Another View on Climate

My Own View of Global Warming

Quality Quotes

Interesting quotes from all over the Interwebs

Most recently posted quotes are at the top of each section.

Global Warming, Science, Climate

  • And then we have Lindzen with a perfect counterpoint to the Mann comment, below: “Perhaps we should stop accepting the term, ‘skeptic.’ Skepticism implies doubts about a plausible proposition. Current global warming alarm hardly represents a plausible proposition. Twenty years of repetition and escalation of claims does not make it more plausible. Quite the contrary, the failure to improve the case over 20 years makes the case even less plausible as does the evidence from climategate and other instances of overt cheating.” (source)
  • Mann explained that “Getting on a debate stage signals that, while you might disagree, you respect the position of your opponent.” NoFrakkinConsensus (Seems like a great reason not to bother to try and debate Mann, we’d have to respect his position to do that.)
  • Many blame the public’s confusion over global warming on a widespread ignorance of science. A scientific grounding wouldn’t hurt but it also wouldn’t help much — few laymen, no matter how well informed, could be expected to follow the arcane climate change calculations that specialized scientists wield. The much better explanation for the public’s confusion lies in a widespread ignorance of history, not least by scientists. We learn that history trumps science when the science is speculative, politicized, and at odds with reality. — Lawrence Solomon, National Post, 19 April 2013 (source)
  • “As far as I can tell, there is no possible weather event which they would say is inconsistent with global warming. That is the nature of ad hoc politically driven junk science.” source
  • And now, about that hate…
  • Don’t expect to get the bottom line on stats because the reality is always ignored but brutally simple. Virtually ALL land temperature data prior to the age of electronics (and the vast majority since) is worthless for use in statistics since it is all based on single non-random non-replicated samples (n=1 sample per day). N = 1 equals data with unknown variance and unknown error in which virtually all parametric statistical requirements are NOT met. Even a mean is worthless since the shape of real temperature values are unknown and each days temperature population is NOT the same as any other’s. You don’t need a statistics expert – you only need to look up the known requirements for any particular stats type to see the truth. (source = WUWT comment)
  • Recent happenings in the field of climatology give cause for complaint, as do the approaches of some of its practioners, especially those who, lacking any real qualification, claim to belong to the climatological community, but give it an erroneous image. It is galling to see the media ‘hype’ which ensues every time a meeting of the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] is announced, every time an extra drop of rain falls here, or fails to fall there, or every time a door slams because the wind is blowing a bit more strongly than is ‘normal’. How irksome it is to hear the simplistic slogans, and sometimes barefaced lies, churned out yet again; to have to put up with the Diktat of an ‘official line’ and the parroted pronouncements of the ‘climatically correct’, numbing all reflection. It becomes over more difficult to stomach the kind of well-intentioned naïvety or foolishness which, through the medium of tearful reportage, tugs at our heart strings with tales of doomed polar bears, or islanders waiting for the water to lap around their ankles …Hardly a week goes by without some new ‘scoop’ of this nature filling our screens and the pages of our newspapers. ‘Global warming’, caused by the ‘greenhouse effect’, is our fault, just like everything else, and the message/slogan/misinformation becomes ever more simplistic, ever cruder! It could not be simpler: if the rain falls or drought strikes; if the wind blows a gale or there is none at all; whether it’s heat or hard frost; it’s all ‘because of the greenhouse effect’, and we are to blame! An easy argument but stupid! The Fourth Report of the IPCC might just as well decree the suppression of all climatological textbooks, and replace them in our schools and universities with its press communiqués! (source)
  • IPCC Mission Statement: The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation. –Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) mission statement (source)
  • What is the IPCC? The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the leading international body for the assessment of climate change. It was established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) to provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of knowledge in climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic impacts. The UN General Assembly endorsed the action by WMO and UNEP in jointly establishing the IPCC. (IPCC site)
  • (A very fine line. 🙂 ) So next time you hear the BBC (or similar) spouting some unutterable crap about some amazingly shocking new event/piece of research/paper showing that the glaciers or Greenland are melting faster than before, that polar bears or coral reefs are becoming more endangered, or that there’s anything remotely worrying about the possibility that the planet has warmed by 1.5 degrees C since the Industrial Revolution, don’t just take it with a huge pinch of salt. Treat it with about as much respect as you would a report from North Korea radio telling you that this year’s bumper grain harvest has been more gloriously plentiful than ever before and that workers are now at severe risk of expiring due to an excess of nourishment, plenitude and joy. (delingpole)
  • Oh don’t be silly. CO2 levels don’t affect tree ring growth, Hansen and Briffa said so. Never mind all those studies about increased growth from high levels of CO2 in greenhouses, that’s just greenhouses, not the “real world”. Other things that don’t affect tree growth in the real world include precipitation, soil nutrients, pestilence, disease, competiion from other species, changes in migration patterns of birds and animals that leave, uhm, soil nutrient precursors, behind in large quantities, late frosts, early frosts, variations in insect population that stunt or promote seed production, and of course the temperature during the non growing season is exactly the same from one year to the next so as to make the growing season representative of the whole year.Just ignore all that, The trees only respond to temperture. Oh and don’t forget that 12 trees in Siberia represent the temperature of the earth for 1,000 years oh a blobal basis. Well, actually as it turns out, only one of them. How it got the local temps wrong and the global temps right is beyond me. Well until 1960, after which the all got it wrong. We can’t compare to temps recorded before 1900 or so, but given there;s a few decades in their where they sorta correlate if we discard the 11 other trees, then obviously there’s not question they were accurate for the 900 years prior to the temperature record beginning. (WUWT comment)
  • “Human societies must now change course and steer away from critical tipping points in the Earth system that might lead to rapid and irreversible change. This requires fundamental reorientation and restructuring of national and international institutions toward more effective Earth system governance and planetary stewardship.” (source)
  • Speaking of whacky…Climate craziness of the week: Eugenics is making a comeback with climate optimized human engineering – nutjobs wanting to bioengineer people to better deal with climate change.
  • Wow. We should bring this up anytime anyone accuses Republicans of being anti-science: “We’re seeing the reality of a lot of the North Pole starting to evaporate, and we could get to a tipping point. Because if it evaporates to a certain point – they have lanes now where ships can go that couldn’t ever sail through before. And if it gets to a point where it evaporates too much, there’s a lot of tundra that’s being held down by that ice cap..” (source)
  • And then, of course, there’s Guam tipping over… (here)
  • A thing is not proved just because no one has ever questioned it. What has never been gone into impartially has never been properly gone into. Hence skepticism is the first step toward truth. It must be applied generally, because it is the touchstone. (Many more: link)
  • Have no respect for the authority of others, for there are always contrary authorities to be found. (We’re not talking about respect for the FBI here. 1 of 10 nicely snarky bits of wisdom. Here.)
  • Natural climate change is evidenced by temperature changes of 5-12C, which happen continuously. Mann-made climate change involves half a degree warming – created by massive amounts of spectacularly dishonest abuse of temperature data. (source)
  • While Ehrlich continued to be feted as an environmental seer (in 1990, the year he lost the bet, he won a MacArthur Foundation “genius award”), Simon was invariably dismissed during his lifetime as a right-wing crank. As a profile in Wired put it: “There seemed to be a bizarre reverse-Cassandra effect operating in the universe: whereas the mythical Cassandra spoke the awful truth and was not believed, these days “experts” spoke awful falsehoods, and they were believed. Repeatedly being wrong actually seemed to be an advantage, conferring some sort of puzzling magic glow upon the speaker.” (source)
  • During the Ordovician, CO2 was more than ten times higher than at present. Global temperatures ranged between very hot and an ice age. We can state with 100% certainty that as CO2 increases, temperatures will either go up, go down, or stay the same. (source)
  • But it’s clear that when one fad is over, the people who have enjoyed this AGW fad – an assorted mixture of Marxists, investors dreaming about supereasy profits, journalists who can make living by repeating the same tendentious sensational fearmongering all the time, pseudoscientists who dream about a universal scientific consensus and about easy grants, Islamic terrorists, and people who belong to several of these groups at the same moment – will be looking for another fad. (source)
  • Nobel Laureate Dr. Ivar Giaever: ‘The temperature (of the Earth) has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this ‘warming’ (last 130 years) period.’ (link)
  • all modeling efforts will inevitably converge on the result most likely to lead to further funding. (link)
  • Heh. “…global warming, which is socialist science fiction fantasy.” (link)
  • Everything proves global warming. (link) and
  • A complete list of things caused by global warming
  • Many scientists are now warning that we are moving closer to several “tipping points” that could — within as little as 10 years — make it impossible for us to avoid irretrievable damage to the planet’s habitability for human civilization. Al Gore, 2006.
  • Heretic Thoughts, Freeman Dyson on Heresy and Climate
  • “…Never before in history, I doubt, has so much money ever been squandered, so much suffering and poverty exacerbated, so much economic damage been inflicted, so many lies promulgated and so much environmental destruction wrought in order to deal with a problem so microscopically miniscule. Really, if Barack Obama were to declare war on Belgium because he’d always found Tintin Au Congo offensively racist, or if David Cameron were to launch a nuclear strike on Mykonos because all those white-painted buildings were “way too gay”, you still wouldn’t be even half way close to equaling the quite breathtaking stupidity, purblind ignorance, and suicidal wrongheadedness of the disasters currently being inflicted on the world by our boneheaded political and administrative classes on their holy mission to “combat climate change.” (Delingpole)
  • WuWT comment: “The longer you measure the weather, the more likely you are to see extreme events. Over time it will appear statistically that the climate is changing, becoming more extreme. However, this is simply poor statistics. What is changing is the length of your sample.
  • “If you toss a coin long enough eventually you will get 10 heads in a row, while a short record almost never will show 10 heads in a row. Climate change is happening because our records are getting longer. The longer we record the weather, the more likely it becomes that we will observe extreme events. Climate change is in large part is the result of the incorrect application of statistics to achieve a misleading result.”
  • IPCC on Models: In sum, a strategy must recognise what is possible. In climate research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible. The most we can expect to achieve is the prediction of the probability distribution of the system’s future possible states by the generation of ensembles of model solutions. This reduces climate change to the discernment of significant differences in the statistics of such ensembles. The generation of such model ensembles will require the dedication of greatly increased computer resources and the application of new methods of model diagnosis. Addressing adequately the statistical nature of climate is computationally intensive, but such statistical information is essential. (source)
  • Absolutely nothing in the past 100 years is abnormal in the rate of temperature change. (source)
  • “Because no other explanation was possible under our then state of knowledge, I argued in favour of sea-action; and my error has been a good lesson to me never to trust in science to the principle of exclusion.” Darwin. (Source)
  • “In a nutshell, theoretical models cannot explain what we observe in the geological record,” said oceanographer Gerald Dickens, a co-author of the study and professor of Earth science at Rice University. “There appears to be something fundamentally wrong with the way temperature and carbon are linked in climate models.” (source)
  • FACTOID: Al Gore likes to say that mankind puts 70 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every day. What he probably doesn’t know is that mother nature puts 24,000 times that amount of our main greenhouse gas — water vapor — into the atmosphere every day.  (source)
  • There are, however, many of us who are intelligent enough, open-minded enough and willing to be labelled uncool to question the current establishment “received wisdom” in things environmental, as can be seen indicated in many of the comments in the skeptical blogosphere. And, in fact, we are quite appalled at the hijacking of environmental issues by a self-selected clique of control-freaks and rent-seekers. Comment on DB
  • Wasting resources on symbolically fighting ever present climate change is no substitute for prudence. Nor is the assumption that the earth’s climate reached a point of perfection in the middle of the twentieth century a sign of intelligence. Lindzen
  • “… skepticism is … dangerous. Skepticism challenges established institutions. If we teach everybody, including, say, high school students, habits of skeptical thought, they will probably not restrict their skepticism to UFOs, aspirin commercials, and 35,000-year-old channelees. Maybe they’ll start asking awkward questions about economic, or social, or political, or religious institutions. Perhaps they’ll challenge the opinions of those in power. Then where would we be?” (Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World, Ballantine, New York, 1997, p. 416)
  • “I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had..”- Michael Crichton
  • Let us permit nature to have her way. She understands her business better than we do.”~ Michel de Montaigne
  • “The scientists’ religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.” Albert Einstein (link)

The Greens Speak

  • More green quotes
  • … he sees babies as just like maggots that hatch from the egg, crawl out of the womb and then crawl around like maggots simply eating and defecating all over the environment. (David Suziki’s remarks regarding Humanity. Here. )
  • One of the more rabid would be dictators speaks up, in regards to taking over in order to save the plant: “Who misses all those who died in the Second World War? Who misses the twenty million executed by Stalin? Who misses Hitler’s six million Jews? Israel creaks with overcrowdedness.” (source, with lots more info.)
  • Hillary Clinton: “This year, the United States renewed funding of reproductive healthcare through the United Nations Population Fund, and more funding is on the way. (Applause.) The U.S. Congress recently appropriated more than $648 million in foreign assistance to family planning and reproductive health programs worldwide. That’s the largest allocation in more than a decade – since we last had a Democratic president, I might add. (Applause.)”
    So what exactly is so bad about the United Nations Population Fund?Not only does the United Nations Population Fund support and fund the forced abortion and infanticide of China’s “one child” program, they also promote abortion, forced sterilization and brutal eugenics programs throughout the developing world.
    (source)
  • Vahrenholt on why the climate debate has inquisitorial undercurrents: Because it has long since been not about a purely scientific issue,  rather it is about how to run society. Some are saying that we are entering an uncontrollable situation and thus claim any means against it is justified.” Source: NoTricksZone
  • “Resources must be diverted from frivolous and wasteful uses in overdeveloped countries to filling the genuine needs of underdeveloped countries,” Holdren and his co-authors wrote. ”This effort must be largely political, especially with regard to our overexploitation of world resources, but the campaign should be strongly supplemented by legal and boycott action against polluters and others whose activities damage the environment. The need for de-development presents our economists with a major challenge. They must design a stable, low-consumption economy in which there is a much more equitable distribution of wealth than in the present one. Redistribution of wealth both within and among nations is absolutely essential, if a decent life is to be provided for every human being”. – John Holdren, 1973 (Obama’s current science czar) from a WUWT comment
  • He (Bill McKibben) talks about federal policies that put the (US) economy in a “graceful decline,” one that stimulates small-scale, organic farming and has more of a focus on activities in neighborhoods, towns and states than on national and international affairs. “We need to scale back, to go to ground… (link)
  • “I don’t understand why it is even controversial to talk about dismantling industrial civilization when it has shown itself for 6,000 years to be destroying the planet and to be systemically committing genocide.” – Lierre Keith; also: “If it were up to me, all the people associated with the Gulf oil spill, which is murdering the Gulf, would be executed. That would be part of the function of a state,” said Derrick Jensen. (link)
  • The good comrades at Greenpeace have opinions differing from Chomsky (see above) or the founders of the Constitution: “There’s a difference between free speech and a campaign to deny the climate science with the goal of undermining international action on climate change.   However, there’s also responsibility that goes with freedom of speech – which is based around honesty and transparency.  Freedom of speech does not apply to misinformation and propaganda.  ” (link)
  • I am not going to rest easy until I have articulated in every possible forum the need to bring about major structural changes in economic growth and development. That’s the real issue. Climate change is just a part of it. IPCC Head Pachauri (link, link)
  • “Surely it’s time for climate-change deniers to have their opinions forcibly tattooed on their bodies.” Read more
  • David Suzuki, Canada’s most prominent environmental activist, has said some interesting stuff. He doesn’t seem to think much of people or our civilization.
  • Edward Goldsmith, the founder of the magazine that claims to have set the environmental agenda for the past 40 years, declares in its first issue that humans are parasites, an infection, and a disease. We’re waste products that make no ecological sense. (here)
  • Our would-be German “Masters” demonstrate their thinking on the subject and show the Climate Change really is about power. At JoNova, and here.
  • (OTTMAR EDENHOFER, co-chair of the IPCC’s Working Group III:) First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole. UN IPCC Official Admits ‘We Redistribute World’s Wealth By Climate Policy
  • “It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.” – Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace

Constitution, Government, Guns, Media, Society

  • On gun control. This sums it up rather nicely, I think.
  • “Libertarian is good on paper, but not in real life. Why would the Govt. turns its back when its people suffer?” Because government causes suffering. (source)
  • A FB comment in regards to a FB post on Corporations running the Gov’t: Back under Woodrow Wilson’s ‘war socialism’ as he called it, Wilson set the model for fascism and nazism. He told the corporations to fall in line with his agenda or receive extra ‘scrutiny’ from the Feds. The idea that corporations run and own government is absurd – I guess this is why they must invest, pay bribe money, in order to get a chance to have some advantage. Crony socialism is not a situation where corporations call the shots. We have a goverenment that has the ability to bankrupt any corporation it chooses and they do this frequently. We have a socialist buracracy that forces businesses to invest in lobbyists or they will be out of the market. If we deregulated all industry, the politicians would no longer have influence to peddle. People on this FB page need to articulate these facts without using Occupy lingo. Corporations DONOT own government. Some pay to play and this is wrong. Most corporations are small businesses just trying to cratch out a living.
  • “There is no such thing, at this date of the world’s history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar weekly salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities, and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.” – John Swinton, former New York Times Chief of Staff (source)
  • The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so. (Source)
  • All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party. (source for this and more gun quotes.)
  • This year will go down in history for the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future. (source for this and more gun quotes.)
  • “The real argument against aristocracy is that it always means the rule of the ignorant. For the most dangerous of all forms of ignorance is ignorance of work.”
    — G. K. Chesterton, 1918 (link)
  • I had the opportunity to speak to a group of patriotic, God-loving, constitution-loving, tax-paying, salt-of-the-earth Americans (a.k.a. “terrorists”) last night. One of the group leaders (a.k.a. “head terrorist) said something in his remarks to the group that turned a light bulb on over my head. We know that Marxists are all about the twisting of language and re-naming things in order to … (link – 8/12/11 posting)
  • “The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money [to spend].” (link)
  • They say they support the Constitution, but just want to make this one small exception. Making a small exception to a fundamental liberty is like being a little bit pregnant. Freedom of speech either protects unpopular speech, or it protects nothing at all. – Roger Ebert (link)
  • “The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else.”   “Roosevelt in the Kansas City Star”, May 7, 1918 (link)
  • Chomsky (Chomsky?!?): “If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don’t like. Stalin and Hitler, for example, were dictators in favor of freedom of speech for views they liked only. If you’re in favor of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.” (link)
  • “The Washington Post thinks it’s ‘harassment’ to request Michael Mann’s files from the University of Virginia (their Memorial Day editorial) but it’s cool with requesting and obtaining and asking for citizen-journalists to go through 24,000 of the State of Alaska’s emails involving Sarah Palin.” (Source)
  • From the same page as above, a tweet:  BREAKING: Analysis of #PalinEmails shows a relative in Nigeria died and left her $10 million in a foreign bank account.
  • The part people leave out is that China and India aren’t just following in our footsteps – they are emitting our emissions for us by manufacturing the goods we used to make everywhere else.
  • If you track the CO2 emissions exported by outsourcing production of goods back to the country that consumes that good, there isn’t a country in the world with a dream of a chance of meeting Kyoto protocol goals without going through a great depression.Meanwhile, moving manufacturing to China means the real environmental problems get ignored as well as the imaginary ones. (WUWT Comment)
  • “Many problems troubling America today are rooted in the poor performance of our elite educational institutions, the moral and social collapse of our ‘best’ families and the culture of narcissism and entitlement that has transformed the American elite into a flabby minded, strategically inept and morally confused parody of itself.” (source)
  • “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner. Liberty is a well-armed lamb.” Benjamin Franklin
  • The current debate is a public policy debate with enormous implications.[3] It is no longer about climate. It is about the government, the politicians, their scribes and the lobbyists who want to get more decision making and power for themselves. It seems to me that the widespread acceptance of the global warming dogma has become one of the main, most costly and most undemocratic public policy mistakes in generations. The previous one was communism. (link)
  • Environment my backside. When they came to control you in your community they called it communism. When they came to control you in your society they called it socialism. When they came to control you in your environment they called it environmentalism. (link)
  • If AGW mitigation required dismantling of authority, implementation of libertarian concepts, and less governmental controls, there would be no interest in AGW among the intelligentsia. Not even Greenpeace would support it. It would be considered a capitalistic, conservative plot. (link)
  • “There is nothing that fanatics can’t justify as being in the interests of saving the planet. Nothing.” (link)

Quotes and Snark

  • Wind Turbines – Cleaning our skies of toxic birds since 1980. (here)
  • “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity,” and “Many journalists have fallen for the conspiracy theory of government. I do assure you that they would produce more accurate work if they adhered to the cock-up theory.” —Sir Bernard Ingham (link)
  • “We live in an unprecedented age of stupid.” (link)
  • When a green/liberal asks what you’re buying your kids for their birthdays, say: “Oh, I guess the usual: more ammo.”
  • On 24 and Mr. Bauer: In a sane world they would give him a bag of guns and a million dollars and a fistful of uppers and say “You just go on now and do what you want.”
  • Probability is just so damn “uncertain”.
  • Climate doesn’t kill people. Weather kills people
  • Climate doesn’t kill science; Mann-made hockey sticks kill science
  • That wasn’t a hurricane, that was Chuck practicing his roundhouse kicks
  • IPCC = Instigating Profitable Climate Consensus
  • You know, it makes you wonder. Here we are running around with combustion engines, our medicine is mostly herbs and spices in pretty packages, the only way we can get off this planet is to ignite a bomb in the back of a tube, and almost the entire planet is crisscrossed with wires and pipes… .yet we know enough to control the climate.

Miscellaneous

Leave a comment