James Hanson refuses to discuss views at William & Mary

It’s tough finding outlets when you are censored.

clipped from media.www.vainformer.com Dr. James Hansen, NASA climatologist and major figure in the debate on global climate change, recently refused a paid invitation to speak and debate at the College about his positions on global warming. Braum Katz (’09) — secretary for the College’s Department of Student Rights, director of the newly-created William and Mary Society for Academic Freedom and Diversity and Informer writer — invited Mr. Hansen via e-mail. “For this fall,” Mr. Katz wrote in his e-mail to Mr. Hansen, “we are hoping to host a debate on global climate change and its implications. Patrick Michaels has agreed to come, and my organization would like you to come and debate Dr. Michaels in Williamsburg. The date is very flexible, and we can tailor the day of the debate completely to your schedule. We will be able to pay for your travel expenses and offer you an honorarium for your time. Please let me know if you would be interested.” Mr. Hansen’s response was, simply, “not interested.”

Falsification of CO2 Effects Within the Frame of Physics

Paging Al Gore…

clipped from arxiv.org The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that authors trace back to the traditional works of Fourier 1824, Tyndall 1861, and Arrhenius 1896, and which is still supported in global climatology, essentially describes a fictitious mechanism, in which a planetary atmosphere acts as a heat pump driven by an environment that is radiatively interacting with but radiatively equilibrated to the atmospheric system. According to the second law of thermodynamics such a planetary machine can never exist. (a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified.

Consumption up 10% over last year

Mine’s down.

clipped from www.tennesseepolicy.org Energy Guzzled by Al Gore’s Home in Past Year Could Power 232 U.S. Homes for a Month Gore’s personal electricity consumption up 10%, despite “energy-efficient” home renovations “A man’s commitment to his beliefs is best measured by what he does behind the closed doors of his own home,” said Drew Johnson, President of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research. “Al Gore is a hypocrite and a fraud when it comes to his commitment to the environment, judging by his home energy consumption.” After the Tennessee Center for Policy Research exposed Gore’s massive home energy use, the former Vice President scurried to make his home more energy-efficient. Despite adding solar panels, installing a geothermal system, replacing existing light bulbs with more efficient models, and overhauling the home’s windows and ductwork, Gore now consumes more electricity than before the “green” overhaul.

Is Eco-therapy for you?

clipped from www.foxnews.com Sarah Edwards worries about the gasoline she burns, the paper towels she throws out, the litter on the beach, water pollution. She worries so much, it literally makes her sick. “Fear, grief, anger, confusion and depression,” Edwards says, pointing to the negativity that has manifested itself in real-life symptoms such as neck and shoulder pain, fibromyalgia and fatigue. Edwards suffers from eco-anxiety, the growing angst experienced by those who can’t handle the thought that they — or anyone — are in some way contributing to global warming, species extinction and dwindling natural resources. Things have gotten so bad, a new kind of therapy has sprouted up to keep people from going nuts over the environment. “eco-therapy” or “eco-psychology.” The time on the couch isn’t spent delving into a patient’s childhood to find the source of misery. Instead, it looks at how much time a person spends in nature, the person’s carbon footprint and what the individual is doing to save the planet.

“Melissa Pickett, an eco-therapist in Santa Fe, N.M., who says she treats dozens of patients a month, said sometimes she has to tell extreme greenies to chill out for their own good. “The global warming craze will cause your clients to go into extremism fueled by fear,” she says.”

“And with eco-therapy around, that extremism can get expensive. Eco-therapy can cost as much as traditional psychotherapy, upwards of $100 an hour. There’s a lot of green in being green.”

“But Pickett said eco-therapy helps those grappling with feelings of helplessness and hopelessness about the environment.”

“People break down and cry. They develop obsessive-compulsive behavior. They have nightmares,” Pickett said. “And these are normally high-functioning people.”

She pushes her eco-disturbed patients to take shorter showers, turn off lights and computers, consume less, buy less and learn as much as they can about global warming.

Backdoor Kyoto

clipped from www.aei.org Listing the polar bear as a threatened species would have significant public policy consequences. It would set a new precedent, representing the first linkage of species endangerment with global warming. Such a listing would basically wall off the entire Arctic region to exploration, resource extraction, and development–at least by U.S. companies–and a threatened species listing would give environmental groups the ability to sue future U.S. governments to force them to reverse climate change by whatever means necessary. There is little doubt that such lawsuits would be filed quickly. According to the NRDC: Listing the polar bear guarantees federal agencies will be obligated to ensure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out will not jeopardize the polar bears’ continued existence or adversely modify their critical habitat, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will be required to prepare a recovery plan for the polar bear, specifying measures necessary for its protection.

“Center for Biological Diversity]Protection under the Endangered Species Act will provide concrete help to polar bears and could revolutionize American climate policy. Since U.S. resistance to curbing greenhouse gases has allowed other countries to shirk their responsibilities as well, major changes in American policy are likely to have a powerful domino effect, catalyzing change in climate policy worldwide.
From polluting power plants in the Midwest to auto manufacturers, a vast array of industries may have to clean up their acts to give the polar bear a chance to survive.”

It’s official! April 2008 cooler than 20th century average!

clipped from www.ncdc.noaa.gov UNITED STATES Climate Summary April 2008 The average temperature in April 2008 was 51.0 F. This was -1.0 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average, the 29th coolest April in 114 years. The temperature trend for the period of record (1895 to present) is 0.1 degrees Fahrenheit per decade.

Global Warming Researcher says Equations “totally wrong”

clipped from www.dailytech.com New derivation of equations governing the greenhouse effect reveals “runaway warming” impossible Mikls Zagoni isn’t just a physicist and environmental researcher. He is also a global warming activist and Hungary’s most outspoken supporter of the Kyoto Protocol. Or was. That was until he learned the details of a new theory of the greenhouse effect, one that not only gave far more accurate climate predictions here on Earth, but Mars too. The theory was developed by another Hungarian scientist, Ferenc Miskolczi, an atmospheric physicist with 30 years of experience and a former researcher with NASA’s Ames Research Center. Zagoni stopped calling global warming a crisis, and has instead focused on presenting the new theory to other climatologists. “Runaway greenhouse theories contradict energy balance equations,” Just as the theory of relativity sets an upper limit on velocity, his theory sets an upper limit on the greenhouse effect

“How did modern researchers make such a mistake? They relied upon equations derived over 80 years ago, equations which left off one term from the final solution.”

“Looking at a series of differential equations for the greenhouse effect, he noticed the solution — originally done in 1922 by Arthur Milne, but still used by climate researchers today — ignored boundary conditions by assuming an “infinitely thick” atmosphere. Similar assumptions are common when solving differential equations; they simplify the calculations and often result in a result that still very closely matches reality. But not always.”

“So Miskolczi re-derived the solution, this time using the proper boundary conditions for an atmosphere that is not infinite. His result included a new term, which acts as a negative feedback to counter the positive forcing. At low levels, the new term means a small difference … but as greenhouse gases rise, the negative feedback predominates, forcing values back down.”

A modest request

clipped from agw-heretic.blogspot.com Is the anthropogenic climate change hypothesis falsifiable? I am asking this within the context of the scientific method. Integrity demands that a scientist, when proposing a hypothesis, list the conditions whereby the hypothesis would fall apart: We believe that this hypothesis sufficiently describes the reality we are studying, but if anybody can demonstrate any of conditions a, b, c, d or e, our hypothesis is fatally compromised and it’s back to the drawing board. So, AGW folks: can you name any condition (series of weather events, temperature trends, etc.) that would make you doubt the current orthodoxy, or are we witnessing the most bulletproof hypothesis ever?

Where have all the sunspots gone?

clipped from wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com The sun has gone quiet. Really quiet. It is normal for our sun to have quiet periods between solar cycles, but we’ve seen months and months of next to nothing, and the start of Solar cycle 24 seems to have materialized (as first reported here) then abruptly disappeared. The reverse polarity sunspot that signaled the start of cycle 24 on January 4th, dissolved within two days after that. But the real news is just how quiet the suns magnetic field has been in the past couple of years. From the data provided by NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center (SWPC) you can see just how little magnetic field activity there has been. I’ve graphed it below: Some say it is no coincidence that 2008 has seen a drop in global temperature as indicated by several respected temperature indexes�compared to 2007, and that�our sun is also quiet and still not kick starting its internal magentic dynamo.

Past temperatures will get colder in the future

clipped from www.climateaudit.org clipped from ncwatch.typepad.com Jim Hansen, NASA scientist, has been on� the forefront of the global warming issue since he briefed Congress on the issue in 1988.� He is rewriting climate history by adjusting the US climate records from 1900 forward to more closely match the growth curve in CO2. The folks who recorded the temperatures across the nation since 1900 were just unaware that their readings were going to mess up his whole� global warming argument. They were just doing their job as weather observers, not concerned about the politics of their readings.� But, since the recordings they made for the last 100 years do not match the increase in CO2, Jim Hansen has decided to adjust these historic measurements to more closely parallel the increase in CO2.� After all, those early temperature recorders just did not know about the great danger of CO2 and global warming. So now NASA is adjusting the record of these thousands of dedicated weather observers to fit Jim Hansen’s religious preferences — global warming by CO2.�