipeline are very concerned, because TransCanada essentially comes in, and they literally give first responders and landowners a brochure that has a 1-800 number on it and say, “If a fire, if a spill, if a leak happens, call this 1-800 number, and we’ll take it from there.” But it could take up to six hours for an emergency response team to get to a place where there is a leak or a spill in Nebraska. And they essentially tell the first responders, “Your job is to keep people away. We’ll come in and deal with it.” That’s not a good emergency response plan. Our first responders should know the contents of the pipe, which TransCanada continues not to tell us. And so, they wouldn’t even know how to respond to a fire, because they don’t know the chemicals that are mixed with the tar sands. And so, there are a lot of unanswered questions about safety. That’s why there are a lot of congressional reviews and a lot of letters from U.S. senators, as well as state senators in Nebraska, that want to have these answers before President Obama and Secretary Clinton grant this permit.

    AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you both for being with us. Jane Kleeb is executive director of Bold Nebraska, one of the leading activists opposed to the Keystone pipeline. Thousands are descending on Washington for this next two weeks, while President Obama is on vacation, but they’ll be at the White House engaging in civil disobedience and other acts. Cindy Schild, thank you very much for being with us, from the American Petroleum Institute.

  37. Kwai Chang says:

    @F. Beard…
    how ahead was D-E-V-O…
    (devolution)…it goes like this:
    “are we not men???
    we are DEVO…
    D-E-V-O…
    we must repeat”…
    and I hated them like the plague…
    (sorry Mark Mothersbaugh!!!)

  38. kdt says:

    people dont even know what the green house efect is or how hairbrained it is. as an example most green houses have heaters to maintain the temp at night in winter where is the magic of co2 ? the truth is that, it is the hard shell of the green house sequestering the air envelope in side that allows the air to warm relitive to OUT SIDE if you open a window it cools.
    with out a heat sorce (open ground =55*at min) your tomatos will freeze in a cold snap co2 is not magic.
    the bankers, oil, and over prudction of food for profit to feed the big citys, that produse nothing but pollution in return for the huge energy demand they represent this is how we have come to a point of spices over reach. that is the bad news the good news is that it is self limiting .this is what peak oil is, the limit. but sadly world population has over shot and will now pay the price .
    look around you ,is your water pumped from god knows where, power from who knows what sorce,how many miles has the food in your fridge traveled ? solve these problems and the non isue of agw goes away

  39. Youri Carma says:

    @Robert Mockan

    We have a proverb here: ‘Zoals de waard is, vertrouwt hij zijn gasten’ losely translated as ‘The host trust his guests like he truts himself’ meaning: because humans have the strange urge to kill one another we think the ET’s do too. That’s not necessarily true.

  40. Trevor Morgan says:

    Jeremiad: A prophet of doom

  41. Donald Hames says:

    Hmm? Everyone is experiencing “climate change”. Global warming is now upon us. Most people would not deny this.

    The point of contention is not that we are having it; but, what is the cause of it? Some people like to pile onto the manmade global warming band wagon. Others state that the driving force of climate change is our solar sun. Who is right? Makes no difference. Its in progress and there is no nation or society that can prevent it. However, we are in for a reversal beginning in the next 3 years:

    NASA admits all previous warming trends caused by sun
    http://www.helium.com/items/2129635-nasa-admits-all-previous-warming-trends-caused-by-sun

    by Terrence Aym – Created on: April 03, 2011

    Under mounting pressure from scientists that reject the politically popularized man-made global warming and climate models—the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory—the American space agency NASA has admitted that all past warming trends were driven by solar activity.

    A victory for the man-made ‘global warming deniers’

    As more scientists have joined the outcry over the politicization of Earth’s climate cycles—the current number exceeds 20,000—promoters of the AGW model have denounced the “global warming deniers” countering that little evidence supports the view that the sun is driving the observed warming trend.

    Now, however, new study released from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland measuring the global temperature variance during the past 100 years has found the sun’s heat and variable cycles have indeed made a significant, measurable impact and greatly influenced Earth’s climate.

    In fact, the influence extends as far back as the Industrial Revolution.

    Goddard’s research shows that the solar cycle’s ups and downs directly affect the temperatures and long term climate. During solar minimum they discovered about 1.36 watts per square meter of solar energy hits Earth’s mesosphere; solar maximum escalates to 1.40 watts per square meter.

    It’s well-known that the sun passes through cycles of 11-year and 22-year intensities. Currently, the sun is on the upswing towards solar maximum when sunspot activity and solar flares will peak. The height of the maximum is expected during 2012-2013.

    Earth now cooling

    After the current peak, NASA and other space agencies believe the sun will go unusually quiet for the next 30 years or more.

    Another proverbial nail in the coffin for the AGW theory is the fact that the Earth has been cooling since 2007.

    Despite the fact that certain NASA scientists keep clinging to AGW (those with the largest government grants tied into the theory), the model has been showed to be flawed and some heavyweights are weighing in against it including one of the world’s great paleoclimatologists.

    George Kukla, 77, retired professor of paleoclimatology at Columbia University and researcher at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory has stated categorically that “The only thing to worry about global warming is the damage that can be done by worrying. Why are some scientists worried? Perhaps because they feel that to stop worrying may mean to stop being paid.”

    During a lengthy interview with Gelf Magazine, Kukla explained: “What is happening is very similar to the time 115,000 years ago, when the last glaciation started. It is difficult to comprehend, but it is really so: The last glacial was accompanied by the increase of a really averaged global mean surface temperature, alias global warming.

    “What happened then was that the shifting sun warmed the tropics and cooled the Arctic and Antarctic. Because the tropics are so much larger than the poles, the area-weighted global mean temperature was increasing. But also increasing was the temperature difference between the oceans and the poles, the basic condition of polar ice growth. Believe it or not, the last glacial started with ‘global warming!'”

    Far from warming, Kukla is warning everyone that will listen that the world is about to enter a new Ice Age.
    Also:

    NASA Data Confirms Solar Hibernation and Climate Change to Cold Era – May 4, 2011 · By Mike McGuinness

    NASA Data Confirms Solar Hibernation and Climate Change to Cold Era
    The Space and Science Research Center (SSRC) announces today that the most recent data from NASA describing the unusual behavior of the Sun validates a nearly four year long quest by SSRC Director John L. Casey to convince the US government, the media, and the public that we are heading into a new cold climate era with 20 to 30 years of record setting cold weather.

    According to Director Casey,
    “I’m quite pleased that NASA has finally agreed with my predictions which were passed on to them in early 2007. There is no remaining doubt that the hibernation of the Sun, what solar physicists call a ‘grand minimum’ has begun and with it, the next climate change to a prolonged cold era.

    When I first called Dr. Hathaway and told him the NASA and NOAA estimates for the Sun’s activity were “way off” in both sunspot count and in which solar cycle the hibernation would begin (cycle 24 vs. cycle 25), he was polite but dismissive.
    Since that time both NASA and NOAA have been revising their sunspot estimates for solar cycle 24 lower every year and with each year their numbers have been getting closer to mine and the few other scientists around the world who had similar forecasts.
    The January announcement by NASA is now virtually identical to mine made almost four years ago.”
    NASA’s solar physics group headed by Dr. David Hathaway at the Marshall Space Flight Center, alerted the solar physics community on January 3, 2011 that the latest sunspot prediction for our current solar cycle 24 had been adjusted downward by a significant amount from recent years to a value of 70 ± 18 and an estimated peak of 59 sunspots during solar maximum in the June-July 2013 time frame.
    This number compares with their prediction of a much larger 2006 estimate of a very active Sun with 145 sunspots at peak. Many of the measures by which the Sun’s activity is measured like sunspot counts, have since set record low levels.

    Casey’s 2007 forecast however, came during the height of the “man-made global warming movement” at a time when any mention of a reduction in the Sun’s energy output much less a new cold climate, was political and scientific heresy.

    As Casey recounts, “Once I made my forecast for the Sun’s reversal in phase from global warming to global cooling and the start of a new cold climate period I was immediately attacked from all sides. Regrettably, that is the history of new scientific discoveries when anyone says the opposite of a belief that is well entrenched in conventional thinking.

    My prediction also ran into political roadblocks since at that time both presidential candidates were trying to woo the ‘green’ vote in what all knew was going to be a close election where every vote counted.

    Both Republicans and Democrats were saying “manmade global warming was real” and something should be done about it.

    Despite my strong space program credentials, what I was saying then was a message no one wanted to hear. Both liberal and conservative web sites launched attacks to discredit my research.

    Fortunately, the Sun has been on my side and it is a powerful ally. At long last, NASA has now come out with their own data that confirms my past predictions.
    After I had completed my original research and notified NASA, I tried to find others who had come to the same conclusion about the Sun and the next climate change. I want to take the time today to mention some of these prominent researchers who made the courageous step forward back then and went public with their predictions. The list is also posted at the SSRC web site. They include in the US:
    Dr.’s Ken Schatten, D. V. Hoyt, and W. K. Tobiska; in Europe and Russia: Dr.’s Habibullo Abdussamatov, Oleg Sorokhtin, Boris Komitov, Vladimir Kaftan, O. G. Badalyan, V. N. Obridko, J. Sykora, and J. Beer; in Australia: David Archibald, Dr.’s Ian Wilson, I. A. Waite, Bob Carter and Peter Harris; in China: Dr.’s Y.T. Hong, H.B. Jiang, L.P. Zhou, H.D. Li, X.T. Leng, B. Hong, X.G. Qin, L. Zhen-Shan and Sun Xian, and in Mexico: Dr. Victor M. V. Herrera.
    I also want to express my thanks to and hope to soon add the many more researchers to this partial list who have supported the position that the Sun drives climate change, not mankind, and that we have begun the transition to the next cold
    climate.”

    As to the linkage of the new cold era with this now confirmed solar hibernation by NASA, Director Casey clarified, “NASA is not the primary source for US government weather and climate forecasts. With the exception of NASA Goddard, that’s NOAA’s area of responsibility though we all rely on the data from weather satellites that NASA launches into orbit around the Earth and the Sun.
    But don’t ask any of the NASA or NOAA scientists to agree with the end of global warming and the now confirmed start of the next solar hibernation or for that matter a cold climate change. That would be career suicide given the measures the current administration goes to in order to preserve the myth of manmade global warming.
    In any case, decades of extreme cold weather always follow these hibernations of the Sun as the research shows going back 1,200 years or more. This next one has begun right on schedule, just as I predicted. We should therefore expect the same climate change to a long cold period just like it has done before.
    The last three record cold and long winters around the globe along with the lack of growth in the planet’s average temperature for the past twelve years, and a new long term downward trend in global temperatures are solid enough signals to prove that global warming ended as and when I predicted and that the Earth is rapidly proceeding into a long cold era.
    NASA’s announcement is clearly vindication for those of us who have spoken out for years against conventional climate science thinking, false statements and misleading reports of the UN and US government climate science officials, and had to endure slander and ridicule from AGW extremists. Now we need to prepare for what has arrived; twenty to thirty years of record setting, crop destroying cold weather. We should stop wasting precious resources on the past climate phase of Sun-caused global warming, bury this hubris of man-made climate change and listen to what the Sun is telling us. We need to do so immediately.”

    http://30atelevision.com/blog/?p=396

    See the new NASA Solar Cycle 24 prediction at: http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/predict.shtml

    Space and Science Research Center
    P. O. Box 607841 * Orlando, Fl 32860
    http://www.spaceandscience.net

  42. F. Beard says:

    Jeremiad: A prophet of doom Trevor Morgan

    Not necessarily. The Lord longs to be gracious (Isaiah 30:18). And in the time of Jeremiah, the Jews in Jerusalem could have avoided destruction if they had not reneged on their release of Hebrew debt slaves – Jerimiah 34:6-22.

  43. Robert Mockan says:

    @ Youri Carma

    Ramming the meteor to save earth? Instead of using their ray guns to blast it?
    What a noble sacrifice! A true credit to the Galactic Federation. And to think all our
    military wants to do is capture the little guys and dissect them. Bummer.

  44. Palantír says:

    I find “headed for extinction via environmental collapse” more plausible with the added “headed for extinction via monoculture of everything, like food growth”.

    Though, (please do not put me in the AGW deniers booth) when it comes to global temperature rise (looking away from the global climate change issue) I find it difficult to see the “sharp deadly” long term trend. Yes, there will regionally be winners and losers with temperature swings (as it always is) but I can’t see the global aspect of it as a whole quite yet. I don’t expect nature nor climate nor temperatures nor the environment to all be in some sort of equilibrium all the time.

    ##
    Nobel price winner in physics Ivar Giaever said this:

    “There are some people, maybe they even are scientists, which measures and calculates the average temperature of the earth for a year, and have concluded that the earth has been 0.8 degrees warmer in 150 years. When you measure the temperature of the air, you measure how fast the molecules are moving. At approx. 273 degrees below zero stops the molecules to move, and it defines the zero point on Kelvin-scale that physicists use. Earth’s temperature was therefore approx. 15+273 = 288 K in 1860 and after 150 years it had risen to 288.8 K. It is amazing how stable temperature has been!”

    “How is it possible to measure the average temperature across the earth over an entire year? In my view, there simply is not possible”

    “If one had a constant number of thermometers placed around the earth, one could perhaps have some kind algorithm, do exactly the same each year to compare one year with another, but so it is not. According to Fred Singer was the 10 000 stations in 1970 and today it is about. 3000.”

    “An important question for those who believe that the temperature has risen, is: Why has the temperature risen? Wise heads have found that this is due to the greenhouse gas CO {-2} in the air. CO {-2} levels have gone up fairly steadily since at least 1900. But that has not the assumed temperature done, The increased by 0.4 degrees from 1900 to 1940, was more or less constant until 1980 and then increased 0.4 degrees in 1998 and since then the temperature has dropped slightly. Therefore, it is certainly not likely that the temperature rise due to CO {-2}, then the relationship is weak. Other wise heads who work for tobacco producers in the U.S. around 1980 found that lung cancer was caused by margarine because margarine consumption increased at the same rate as lung cancer.”

    “But “climate champions” are no longer talking about global warming, the temperature has gone down since 1998! In the U.S., where we have most thermometer, was 2010 the 23 warmest year. CLIMATE CHANGES, with capital letters, has taken the papers. But if we talk about climate change, we must measure it in a way, and it is not easy. The climate is of the World Meteorological Organization defined as average weather for a 30-year period. If I have understood everything correctly, you need at least two 30-year periods to detect changes in climate.”
    ##

  45. Citizen119 says:

    The natural history of the planet Earth is of extinctions.

    All life forms that ever existed are extinct, except those alive in the present era.

    We in our turn, will one day become extinct.

  46. Steven Rowlandson says:

    I would say that the odds favor extinction of humanity in whole or in part at the hands of the elites and their minions more than any other cause. As for AGW it is an illusion unless done locally with nuclear weapons. For that to occur a politically correct diabolical mind would have to be given free reign to make it happen. Again it would be the elites that would make it happen. In the real world of science there are cycles and natural mechanisms that govern the climate and a study of climatic history indicates that we will have global cooling and probably an ice age. Considering that the elites caused the earth quake that triggered fukashima I think we are going to need a 100 ,000 year ice age to clean up the world.

  47. Tony Montoya says:

    BULL SHIITE! WAR & EARTH CHANGES TAKE US DOWN TO GOAL OF 5HUNDRED MILLION INHABITANTS
    A message consisting of a set of ten guidelines or principles is engraved on the Georgia Guidestones in eight different languages, one language on each face of the four large upright stones. Moving clockwise around the structure from due north, these languages are: English, Spanish, Swahili, Hindi, Hebrew, Arabic, Chinese, and Russian.
    Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
    Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.
    Unite humanity with a living new language.
    Rule passion — faith — tradition — and all things with tempered reason.
    Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
    Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
    Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
    Balance personal rights with social duties.
    Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
    Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for natur

  48. Rumcajs says:

    I do not think I know a better site to go to for news on economy. But I have always found it troubling that on the issue of the so called global warming Max speaks the way the leading eugenicists do. Banging on about global worming is hijacking the movement of the people who are genuinely concerned about the planet by narrowing the debate to the issue of climate; an area so controversial due to inconclusive or fraudulent studies that divides environmentally minded people thus increasing chances of the dominant idea of global warming coupled with carbon taxes winning the debate. The consequences of such development would be, like with all similar scams, an introduction of carbon taxes, further squeeze on the economic wellbeing of the poor, violent decrease in the population and mega bucks for those who benefit from our present and future taxes already – corporations. I see the idea of global warming shaping global policy as a sinister plan to introduce atomized version of extermination camps. Nobody will know they exist because they will look like mundane reality, Just normal except slightly more crippling. So nobody will know who pulled the trigger in order to achieve what Goregia guide stones talk about. Is Max a front for Gore and Gates or does he simply think that parroting some trendy phrases about AGW will make him look like he is some sort of progressive? I do not know. I wish somebody ereased the AGW hoax from the memory of humanity so that we can focus on really urgent environmental issues like economic system that attempts to organise every facet of Life around profit. How about that?!

  49. Rumcajs says:

    @Tony Montoya. Correct. It looks like the demons who run this planet treat us like some scum in petri dish. They can increase the population if needed or kill us off if they change their mind. But before they do anything they will get us to agree that theirs is the best idea. And maybe Max is knowingly or not helping them to achieve just that.

  50. Kwai Chang says:

    @Tony Montoya…
    you found the disclaimer…good job…

  51. Zach OBrien says:

    Let’s get that green carbon tax passed so the Pentagon has more gas-money for wars.

  52. bammbamm says:

    Adolph Random’s global warming position can be summarized thus:

    1. I’m enlightened and you’re neanderthal.

    2. Anyone who denies global warming is in bed with Osama Bin Laden.

    Who could rebut such an intellect?

  53. Gordo says:

    “AGW deniers and Kochbots look away”

    Looks like they are looking away as predicted.

    Never confront a AGW deniers or Kochbot with facts or evidence.
    Best to just simply ignore.

  54. YoLithos says:

    Weather and climate leave marks – chemical and physical – in the natural world. Rocks, ice, soil, geology, trees. Temperature is one of the factors that can be evaluated. Humans have a propensity to collect and register data. To leave a mark. Even if no-one is there to read it. That allows a fair estimate to be made of average temperatures to be made. Over – at least – tens of thousands of years. Certainly, since the Napoleonic age.

    Wherever there were literate record-keeping humans, temperatures have been recorded as strategic information. The Chinese, for example, have a rather long history on the books. So do the “Arab” Muslim, and Jewish, scribes, researchers, … people with diaries. That allows checking against the geological, archeological, and living evidence. Extremes. Excursions. Local, regional, … global.

    Nowadays, old-fashioned pyrometry, and radiometry from space – aided by ground data – can certainly give very precise measurement. If half of the commercial sattellite clutter were used for science, instead of dominance dances and sterile finance …

  55. Kwai Chang says:

    “Please, somebody…over here…help…please, somebody”
    re:AGW…
    so far…NOBODY will answer my question…
    Is Welsbach Seeding (chemtrails…aluminum, barium) related to AGW???
    (here’s one thing that always causes CO2 problems: Tritium…
    where does Tritium come from??? NOT Nature)

  56. YoLithos says:

    @Gordo – Re: “Best to just simply ignore

    Too dangerous. That’s what they tried to do with the Nazis. Just remind them they are treachorous fear and thanatos driven emotionally crippled mentally mowed archaic trash. (The Nazis, that is.) Ô_ô

  57. Rumcajs says:

    @Kwai Chang. I cannot offer any help on this one, but thanks for mentioning Welsbach Seeding here. I had never heard of it before, but it does look like something related to the chemtrails.

  58. johnypage says:

    The Author is another ignorant globalist hoaxer, full of shit about global warming. Al Gore is ejaculating on massage therapists these days because he also knows he is a fraud committing crimes against humanity to get rich.

    The Earth’s atmospheric CO2 levels are at near all time lows, going back 500 Million years. We are only at 388 ppm while the average has been 1250 ppm, and has been as high as 5500 ppm for tens of millions of years, when humans were not around.

    The East Anglia University PhD’s have already admitted they lied and cheated on their data, while repressing opposing research in a classical fascist way. They are guilty.

    Turns out the only “evidence” of these experts has been computer generated climate model predictions, which were/are heavily doctored and skewed. Not only has the baseline data shown to be falsified, but their assumptions programmed into the climate models are wildly incorrect, which they are now admitting (under pressure) these days.

    Moreover, 95% of the greenhouse gases are water vapor, which we can do nothing about. Only 3% is CO2 — and of the 3% that is CO2, only 3% of that is man made CO2. In other words, man made CO2 is only .003% of the greenhouses gases. Put another way, the organic decay and bacteria in my yard produce far more CO2 every year than I do driving my car and using electricity.

    What’s more, of the tiny .003% of the CO2 man produces, the atmosphere, oceans, and vegatative organisms sop up in the natural Carbon Cycle, and if anything, there is a CO2 shortage going on if you are a plant because this low CO2 is actually stunting your growth. The atmosphere contains 700 Trillion tons of CO2, but the oceans have 40,000 Trillion tons of CO2 and with the huge capacity to absorb any extra CO2 from the atmosphere, that the plants don’t get, in a dynamic equilibrium. So, even if man doubled or quadrupled our CO2 output from currrent levels, the oceans have a huge capacity to absorb lots more.

    And there are lots more common sense facts swatting down the global warming moonbats these days, but here’s one of the real clinchers: CO2 does not even cause global warming. Even Al Gore admitted in congressional testimony that warming occurs first and CO2 rises as a secondary finding. Rises in CO2 actually lags sun cycles and decadal oscillation warming by many decades, if not hundreds of years. And did I mention that the Earth is at near all time lows in CO2 with only 388 ppm??

    Even 8th graders know that when you leave a cold soda out, as soon as it warms up, the CO2 escapes making it go flat. The soda did not get warm because the CO2 left the liquid, it was the other way around.

    And the environmental wackjobs are actually just making things worse. They are shutting down and driving all energy production away from the West to the dirty places of the world, like China and the Niger Delta. The point of 40 years of cleaner regulations was to make it safer, not to shut it down. All the GreenBots have accomplished is to dirty processes to prevail in countries where they refuse to go and lobby for clean regulations that match ours.

    And the really peculiar and astonishing thing is that the GreenBots become extremely emotional and angry if persented with mountains of conclusive evidence that Doomsday has been called off! You’d think they’d rejoice and be happy about it — but NO — they become disoriented, violent, shout out with namecalling and dig in their heels. They want a crises, even if it is manufactured. It matters not to them.

    Take the red pill and start here at this site for the best evidence to counter the government sponsored green propaganda: Climate Depot

    Remember to recycle, and remember we are also actually at an all-time low on atmosperic CO2, so it’s OK to Free the Carbon.

  59. Cabernet says:

    There goes Max again. The evidence that global warning is caused by increasing solar radiation is no long in dispute. The NASA data proves it. The evidence against CO2 being the problem is overwhelming as well. It makes up just 0.038% of the atmosphere. Water vapor makes up 90% of the green house gases in the atmosphere.

    The banks say they can solve this problem with cap and trade. If that goes into effect, they stand to make $3 trillion in capital gains on the carbon credits they already purchased. The government says they can solve the problem if they tax energy more heavily. We know AGW is a scam designed to separate us little people from what little money we have.

  60. Kwai Chang says:

    @Rumcajs…
    Welsbach Seeding IS chemtrails…there’s a patent number…
    engaged via Raytheon…
    (scary: research ‘aerogel’…an ugly variant)

  61. jimmytee says:

    Not only am I an AGW denier, but a Holo-Hoax Denier as well. 6 Million my hairy arse! Which would correspond with most intelligent , informed people, NOT Sheeple.

  62. Robert Mockan says:

    The Georgia Guidestones do not communicate anything indicating they are the product of a superior mind. There is nothing intrinsically meaningful about a numerical boundary condition pertaining to human population. The standard of living of each individual, when created from an energy density and physical economy feasible applying advanced science and technology, can exceed any available today for a population from …one.. to trillions… of people. The 500,000,000 number does reveal a neural construct emphasizing a primitive philosophy of natural biosphere sustainability, using ecology equilibrium. That construct, with limited mapping to the physical universe, is the result of a limited knowledge base, not a superior knowledge base.

  63. Rumcajs says:

    @Gordo. AGW is a bogus idea which evolved from another bogus idea of anthropogenic global cooling and the threat of an ice age. But since nobody could conclusively prove whether the climate is cooling or warming up and whether the processes are due to human activity another bogus idea was born. Climate change. Meanwhile the Gulf of Mexico is dying, Fukushima is melting, radiation everywhere so let’s not have a barbeque because it will add CO2 in the atmosphere. Did you notice that despite the panic about imminent climatic cataclysm nothing is being done to encourage true sustainability and development of alternatives to oil, coal and nuclear? Big agra is going strong the hegemony if internal combustion engine is intact and the economic system thretens to collapse if you do not participate in destroying the planet by consuming incerasing amounts of stuff stolen from the nature. Don’t you think that ther is something wrong in a system whre oil companies are making billions ruining the environment in the process but you are asked to take shorter showers, put a brick in your cistern, change the lightbulbs into ones that barely glimmer, produce no waste, pay more for energy and on top of that they will slap you in the face with a green tax. But if you want to pay your carbon tax on every fart or have the government eradicating you for being a burden on the environment go ahead and preach AGW. And out of curiosity… What facts or evdence would you confront an AGW deniers with?

  64. Jayme says:

    Regardless of AGW…. we still trash the planet at an extraordinary rate and don’t seem to have any regard to living systems beyond kittens, cute puppies, and parakeets, a couple of house plants, and whatever corporate GMO is forced on us as a solution to someone elses problem but always seems to be more of a problem for everyone else except the corporation making profits off it.

    Humans are wonderful and sick and everything in between. I sure don’t know when it will all stop or where it’s headed.

    Scientists reverse evolution with snouted chicken

    Scientists have rewound 65 million years of evolutionary history by tweaking chicken DNA to create embryos that grow alligator-like snouts rather than beaks.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/evolution/8707125/Scientists-reverse-evolution-with-snouted-chicken.html

  65. Paul says:

    @ dg | August 20, 2011 at 8:24 pm |

    Regarding your link to Phil Jones of Wast Anglia University. You seemed to have missed the most important part of the comment. Here is the question and his response copied from the BBC interview:

    BBC – Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming

    Jones – Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.

    By statistical significance he means the confidence interval on the estimate of the slope of the temperature trend regression line swings slightly negative over the period of data from 1995 to 2010 when the interview occurred. It doesn’t mean there has been no warming. It means the data record is too short to dig the temperature signal out of the noise. Take about a 30 year period which is a typical climate interval and start from say 1975 to the present and the trend is highly significant. The confidence interval is positive at both ends with the regression line having a positive slope of about .017 degrees C per year.

    If you don’t believe it you can download the temperature anomaly data from GISS (NASA) or HADCrut (East Anglia) and do a regression in EXCELL yourself. Its not hard to do and get the confidence interval for the regression line slope too.

    Incidentally, that is why when you see denialists present plots of temperature claiming that AGW ended in 1998 or there’s been no warming in the last 10 years, they never present estimates of statistical significance or confidence intervals. It would kill their denialist BS if they did.

  66. SilverFish says:

    Yes all the leading scientific authorities are playing a big hoax on you.Lucky you have good folk like the Hunt brothers and Peabody to reveal the truth.Pull the tea cosy off your heads.

  67. Rusty says:

    Yes, bureaucrats, carbon credits, more red tape and government corruption and more taxes will save us from the Sun and El Nino. Great religion. Marijuana much?

  68. Al Kyder says:

    @ Palantír @ Paul et al

    If you look at the global max temps, you are looking at the wrong data. The increase is …

    1. 20ºC Isotherm Level, particularly in the Pacific Ocean.

    2. The mean minimum temps. Which are up about 4ºc

    I have been saying this for 20 years, The planet is not getting hotter. Its not as cool as it once was. No this is not global cooling. Its Global Warming. No the Planet is not getting hotter its not as cool as it was 30 years ago. And, round and round it goes.

    This is the germ of the misunderstanding.

    As for the claim above that it had something to do with Ice age / Global warming fake science. This is partly true. There is a very compelling pile of data which suggests that a rise in Global average temps. (Not the MAXIUM) particularly the mean lows, might be the trigger for an ice age.

    An Ice age will occur if the Gulf Stream current stops. It will happen very quickly. Within av few years. If it happened tomorrow children born today may see New York city crushed under glaciers.

  69. SilverFish says:

    Dont touch marijuana sunshine,so whats your excuse for delusion.

  70. farang says:

    F. Beard | August 20, 2011 at 10:24 pm |
    Jeremiad: A prophet of doom Trevor Morgan
    Not necessarily. The Lord longs to be gracious (Isaiah 30:18). And in the time of Jeremiah, the Jews in Jerusalem could have avoided destruction if they had not reneged on their release of Hebrew debt slaves – Jerimiah 34:6-22.”

    How is it you are always one of the very first to post a gibberish comment, F?

    “The Lord” was PHARAOH, genius. SINCE WHEN HAS “The Lord” spoke to YOU or ANYONE else SINCE the days of the PHARAOHS?????

  71. indeed says:

    I wish that we could concentrate of dismantling all of the nuclear power plants.
    I wish that we would use less energy.
    I wish that people would limit themselves to two children.
    I wish that we would start helping each other instead of trying to kill each other.
    I wish that we could start taking responsibility for ourselves and stop the diffusion of responsibility for each other instead of whining to the government to make more laws or bailouts.
    I wish that we would reward compassionate intelligence, rather than rapacious theft.
    I wish that we could close the borders.

    What progress have we made? None. Yes, I believe that we are devolving and murdering each other.

  72. Danielz says:

    Vote Al Gore!

  73. AlienApeHybrid says:

    Pretty good article.

  74. AlienApeHybrid says:

    “Safely shuttering a nuclear power plant requires a decade or two of careful planning. Far sooner, we’ll complete the ongoing collapse of the industrial economy. This is a source of my nuclear nightmares.

    When the world’s 442 nuclear power plants melt down catastrophically, we’ve entered an extinction event.”

  75. Confused says:

    I saw the “Paul’ move aliens are weed smoking, hairy balled, hermaphrodite, Paul said that the earth wozz cool.

  76. Rumcajs says:

    @Paul. Statistics is for a reason referred to as lies. Dip your toe in statistics and you will see a wonderful tool to introduce confusion. Statistics is convoluted, arbitrary and for the most part having nothing to do with the science.

    But looking at what you posted. The guy detected some fluctuation in temperature which is not even statisticaly significant therefore we have to accept, with all its ramifications, the pre-determined outcome that global warming is a fact and is being caused by human activity . Why?

    Let’s say AGW is unquestionably a true theory. What then? Is the world going to scramble for ways of living free of consumerism or for alternative energy sourcess that people were demanding for decades? Nope! Because it would give people a good reson to believe that they should not to be burdened with shacles of green taxes or with other means of control. We will be kept in the current unsustainable paradigm until the very end while the governments are trying to convince us that we would do the planet a favour by dying quickly and quietly to make space for more desirable species.

    Banging on about AGW plays into the hands of the likes of Gates and Gore. And sadly the whole debate on the environment excludes discussing the main problems underlying environmental devastation i.e. economic system that will not accept any change untill it devours itself completely. So please look at the bigger picture. Think of the change you want to see and not about change the fascists would like you to endorse.

  77. Palantír says:

    @Al Kyder – To get some constant data you need to look at the average temperatures not the max or lowest. I see a tiny increase over the century in global average temperature where Ivar Giaever comment “amazing how stable the temperature has been” fits quite well. Climate and temperature are changing, I just don’t see the hockey stick change in the future as many others do, probably since I don’t know as much as I should in these matters.

  78. F. Beard says:

    “The Lord” was PHARAOH, genius. SINCE WHEN HAS “The Lord” farang

    You wouldn’t happen to be of Egyptian descent, would you?

  79. Bev says:

    This activism started yesterday so today is day two.

    Please note from Naomi Klein:

    http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2011/06/invitation-washington-d-c

    Invitation to Washington D.C.

    By Maude Barlow, Wendell Berry, Tom Goldtooth, Danny Glover, James Hansen, Wes Jackson, Naomi Klein, Bill McKibben, George Poitras, Gus Speth, and David Suzuki – June 23rd, 2011

    Dear Friends,

    This will be a slightly longer letter than common for the internet age—it’s serious stuff.

    The short version is we want you to consider doing something hard: coming to Washington in the hottest and stickiest weeks of the summer and engaging in civil disobedience that will quite possibly get you arrested.

    The full version goes like this:

    As you know, the planet is steadily warming: 2010 was the warmest year on record, and we’ve seen the resulting chaos in almost every corner of the earth.

    And as you also know, our democracy is increasingly controlled by special interests interested only in their short-term profit.

    These two trends collide this summer in Washington, where the State Department and the White House have to decide whether to grant a certificate of ‘national interest’ to some of the biggest fossil fuel players on earth. These corporations want to build the so-called ‘Keystone XL Pipeline’ from Canada’s tar sands to Texas refineries.

    To call this project a horror is serious understatement. The tar sands have wrecked huge parts of Alberta, disrupting ways of life in indigenous communities—First Nations communities in Canada, and tribes along the pipeline route in the U.S. have demanded the destruction cease. The pipeline crosses crucial areas like the Oglalla Aquifer where a spill would be disastrous—and though the pipeline companies insist they are using ‘state of the art’ technologies that should leak only once every 7 years, the precursor pipeline and its pumping stations have leaked a dozen times in the past year. These local impacts alone would be cause enough to block such a plan. But the Keystone Pipeline would also be a fifteen hundred mile fuse to the biggest carbon bomb on the continent, a way to make it easier and faster to trigger the final overheating of our planet, the one place to which we are all indigenous.

    How much carbon lies in the recoverable tar sands of Alberta? A recent calculation from some of our foremost scientists puts the figure at about 200 parts per million. Even with the new pipeline they won’t be able to burn that much overnight—but each development like this makes it easier to get more oil out. As the climatologist Jim Hansen (one of the signatories to this letter) explained, if we have any chance of getting back to a stable climate “the principal requirement is that coal emissions must be phased out by 2030 and unconventional fossil fuels, such as tar sands, must be left in the ground.” In other words, he added, “if the tar sands are thrown into the mix it is essentially game over.”

  80. Al Kyder says:

    @ Palantír

    You missed it again. Everyone does. The mean low Temp.(and The 20ºC isotherm levels.)

    This is important. The mean lows have indeed gone up as predicted. By 4º but the mean high’s have not moved.

    This is very bad news. Its that 20ºC isotherm temp that is the killer.

    So again. The planet is not as cool as it was 30 years ago. NO its not getting hotter. No Its not getting colder.

    The other thing is AGW is about the Sea and those sea temps. How they effect weather patterns and rain fall.

    The data from the last 30 years is in. Its all there on CSIRO

    AGWis real, undeniable proof as of a few months ago. Not that we needed it.

    We now know enough about it to predict El Niño-Southern Oscillations with a high degree of accuracy.

    So again @Palantír Its the mean lows you need to watch. That is the average low. Not the low. The mean low. OK. The driver of this is the 20ºC isotherm temps.

  81. Palantír says:

    @Al Kyder – that is something to be considered all right, been reading wiki and ixquick’ing isotherm to understand it better so thanks for that info.

  82. Paul says:

    @Al Kyder |

    Your point on the global temperature minimums is well taken.

    The HadCrut data I was referring to as well as the GISS NASA data is not max temperature data. It is temperature anomaly data.

    Daily average temperature data for a reporting station is typically formed by averaging the max and min daily temperature. The daily averages then get averaged over a month to form the the monthly temperature average for the station.

    NASA or East Anglia or the National Climate Data Center (NOAA) forms a baseline average of monthly temperatures for all the stations over a 30 year period giving a global monthly average for that 30 yr period. I believe NASA uses the period 1951 to 1980. The average for a particular month gets subtracted from the station average for that month and that forms the temperature anomaly for that station. The station anomalies get averaged to form the global anomaly which is what is contained in the HadCrut or GISS data. That’s a rough idea of it anyway. There are other steps that may be included like combining stations into grids that cover the earth then averaging (NCDC), area weighting, and data homogenization. Ultimately the min daily temp will get rolled into the data via the station averaging.