RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

POTUS Tree-Rings

By John Batchelor on November 27, 2009 at 7:00 PM in Current Affairs

* bumped up *

 

Suddenly Copenhagen.  

treerings.jpg

The Obama administration suddenly reverses itself and announces, according to Simon Constable and Kelsey Hubbard, conversing with Stephen Power,, that POTUS will stop in Copenhagen to deliver an opinion on greenhouse gas emissions targets for the next decade, and the question is why the reversal. Several weeks ago, the Obama team clearly indicated POTUS was skipping Copenhagen and would make his green world remarks at Oslo for his Nobel Peace Prize.

The change looks like political spin, and one presumption is that the administration is weakening to EU pressure on the fantasy of a planetary climate treaty.

The US was supposed to lead on climate, but the House bill that was shoved through by Mrs. Pelosi is so gummed up with tricks and costs and obvious unenforceable taxes that the Senate will not touch it. That was why the White House initially tried to skip the warmist confab. No gain, just noise.  So why the flip?

Warmist Fakes. 

ice-drill-peru-001.jpg

What has happened recently on climate is the revelation by a hacker into East Anglia University files that the warmists have been colluding for a decade to concoct or suppress data.  There are 62 megabytes of emails between many players, most all of them warmists who are paid for their research, called scientists.

The scandal is still emerging. We are in the denial stage.  Right now, what we know is that the tree-ring data, which did not suit the anthropogenic theory, was either cooked or ignored.  (Grows faster when warmer; slower when cooler.)

The apologists are trying to argue that, while the emails are not good, the tree-ring stuff is minor and does not speak to the big picture.   It is too early to say that the tree-ring data is all that was cooked.  Ask yourself, if you are shopping for correlations to your theory that, starting with the Industrial Revolution of the mid 19th century, the greenhouses gases have risen precipitously, where do you go?  Ice cores and tree rings are two metrics.

Now, if the scientists handling the data are willing to fake the tree-ring data, or at least to abuse it, why would they stop?  Why not the ice cores?  Why not the ice cores back a million years?  Why not the ocean temperatures now and over the last 60 years.  Where would you stop abusing the data?  Why stop?

The warmist email scandal has months to go.  Reputations will be wrecked, schools will be damaged, wholesale collapse of a money-raising internationalist cause.   The cap and trade bill is tattered, shredded, mealy, used for a napkin at MacDonald’s.

POTUS  to the Rescue.

Perhaps POTUS has suddenly decided to return to Copenhagen (scene of his last defeat re Chicago Olympics) because he is looking to bolster the warmists.  Perhap it is coincidence that the warmists are melting.

The cocktail party unanimity at Copenhagen is probably ruined.  POTUS attending does give the posse something to talk about besides how those emails really mean nothing, nothing at all, and that tree-rings are meaningless, without meaning, and that the global warming deniers are crackpots who make ice mountains out of ice in my tonic.   

  • creeper

    “The change looks like political spin, and one presumption is that the administration is weakening to EU pressure on the fantasy of a planetary climate treaty.”

    Nah. It’s not that complicated. This is just an excuse for another junket.

    I’m torn between wishing this man would stay home and do his job, and thinking we’re better off if he doesn’t.

  • connie

    So, does this mean he will not sign the bill or what?? Have we put enough pressure on Soro’s and Company that they will not be able to sign away our soveignty??

  • helenk

    How many of his puppeteers are making money or due to make money from this sham?
    He goes where he is told to go.
    Remember paraphrased ” just tell me what you want and I will sell it”
    I really can not see him having any over riding interest in the good of humanity.

    WOMEN WITH INTELLIGENCE AND EXPERIENCE,MEN WHO SUPPORT THEM AND COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY ALWAYS

    PUMAS,BUBBAS,EQUALISTS AND THOSE PEOPLE RULE

  • helenk

    How many of his puppeteers will make money off this climate thing?
    He goes where he is told to go.
    Remember paraphrased ” just tell me what you want and I will sell it”

    WOMEN WITH INTELLIGENCE AND EXPERIENCE, MEN WHO SUPPORT THEM AND COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY ALWAYS

    PUMAS,BUBBAS,EQUALISTS AND THOSE PEOPLE RULE

  • Docelder

    The whole reason we are stuck with Obama now is this “carbon as the new gold standard” hoax. Obama has his hands on this back to the days of the Joyce Foundation and the inception of the CCX in Chicago. This isn’t going to fade quietly away. No, POTUS is being asked to hard sell this in the face of evidence against it. We will see how good of a snake oil salesman he really is. Be prepared for a whiz bang of a speech chock full of start-stop Neurolinguistic Programming. Just don’t watch it.

  • SPSUZEE

    When it was announced that POTUS would not attend, I immediately thought it was a ruse. I believe that was just another distraction to keep the opposition to his attendance from gaining momentum. IMHO, he intended to go all along, and am not at all surprised with this latest announcement. Now, we need to watch his movements very closely because he is up to no good.

  • I’m a Linda too

    This was disheartening to learn. Especially after learning when and how the IPCC got started and by whom.

    Then you actually have a proponent come on to argue, this means nothing…of course they are not shutting out opposition voices…and then trying to shut up anyone pointing to the cover up and falsified documentation and that opposing voices had claimed this not true.

    ….”no no, no true, not correct…..they’re idiots and in denial” WHAT?

    They weaken their own argument.

    A real disheartening came on falsifying the temps. if they were honest and believed the occurence, they wouldn’t need to do this, then attack the opponents arguing all lies on their side.

    So, now we find out that warming had peaked a decade ago. We are on a decline. Again, doesn’t fit with their argument and their indignation “the debate is over”…”deniers” (and worse). They knew this and for a decade have been lying.
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,662092,00.html

  • I’m a Linda too

    Oh, my bad, I typed w h a t in capital letters and now…..

    …I’m locked in the spam filter.

    please free my comment

  • HARP

    If we could stop the politicians from talking so much, we would substantially reduce the amount of co2 emitted.

  • SuperGalt

    No, POTUS is being asked to hard sell this in the face of evidence against it.

    Assuming your assertion is correct:

    Bearing in mind the present political climate where he is getting torn to shreds no matter what he does or does not do, an image comes to mind of a lamb giving a speech at the Loyal Order of Hungry Wolves Convention. :D

  • RecoveringDemoholic

    Discussions including tree-ring data, preceding the recent document grab:

    http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/10811
    http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/10838

    In science, everything ought to be open for question — data, models, motives.

    I’m old school RTFM & RTFC/C. Read the Farkin Manual & Code/Comments.

  • PO’dVet

    I believe it is pure politics. He got his ass handed to him repeatedly on his Asia trip. Going from blunder to blunder every stop along the way, and his international cred took a nosedive. Now he wants an easy venue to prop himself up to be deified again by the too lazy to look up the truth Obamatons.

  • Onofre’s arm

    Could someone find and post Ed Begley Jr’s meltdown on Cavuto the other day. You know you’ve hit a major nerve when someone reacts so violently defensive. Begley’s a moron. Long time skeptics, and scientists like myself who never bought into AGW, and were ridiculed as Holocaust deniers, deserve a major apology from the Neo Marxist/progressive/econazis who’ve been perpetrating this hoax. I won’t hold my CO2 laden breath. The AGW fraud has always been an attempt at iron fisted control of our lives by strictly regulating our necessary use of energy. Al Gore, the Baghdad Bob of the Econazi movement, should be brought up on serious charges, and be stripped of all the wealth he’s gained through this swindle.

  • SHV

    How many of his puppeteers will make money off this climate thing?
    *********
    Goldman Sachs, General Electric, Chicago Climate Exchange to name the most obvious.

    There are a least two warming conspiracies going on. 1)the fossil fuel industry hacks who use the same techniques that the auto industry did to fight safety legislation, the Tobacco industry that said smoking was safe, the food industry that says food is safe, etc.

    2)The politicians who push “warming” to benefit their corporate backers, Goldman et al but minimize the real impact of warming…don’t want to alarm the voter too much….you know.

    IMO, really doesn’t make any difference…the tripping point for “out of control” warming was probably passed decades ago if not centuries ago.
    If the politicians wanted to do something useful about “warming” they would start planning for significantly higher sea levels and altered agriculture that will occur with climate change. ain’t gonna happen.

  • Onofre’s arm

    That WOULD be a farewell address.

  • http://www.sonicninjakitty.wordpress.com Sonic Ninja Kitty

    Data is not only cooked, it is completely “lost”: http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2009/08/we-lost-original-data.html

    and completely misread: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzFL6Ixe_bo&feature=related

    Sunlight not only warms, it disinfects :)

  • SuperGalt

    Hey you got your wish: a thread on climategate! :D

    Congrats!

  • http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

    Now if we can get some of that sunlight to shine on the fraud and corruption of the last presidential election, it will be a beautiful day of perfect climate harmony!

  • RecoveringDemoholic

    @Onofre’s arm — Ed Begley Jr’s meltdown on Cavuto

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=429xoDtqS-A&feature=player_embedded

  • Onofre’s arm

    Than you SOOOOO much! !

  • Onofre’s arm

    Unfortunately, I’m bogged down today making pies, and the main components of the feast my two sons and I will blimp out on later. Tomorrow, when the dust settles, I’ll be able to devote more time to this.

    Now I’m off to mix up some scallop stuffing so I can throw the bird in the oven. I love the way the oven alone can heat my entire house while I’m cooking.

  • Fredster

    What’s your carbon footprint with firing up that oven? ;-)

  • jbjd

    It’s okay; my son and I walked to Thanksgiving dinner, and back; and we cooked nothing. Headlines: Oa and jbjd successfully negotiate Thanksgiving carbon credit swap.(Must we previously have arranged the transaction to obtain the offset; and, must both parties to the transaction be aware of the deal?)

  • jbjd

    Wow! Thank you, SNK.

  • http://noquarter foxyladi14

    HAPPY THANKSGIVING ALL

  • Docelder

    Yes, but it was never about the environment from the top down. Many of the foot soldiers believe in the cause… yes. But at the top, at the inception of the idea… it’s just about making carbon the new gold. Think of it this way… Arab sheiks have been made filthy rich because their tents were on the top of oil deposits. Deposits that foreign companies found and developed. What if… the oil could be made valueless without a “permit” to burn it? What if instead of the oil itself being the scarcity… what if it was the carbon allotment to utilize the oil that was suddenly so valuable? This is just another wealth transfer to the super rich. Rich people are just playing “monopoly” with our lives… while we are little more than race car, irons or dog tokens that get pushed around the board. We aren’t playing… we are the game pieces. What is a carbon credit anyway? Just another scheme.

  • Very close

    What if this is all just a utopian idea of “social justice”?

    Division of the world into regions?
    Each region being more or less self-sufficient?
    Oil rich regions using their own oil?
    Hi-tech, hi-income regions finding alternative energies?
    Transferring of wealth from hi-income nations to developing nations?
    Why is it ok for foreign nations to use more pollutants than we do if this is really just about cleaning up the earth?
    Why would the IPCC be concerned about people becoming less concerned with materialism and use their time to become more community involved?

    From the purloined email was a very ominous email—-please read and ask yourself what this means in the grand scheme of things. (And why is the CRU privy to this geopolitical agenda?)

    http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=54&filename=889554019.txt

  • Very close

    PS–and why is the IPCC concerned about leveling the worlds income for equitable “redistribution”? (Changing the global median income.)

    Cap and trade is one such maneuver–it will be very costly to heat our homes and transport ourselves. EVERYONE will pay higher utility and gas bills in the US under the guise of cleaning up the environment. CCX in Chicago is already set up for carbon trading. Al Gore stands to make hefty profits too.

    Oh, and what if there’s been this grand plan in place for a decade and all of a sudden the earth fails to cooperate and starts going into a cooling period once all the dominos have been put in place? What is your only defense if somehow your email and data becomes known and threatens to destroy a plan already well on its way to fruition? Deny. Besmirch the skeptics. Continue on as if unaffected.

    I wonder how many gems are yet to be revealed among these emails that were already the subject of numerous FOI requests that were ignored?

  • Jon S

    This is just the tip of the “ice berg” now other climategates are surfacing. It turns out scientist in New Zealnd and Austrialia have also been “fudging” the numbers. WTF?? This has been such a organized global scam!!!

    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/climategate_making_new_zealand_warmer/

    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_global_warming_conspiracy_the_trashy_australian_data/

  • Docelder

    There are hose who believe in this not because of the warming but because of the social justice aspects of it. But just as the environmentalists have been co-opted so too the Utopians have been co-opted along with the intellectual elites. I still believe from the top down this is about money and control. The concept of forcing their ideas on the rest of the world of how things “should be” is driving this. The problem is, the agenda is being controlled by those whose intentions aren’t pure. I think the scientists are just caught up in this out of idealism… that and the concept that “by any means” justifies the end result. They are wrong… totalitarianism of thought is no better than any other totalitarianism. The scientists would see the truth as soon as they were successful and things don’t work out as they thought. The lesson of Obama being elected should have woke them up by now… things aren’t working out there either. But then again street smart people always can run circles around book smart people… anywhere at anytime off a university campus.

  • Very closed

    Docelder–
    I hope you saw my response to you up the thread and check out that link. Why would Jones have this IPCC topic in his email? What is his concern with a geopolitical agenda?

    Yes, there are some true believers in CC–probably the average citizen. On the other hand, this seems much bigger than the election of Obama but that played very well into his securing the presidency.

    I think you were here at the time too–but do you remember the Ayers blog with the quote “the end of an empire is messy….”? Check out social justice and Obama/Ayers.

    There are too many parallels between this email (see above link) and Obama’s own words all through the campaign.

    We need to all wake up–our nation is giving away its sovereignty.

  • Lou Filliger

    Sooner or later, the liberal community, or more precisely the naive people who bought the AGW hoax hook like and sinker, liberals and some extremely dumb fringe conservatives alike, will realize that we owe GWB an apology for being right all along by ignoring the IPCC nonsense.

  • Lou Filliger

    If we do decide to start over I’d like to have them begin research on the most massive available piece of wood known to science, that is, Keith Olbermann’s head, and see whether his rings have grown any faster during Democratic administrations.

  • mountainaires

    Oh, ferchrissakes. There IS climate change. We are in a process of changing environmental effects, from melting polar ice caps–Greenland–to massive disappearance of bees–which affects everything. Stop drinking the kool-aid, whether it’s from Obama/Pelosi or Hannity/Beck.

    You are a prime target for propaganda if you’re getting your information from anyone else; do your own research. Decide for yourself.

    What Is Totalitarianism?

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article24073.htm

  • Onofre’s arm

    Well, you’re wrong on most counts, IF you’re blaming any climate change on mankind. The Arctic ice cap may be reducing, but the Antarctic cap is increasing. Honey bees (not all bees, and certainly not all pollinators) are decreasing due to trachial mites and other organic reasons, not temperature changes. Greenland has had broad fluctuations in it’s ice coverage, and what may have been happening recently is historically not unusual. The climate ALWAYS changes, there never has been a static climate, and NOBODY in their right mind can state with certainty what the ideal global temperature is. ALL of man’s cumulative contributions to the climate have less than a 5% influence, more like 1%. The data that YOU have been swallowing as proof of warming has been cooked, exaggerated, and often incorrectly interpreted. The models used to predict climate change have failed miserably to predict 10 years into the future, let alone 100 years. The effects of CO2 toward warming decrease logarithmically with higher concentrations until it no longer has added effect past a certain concentration. There have been times in Earth’s past when CO2 concentrations were 10 times what they are now, and the planet didn’t spin off in flames. Most models are unevenly skewed because of intentionally greater inclusion of contributing factors, and omission of mitigating factors. Both sides of the debate do this, but the global warming econazis like Al Gore refuse to debate their data and conclusions with the other side. Why is that? Could it be, as we are beginning to rapidly find out, that the data, graphs, pictures, and films they’ve used to jamb AGW down our throats is all a pack of lies? Several days ago Al Gore claimed that rocks that are millions of degrees hot are only two kilometers down. Stupendously wrong on both counts, yet how many morons in this world think he is some sort of scientific oracle?

    It’s far more complicated than you, or I, or even the most brilliant scientists can begin to comprehend, whether they want to admit it or not. But the known actual causes for climate change such as solar activity, ocean currents, and the totality of effects of the non-anthropic biosphere, completely dwarf man’s contribution. The sea levels are rising, but they’ve been rising for 10,000 years, and it is a statistical lie to claim that there has been a sudden bump in that trend, and the “fixed data” from East Anglia are another pack of lies that have built this huge hoax into a religion.

    I would also say “go do your own research”, except that the general public are not capable of understanding the esoteric disciplines of climate, geology, biology, and so forth, and it has been this lack of sophistication that agenda driven individuals have preyed upon to create an AGW frenzy.

    The motives for perpetrating this hoax are debatable, I have my theories on that, but as more fraudulent activity is exposed, and more accurate data is properly interpreted, the true causes for climate change are being pinned down, and AGW is becoming just insignificant noise.

  • Lou Filliger

    I have done my own research, and I agree that the climate is always changing. Read Ian Plimer’s book “Heaven and Earth” to see how it’s changed over the period of recorded history and before; see how the current change is less than a blip in the grand scheme of things; see how badly the IPCC model is flawed because of all the things it doesn’t take into account.

    (1) I use statistical analysis in my day to day work, which I’ve done over thirty years.

    (2) I don’t listen to Hannity or Beck, and if I did I sure wouldn’t adopt a view as mine just because they espoused it.

    (3) I graduated high school when I was 15 and the University of Michigan when I was 19.

    (4) My hobbies have long included paleogeology and other earth sciences.

    (5) You are unfit to sit in judgement of me, or to make these insulting remarks about kool-aid, whatever that means. Perhaps a reflection of your own drug-addled past?

    (6) You should be a bit more respectful of other people’s opinions, and I’ll tell you why. Because you are a complete, unmitigated IDIOT.
    You don’t know anything, and your life has been a complete waste so far.

    (7) I really detest people like you – liberal shills whose thinking, if it could be called that, could easily be duplicated by an Excel macro that pulls non-sequiturs out of a database and random intervals and mail-merges them into paragraphs intended to give the semblance of rational thought.

    (8) Go to hell and take your kindred spirits with you! The Earth, cold or warm, will be better off without you.

  • Lou Filliger

    I have done my own research, and I agree that the climate is always changing. Read Ian Plimer’s book “Heaven and Earth” to see how it’s changed over the period of recorded history and before; see how the current change is less than a blip in the grand scheme of things; see how badly the IPCC model is flawed because of all the things it doesn’t take into account.

    (1) I use statistical analysis in my day to day work, which I’ve done over thirty years.

    (2) I don’t listen to Hannity or Beck, and if I did I sure wouldn’t adopt a view as mine just because they espoused it.

    (3) I graduated high school when I was 15 and the University of Michigan when I was 19.

    (4) My hobbies have long included paleogeology and other earth sciences.

    (5) You are unfit to sit in judgement of me, or to make these insulting remarks about kool-aid, whatever that means. Perhaps a reflection of your own drug-addled past?

    (6) You should be a bit more respectful of other people’s opinions, and I’ll tell you why. Because you are a complete, unmitigated IDIOT.
    You don’t know anything, and your life has been a complete waste so far.

    (7) I really detest people like you – liberal shills whose thinking, if it could be called that, could easily be duplicated by an Excel macro that pulls non-sequiturs out of a database and random intervals and mail-merges them into paragraphs intended to give the semblance of rational thought.

    (8) Go to hell and take your kindred spirits with you! The Earth, cold or warm, will be better off without you.

  • lorac

    Docelder – yes, cap and trade seemed like just a scam to me, not about controlling carbon output. When I heard that someone whose business didn’t use up all of its “credits” could sell those to someone who was going OVER their own credits, it was clear that this was all about creating a new market for the rich.

    If instead of lowering their emissions, the overpolluters just buy credits from someone else, how do we end up with anything but the same levels we have now? There would be no reduction. So – that scheme isn’t for affecting the environment – it’s just about someone else (not us) making money off a scam…

  • Onofre’s arm

    Lou,I guess I can consider you part of the AGW skeptic (sceptic in GB) crowd.

    20 years ago, an increasingly radical and statist environmental movement were searching for a cause that could not be well defined, and could really only exist in predictions, so they seized upon AGW. James Hansen led the movement after he recently abandoned efforts to generate concern over the coming ice age. That particular “Sky is falling” scenario never caught hold, maybe because the “ice age” cycles were pretty well defined, and we’re obviously in the middle of the glacier free wave of the cycle. They made AGW their baby because it would be relatively easy to make false correlations to pin climate change on man’s activities, and a naive and scientifically illiterate public could easily be swayed by it’s reverence for the mysterious scientific community. People are also naturally anthropocentric so they are more inclined out of arrogance to believe that we actually do have a great deal of influence on the climate, even though termites are a greater contributing factor. The acceptance of the idiotic notion that CO2 is a pollutant, or is a significant greenhouse gas, is a perfect example of how successful the econazi propaganda has been in creating a fear generating fantasy.

    Plimers book is great, but for the general public, I would recommend reading “State of Fear” by Michael Creighton, since the fictional story line may keep the attention of the reader while Creighton instructs with well footnoted facts in an entertaining and enlightening lecture.

  • Onofre’s arm

    Admin: Spammed again! I would deeply appreciate it if you could dig it out. Thanks.

  • Jack

    Obama thought he got China on board.

    But the day after he left, the Chinese leader said Chinese co2 abatements will not be open to verification to anyone outside, meaning especially, the UN’s dubious carbon cops/authenticators.

    So he got nothing, and the Chinese got a laugh

blog comments powered by Disqus