Some developments and thoughts

The United States, Torres says, is responsible for “extreme weather events, megadroughts, desertification, deforestation, species extinctions, biodiversity loss, ecological collapse, the spread of infectious diseases, rising sea levels, food supply shortages, mass migrations, social upheaval, and political instability.”
Paul Torres–Salon

Who knew?  The United States apparently has the power of a god.  This is mindless drivel.  Yet somehow people pick it up as the gospel truth.  It is truly frightening how little thought goes into the beliefs of global warming activists.


John Kerry, who voted against the Kyoto Protocol, now says anyone who doesn’t believe in climate change is not qualified to president. Didn’t he mean “Anyone who doesn’t waffle on their positions, voting both for and against an idea” does not deserve to be president? Or maybe it was “Anyone who doesn’t follow what the Washington elite and the very, very, very, very, very rich rulers of this country believe” does not deserve to be president? Maybe he just meant “anyone who disagrees with me does not deserve to be president”. Any way you look at it, it’s all about the politics and nothing about science.


“Saving the environment isn’t just about cutting carbon emissions, of course. Housing the conference cost a small forest. Rather than using existing buildings, the French government built a small city of pavilions at Le Bourget for the conference, seven miles north of the centre of Paris.
A total of 50 contractors worked for 40 days, knocking up 80,000 square metres of temporary buildings and fitting them out.
The centrepiece, a ‘plenary room’ to seat 2,000 delegates, was supposed to be a model of environmentally-friendliness. Yet it alone required 900 trees to be sawn down. The organisers say they have replaced every one with a new tree – overlooking the fact that the new trees are saplings while the 900 sawn down were mature trees. While the delegates were trying to persuade each other to invest in renewable energy, the buildings were heated by a gas-fired boiler. Unbelievably, the organisers said this ‘helps reduce carbon emissions by 20 per cent’ because they could have used an oil boiler, but didn’t.
The Paris Conference made great claims that it would create ‘zero waste’. That was assuming the buildings, to be taken down after the event, could be used again. They might just struggle, though, to find many people in need of a 2,000-seater plenary room.
The organisers said that reusable coffee cups did away with the need for two million disposable plastic cups. Yet reusable cups are not nearly as environmentally friendly as the organisers would have us believe as washing them consumes a lot of energy. According to environmental consultancy Carbon Clear, a ceramic coffee cup would have to be used 354 times before it has used less energy than a plastic cup.”

Read more:

It should be clear to anyone that these people do NOT believe a word they are preaching.  The waste and environmental damage wrought by these conferences is criminal.  No one who actually believed in catastrophic, or even mildly threatening, global warming would behave in this fashion.  This screams “We Don’t Care”.  There is no reason whatsoever to listen to these individuals.  If they don’t believe what they’re preaching, there’s no reason for you do so based on their proclamations.


“Arctic has its warmest year in history as experts say temperatures there are rising TWICE as fast as anywhere else in the world”
Read more:

This is LOCAL warming and is proof of nothing. GLOBAL warming must be global. It is interesting that the IPCC and others worked so hard to eliminate the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age as “local” but I don’t see any rush to point out that the Arctic warming is LOCAL. Why is that?

IF Arctic warming is proof of or caused by global warming, then the Medieval Warm and Little Ice Age are proof that it was globally both warmer and colder in the past, during the time humans lived on the planet. Which means the Hockey Stick and much of what the activists are saying a lie. OR the Arctic is proof of NOTHING and again, the activists are lying.  Either way.

Scientific badger

Scientific badger

Non-trends and politics

First, the “non-trend”.  I am reproducing here an article in full from  (I rarely do this, but for the purpose of having all information here for discussion, I did so.)  Please visit the blog for more interesting articles on US precipitation, and other climate change topics.

UK Precipitation Trends

OCTOBER 26, 2013

By Paul Homewood


The Norwegian Meteorological Institute, in conjunction with The European Academies Science Advisory Council (EASAC), have published a report, “Extreme Weather Events in Europe: preparing for climate change adaptation”, which makes the usual claims that extreme weather events are on the increase.

One of their claims concerns winter rainfall:

Winter rainfall has decreased over Southern Europe and the Middle East, and has increased further north. The latter increase is caused by a pole-ward shift of the North Atlantic storm track and a weakening of the Mediterranean storm track. Short and isolated rain events have been regrouped into prolonged wet spells.

But have we seen this effect in the UK?

Winter rainfall has increased since the 1960’s, but only back to levels seen earlier in the 20thC. Even further north in Scotland, the pattern is similar.



Professor Stuart Lane of Durham University has looked at long term precipitation records for the UK, and concludes that the period from the 1960’s to the 1990’s was an unusually dry one, so there is nothing to suggest that current levels of rainfall are in any way unusual. (Remember that this period coincides with the cold phase of the AMO, that leads to drier conditions in the UK – see here.)

Let’s finish by looking at rainfall intensity, which the EASAC paper suggests is getting worse.

As with overall rainfall totals, we see an increase in the average rainfall per rainday since the 1960’s, but no increase at all in the last 20 years. Indeed, if anything there is a decline. We also see the same sort of pattern with the number of raindays. (Met Office data for raindays only starts in 1961)



I can make no comment about the rest of Europe, but it is clear that the report’s findings on this particular topic have no factual basis in the UK.


All data from the UK Met Office

End of post

Political commentary (since WtD is now addressing politics, I thought I might too on occasion

There was a headline:  

Kerry ‘Amazed’ That Some Americans Still Don’t Grasp Urgency of Global Warming

Secretary of State John Kerry expressed his frustration Tuesday with the fact that even in the United States, “a very educated country,” there are those who do not recognize the urgency of combating global warming. 

(See more at:

First, one must question if a “very educated country” elects a pathological liar as president twice.  

Second, if we are to “do the maths” as McKibben says, one can see where a country where the president can say with a straight face that increasing the debt limit does not increase the debt would be dream land for the AGW crowd.  Sadly, even if we weren’t bright enough to detect pathological lying, it appears maybe too many people here can still do math well enough to know the debt limit increase does increase the debt and the AGW numbers add up to broken theories and societal poverty.

Third, for those of you who will doubt my second statement:  check out and see what going green has done for California.  The green dream results in large exoduses of people and decreasing standards of living in a very short time. Soon, California will look like Detroit and be demanding those states that use evil fossil fuels bail them out. Personally, I would like to see any state that demands the use of alternative worthless energy sources not allowed to buy electricity from any fossil fuel sources and it be forbidden to bail out their economy after the climate change gurus have bankrupted it. Actions should have consequences, though, sadly, there will be an attempt to hide all the consequences in the hopes no one will recognize the utter failure of “sustainable” energy.

Fourth, for those of you who still believe those who advocate “green policies” for saving the planet, you need to keep this in mind when reading about all those who freeze to death due to fuel poverty in England this year, or froze to death last year for that matter, that many, many greens care nothing about who lives or dies in saving the planet.  A few dead grandparents are a small price to pay to save Gaia.  It’s interesting that advocates sometimes say they are doing this for their grandchildren while their actions result in the death of current grandparents. It’s either incredibly selfish,or further proof that Kerry’s assessment of the intellect of Americans is way off base. (Some have not actually looked at the reality nor have they “done the maths” for what the reality of their ideas will cost.  Europe is dumping wind and solar–it’s unsustainable without a forest of money trees to prop it up.  That’s reality.)”

Scientific Badger

Scientific Badger