UN Global Warming report is out

[cravnravn]

Nope, got rid of the freezer, gave it to the folks that bought our home in PA along with the garage frig too.

[cravnravn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyUDGfCNC-k

The Youtube is 30 plus long

Global Warming a Hoax according John Coleman

http://www.tpnn.com/2014/03/17/weather-channel-founder-explains-the-history-of-the-global-warming-hoax/

Edited July 1, 2014 by cravnravn

[papasmurfbell]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/science/coleman.asp

 

 

For the many Americans who don't understand the difference between weather — the short-term behavior of the atmosphere — and climate — the broader system in which weather happens — Coleman's professional background made him a genuine authority on global warming. It was an impression that Coleman encouraged. Global warming "is not something you 'believe in,'" he wrote in his essay. "It is science; the science of meteorology. This is my field of life-long expertise."

Except that it wasn't. Coleman had spent half a century in the trenches of TV weathercasting; he had once been an accredited meteorologist, and remained a virtuoso forecaster. But his work was more a highly technical art than a science. His degree, received fifty years earlier at the University of Illinois, was in journalism. And then there was the fact that the research that Coleman was rejecting wasn't "the science of meteorology" at all — it was the science of climatology, a field in which Coleman had spent no time whatsoever.

Skepticism is, of course, the core value of scientific inquiry. But the essay that Coleman published would have more properly been termed rejectionism. Coleman wasn't arguing against the integrity of a particular conclusion based on careful original research — something that would have constituted useful scientific skepticism. Instead, he went after the motives of the scientists themselves. Climate researchers, he wrote, "look askance at the rest of us, certain of their superiority. They respect government and disrespect business, particularly big business. They are environmentalists above all else."

Feel free to try again.

[cravnravn]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/science/coleman.asp

 

Feel free to try again.

 

Of course there are going to be naysayers, its the American way, no different then Dem vs Rep, Anti-Union vs Pro-Union

[papasmurfbell]

The problem with your guy is he doesn't know what he is talking about.

[cravnravn]

And the same can be said about your guy

[papasmurfbell]

What guy is that? I am relying on 97% of climate scientists.

There is a reward of $30k if someone can prove climate change is not man made. Lets see if someone wants to claim the money.

http://dialoguesonglobalwarming.blogspot.com/p/10000-global-warming-skeptic-challenge.html

[Spen]

 

Of course there are going to be naysayers, its the American way, no different then Dem vs Rep, Anti-Union vs Pro-Union

 

Except 98% of scientists (which your essay writer is not) are saying one thing and 2% are saying something else.

 

Seriously you might as well ask Bob Turk his opinion on climate change.

 

Enough people are throwing around enough money to cloud people's judgement and some networks still make it seem like there is a legitimate debate, that a large minority still question the validity of the science. Because of that, we deserve to lie in whatever bed we made for ourselves. Shame on us.

[papasmurfbell]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BzItCPk5j4

Wow!!!

[RavenMad]

^Wow! We are all doomed if people like that are going to be running governments.

[papasmurfbell]

Who can argue with a 10 yr old and a thermometer?

[Spen]

Shes dumb and at times flat out lying.

 

I really need to get in touch with her about my rising ocean level space pump or ROLSP. Maybe get a grant or something.

 

"Folks, if you get water in your basement what do you do? The liberals and the lame stream media would say you needed to move somewhere else. Of course not, you pump it out! Ladies and gentlemen, introducing the ROLSP. "

[ForceEight]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BzItCPk5j4

Wow!!!

It is infuriating that someone so low on the evolution chain is in such an important position.

[papasmurfbell]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/13/koch-brothers-make-climate-activists-new-target.html

Koch Brothers Unveil New Strategy at Big Donor Retreat

The Koch brothers’ financial network is planning on spending almost $300 million in the 2014 election, including a new anti-environment effort.

In the face of expanding energy regulations, stepped-up Democratic attacks and the ongoing fight over Obamacare, the billionaire Koch brothers and scores of wealthy allies have set an initial 2014 fundraising target of $290 million which should boost GOP candidates and support dozens of conservative groups—including a new energy initiative with what looks like a deregulatory, pro-consumer spin, The Daily Beast has learned.

This weekend, at a posh California resort near Laguna Beach, energy is expected to be among the topics as Charles and David Koch and their extensive donor network hold a semiannual fundraising and policy seminar. Political allies including Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida and libertarian political scientist Charles Murray are slated to speak, according to conservatives familiar with the Koch network.

The energy initiative is being created under the umbrella of the largest Koch network nonprofit in apparent response to a number of developments: the commitment by liberal billionaire Tom Steyer to steer $100 million into ads in several states to make climate change a priority issue in the elections; numerous setbacks at the state level where Koch network backed advocacy groups have been fighting against renewable energy standards; and the new EPA regulations to curb carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.

The meeting will cap a frenetic fundraising season for the conservative donor network. This year the Koch network not only hosted a similar January conference, but several smaller gatherings in Palm Springs, Newport Beach, St. Louis, and other locales to attract new donors, according to an email from Koch fundraising honcho Kevin Gentry obtained by The Daily Beast In his email, Gentry called the Palm Springs event— which drew some 50 wealthy conservatives in March —a “highly successful recruitment reception” and encouraged other veteran donors to get involved by holding local gatherings in their areas.

Koch network operatives also have held periodic conference calls—sometimes with members of Congress on the line—to update loyal check writers on various issues and keep them in the fold, say conservative sources.

Now, hitting the $290 million goal seems within reach: almost $170 million of that total was pledged at the last big Koch donor seminar in January this year, say two conservative sources. The hefty haul will help fund a mix of politically active nonprofits like the Koch-backed Americans for Prosperity, and a newer outfit called the Libre Initiative that’s aimed at appealing to Hispanics with a small government, free-market message. AFP alone is expected to spend upwards of $125 million this year on a variety of political and advocacy projects including air and ground operations, according to Politico.

By comparison, in the 2012 presidential cycle, the Koch donor network raised more than $400 million to help underwrite 17 politically active nonprofit groups—including AFP and Libre Initiative— according to The Washington Post.

A few Koch network-backed nonprofit groups including AFP have long fought against climate change regulations, a carbon tax, and subsidies for renewable energy. But lately, the Koch universe seem to be facing bigger energy threats stemming from Washington, state governments and big liberal checkbooks.

The new energy initiative is the handiwork of Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce, the Koch network’s central fundraising hub, which was established in late 2011 as a trade group, according to an email to the group’s members from Gentry. In 2012, the fledgling group —which claims some 200 members who each kick in at least $100,000 yearly— funneled over $230 million dollars to numerous other non-profits in the Koch ecosystem according to the group’s 2012 tax returns.

In an April 1 missive, Gentry invited Freedom Partners members to join an upcoming conference call about a “significant new Freedom Partners initiative” which he touted as one that would “drive the national narrative around energy and the tremendous benefits of reliable affordable energy for all Americans, especially for the less fortunate.” The email indicated that discussions about the energy project began last summer at another Koch donor event in New Mexico, which drew outgoing House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and Rep. Paul Ryan among others.

Gentry’s email stressed that liberal donors, led by hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer, have plans to spend as much as $100 million on climate change issues and ads to make it a top-tier issue in the election. He noted that environmental groups had recently run a $5 million “clean energy” ad blitz in Iowa, Michigan, and North Carolina, all of which are considered “focus” states for Freedom Partners and among the states where Americans for Prosperity has spent over $35 million on attack ads against Democratic Senate candidates on Obamacare.

In a chagrined-sounding PS, Gentry opined that the “new multi million dollar campaign by environmentalists is arguably an effort to distract from the failures of Obamacare. But you and I know energy is a critically important issue for the United States.”

The details and scope of the new energy initiative, which has not been announced, aren’t clear yet, but it’s expected to cost in the seven figures and be a topic at the Koch donor conference this weekend— especially in light of the Obama administration’s newly unveiled EPA regulations to curb carbon emissions from mostly coal fired power plants. Two sources familiar with Koch donor world told The Daily Beast that a new nonprofit group is being formed to help run the new energy initiative. Neither spokesmen for Freedom Partners or Koch Industries responded to requests for comment about the new initiative or fundraising efforts this year.

The Koch brothers combined net worth exceeds $80 billion, according to Forbes magazine, and is derived from their control of Koch Industries, the eponymous energy and manufacturing conglomerate

Based on Gentry’s email and recent energy drives by other Koch network groups, the initiative is likely to mix a minimalist regulatory and free-market message with a pro-consumer spin.

On its website, Freedom Partners explains its energy policy goals very broadly as “increasing access to affordable energy that helps societies-businesses, families and especially the poor—prosper and thrive.” It says that the role of federal government is to “administer smart and safe environmental regulations” but argues that too often there’s a lack of transparency and that “unsound science” is used to justify decisions without weighing costs versus benefits.

The new energy initiative may partly stem from setbacks in many states where advocacy groups funded by the Koch network like Americans for Prosperity and allies have been waging mostly uphill battles to roll back renewable energy standards. In these fights the conservative nonprofits have often portrayed renewable mandates as very expensive for consumers, a point that’s frequently been rebutted by independent groups.

Even in Kansas, the home of Koch Industries, the Koch-backed advocacy network failed to repeal the state’s renewable standards, which were enacted in 2009 Under Kansas’ Renewable Portfolio Standard, 20 percent of the state’s electricity is supposed to come from renewables by the year 2020.

The Kansas fight suggests part of the strategy that Koch-linked groups are expected to pursue to broaden their message and try to appeal to consumers. Alan Cobb, a former lobbyist for the company who also did stints with AFP and Freedom Partners, was hired this spring by the newly created Kansas Senior Consumer Alliance, which sent thousands of postcards to elderly citizens criticizing the renewable standards. The postcards, with pictures of worried-looking seniors opening their mail, said that there had been 15 rate hikes since 2009 when the renewable standards were enacted and urged seniors to contact their representatives to protest them.

A state commission has found less than 2 percent of recent rate increases can be attributed to the renewable standards.

Groups backed by the Koch network in several other states have also been rebuffed in their drives against renewables. But in late May, in a rare victory, Ohio Governor John Kasich signed off on a two-year freeze on the Buckeye State’s renewable energy and energy efficiency requirements.

On the 2014 electoral front, other Koch donor supported non-profit groups like the American Energy Alliance (AEA) have poured funds into ads targeting Democrats in close Senate and House races, knocking their opposition to building the Keystone XL pipeline. In May, the AEA spent over $400,000 on ads in Colorado attacking Sen. Mark Udall for his stance opposing the Keystone pipeline. AEA, which is run by former Koch Industries lobbyist Tom Pyle, has also been fighting to end wind energy subsidies. Last year, Congress ended a two-decade old tax credit for wind energy companies after vigorous lobbying by Koch-backed groups including AEA and AFP. This year, the groups have continued to fight against attempts to revive the credit.

The fight over climate change took a personal twist this spring when Tom Steyer challenged the Koch brothers to a debate about the issue and whether more regulations are needed to curb man-made pollution. The Koch brothers turned down the invitation. In an email to a local Kansas paper, Koch spokesperson Melissa Cohlmia explained “we are not experts on climate change.”

The Koch seminar this weekend is scheduled to feature a speech by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), who last month sparked a small firestorm when he said that “I don’t believe that “human activity is causing these dramatic changes in our climate the way these scientists are portraying it.” Rubio, whose view is contradicted by many scientific studies showing that carbon dioxide emissions have accelerated global warming, added that he thinks proposed laws to deal with climate change “will only wreck our economy.” Rubio’s position should get a warm reception among the libertarian leaning donors at the conference.

 

[papasmurfbell]

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-turning-point-new-hope-for-the-climate-20140618

The Turning Point: New Hope for the Climate
In the struggle to solve the climate crisis, a powerful, largely unnoticed shift is taking place. The forward journey for human civilization will be difficult and dangerous, but it is now clear that we will ultimately prevail. The only question is how quickly we can accelerate and complete the transition to a low-carbon civilization. There will be many times in the decades ahead when we will have to take care to guard against despair, lest it become another form of denial, paralyzing action. It is true that we have waited too long to avoid some serious damage to the planetary ecosystem – some of it, unfortunately, irreversible. Yet the truly catastrophic damages that have the potential for ending civilization as we know it can still – almost certainly – be avoided. Moreover, the pace of the changes already set in motion can still be moderated significantly.

There is surprising – even shocking – good news: Our ability to convert sunshine into usable energy has become much cheaper far more rapidly than anyone had predicted. The cost of electricity from photovoltaic, or PV, solar cells is now equal to or less than the cost of electricity from other sources powering electric grids in at least 79 countries. By 2020 – as the scale of deployments grows and the costs continue to decline – more than 80 percent of the world's people will live in regions where solar will be competitive with electricity from other sources.

No matter what the large carbon polluters and their ideological allies say or do, in markets there is a huge difference between "more expensive than" and "cheaper than." Not unlike the difference between 32 degrees and 33 degrees Fahrenheit. It's not just a difference of a degree, it's the difference between a market that's frozen up and one that's liquid. As a result, all over the world, the executives of companies selling electricity generated from the burning of carbon-based fuels (primarily from coal) are openly discussing their growing fears of a "utility death spiral."

Germany, Europe's industrial powerhouse, where renewable subsidies have been especially high, now generates 37 percent of its daily electricity from wind and solar; and analysts predict that number will rise to 50 percent by 2020. (Indeed, one day this year, renewables created 74 percent of the nation's electricity!)

What's more, Germany's two largest coal-burning utilities have lost 56 percent of their value over the past four years, and the losses have continued into the first half of 2014. And it's not just Germany. Last year, the top 20 utilities throughout Europe reported losing half of their value since 2008. According to the Swiss bank UBS, nine out of 10 European coal and gas plants are now losing money.

In the United States, where up to 49 percent of the new generating capacity came from renewables in 2012, 166 coal-fired electricity-generating plants have either closed or have announced they are closing in the past four and a half years. An additional 183 proposed new coal plants have been canceled since 2005.

To be sure, some of these closings have been due to the substitution of gas for coal, but the transition under way in both the American and global energy markets is far more significant than one fossil fuel replacing another. We are witnessing the beginning of a massive shift to a new energy-distribution model – from the "central station" utility-grid model that goes back to the 1880s to a "widely distributed" model with rooftop solar cells, on-site and grid battery storage, and microgrids.

The principal trade group representing U.S. electric utilities, the Edison Electric Institute, has identified distributed generation as the "largest near-term threat to the utility model." Last May, Barclays downgraded the entirety of the U.S. electric sector, warning that "a confluence of declining cost trends in distributed solar­photovoltaic-power generation and residential­scale power storage is likely to disrupt the status quo" and make utility investments less attractive.

This year, Citigroup reported that the widespread belief that natural gas – the supply of which has ballooned in the U.S. with the fracking of shale gas – will continue to be the chosen alternative to coal is mistaken, because it too will fall victim to the continuing decline in the cost of solar and wind electricity. Significantly, the cost of battery storage, long considered a barrier to the new electricity system, has also been declining steadily – even before the introduction of disruptive new battery technologies that are now in advanced development. Along with the impressive gains of clean-energy programs in the past decade, there have been similar improvements in our ability to do more with less. Since 1980, the U.S. has reduced total energy intensity by 49 percent.

It is worth remembering this key fact about the supply of the basic "fuel": Enough raw energy reaches the Earth from the sun in one hour to equal all of the energy used by the entire world in a full year.

In poorer countries, where most of the world's people live and most of the growth in energy use is occurring, photovoltaic electricity is not so much displacing carbon-based energy as leapfrogging it altogether. In his first days in office, the government of the newly elected prime minister of India, Narendra Modi (who has authored an e-book on global warming), announced a stunning plan to rely principally upon photovoltaic energy in providing electricity to 400 million Indians who currently do not have it. One of Modi's supporters, S.L. Rao, the former utility regulator of India, added that the industry he once oversaw "has reached a stage where either we change the whole system quickly, or it will collapse."

Nor is India an outlier. Neighboring Bangladesh is installing nearly two new rooftop PV systems every minute — making it the most rapidly growing market for PVs in the world. In West and East Africa, solar-electric cells are beginning what is widely predicted to be a period of explosive growth.

At the turn of the 21st century, some scoffed at projections that the world would be installing one gigawatt of new solar electricity per year by 2010. That goal was exceeded 17 times over; last year it was exceeded 39 times over; and this year the world is on pace to exceed that benchmark as much as 55 times over. In May, China announced that by 2017, it would have the capacity to generate 70 gigawatts of photovoltaic electricity. The state with by far the biggest amount of wind energy is Texas, not historically known for its progressive energy policies.

The cost of wind energy is also plummeting, having dropped 43 percent in the United States since 2009 – making it now cheaper than coal for new generating capacity. Though the downward cost curve is not quite as steep as that for solar, the projections in 2000 for annual worldwide wind deployments by the end of that decade were exceeded seven times over, and are now more than 10 times that figure. In the United States alone, nearly one-third of all new electricity-generating capacity in the past five years has come from wind, and installed wind capacity in the U.S. has increased more than fivefold since 2006.

For consumers, this good news may soon get even better. While the cost of carbon­based energy continues to increase, the cost of solar electricity has dropped by an average of 20 percent per year since 2010. Some energy economists, including those who produced an authoritative report this past spring for Bernstein Research, are now predicting energy-price deflation as soon as the next decade.

For those (including me) who are surprised at the speed with which this impending transition has been accelerating, there are precedents that help explain it. Remember the first mobile-telephone handsets? I do; as an inveterate "early adopter" of new technologies, I thought those first huge, clunky cellphones were fun to use and looked cool (they look silly now, of course). In 1980, a few years before I bought one of the early models, AT&T conducted a global market study and came to the conclusion that by the year 2000 there would be a market for 900,000 subscribers. They were not only wrong, they were way wrong: 109 million contracts were active in 2000. Barely a decade and a half later, there are 6.8 billion globally. 
These parallels have certainly caught the attention of the fossil-fuel industry and its investors: Eighteen months ago, the Edison Electric Institute described the floundering state of the once-proud landline-telephone companies as a grim predictor of what may soon be their fate.

click link to read rest of article.

I still need to verify all of what is in this article but I know that PV's are dropping in price like crazy. I also heard a few weeks ago about how Germany had 74% of theri power from renewables and the price went down to the point that they were almost paying people to use electricity.

[papasmurfbell]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCF_Yy3oFNo

Sen. Brandon Smith

 

http://www.metzbank.com/dynamic_content_view.php?contentType=uf_US_News-id:Be7b1HFjlN3OK09yFlIubCTX-jzsrQxxDZk2aNU5WV5kM8NMajNI3wlSd99HUkai.html

 

 

"The dinosaurs died, and we don't know why, but the world adjusted," Sinnette said. "And to say that this is what's going to cause detriment to people, I just don't think it's out there."

[dc.]

Stealing this from a friend... but this one is just beyond me.

 

 

“I won’t get into the debate about climate change," said Sen. Brandon Smith, a Hazard Republican. “But I’ll simply point out that I think in academia we all agree that the temperature on Mars is exactly as it is here. Nobody will dispute that. Yet there are no coal mines on Mars. There’s no factories on Mars that I’m aware of.”

[The average Martian temperature is -81 degree Fahrenheit.]

http://wfpl.org/post/kentucky-lawmakers-attack-climate-change-science-discussion-carbon-regulations

[dc.]

Just realized that our quotes are from the same guy - different articles.

 

Nice.

[papasmurfbell]

No prob.

[papasmurfbell]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlTA3rnpgzU

[thundercleetz]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCF_Yy3oFNo

Sen. Brandon Smith

 

http://www.metzbank.com/dynamic_content_view.php?contentType=uf_US_News-id:Be7b1HFjlN3OK09yFlIubCTX-jzsrQxxDZk2aNU5WV5kM8NMajNI3wlSd99HUkai.html

This is a dumb quote but ironically there is a sad, unintended truth behind it. The world will adjust in one way or another, however, like the dinosaurs, how many people will die as a result? The sad part is it will take death before action is taken and by then it will be too late. Humans will continue living on earth, I have no doubt about that. However, there will be a significantly smaller population, and habitable land will only be available to those who can afford it. Those that perish will be the less fortunate.

[papasmurfbell]

Hey it's progress. We can do in about a million yrs what it took the dinosaurs 165 million to accomplish.

[dc.]

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/physicist-michio-kaku-explains-record-low-summer-temperatures/

 

Saw this this morning on CBS Morning News. Physicist explains how the "polar vortex" phenomena that we experienced this winter (and actually kind of right now too - causing these storms) are the result of warming.

 

The cold "cap" on the arctic is very stable when very cold. But as it has warmed up slightly in past decades, it has become less stable and less symmetrical, leading to big pieces breaking off and spinning south into the continental US - under the name "polar vortex." Again, this is the theory behind the movie "The Day After Tomorrow."

 

He doesn't address it here - but important to note that this will not end global warming, but could be catastrophic - for example what happens to crops if some regions get a frost in the next 24-48 hours because of this push? (Hint - the crops die, and yes, some northern states are seeing the potential for frost tonight).

[papasmurfbell]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/louisiana-republican-flees-interview-asked-115123316.html

 

A Republican congressional candidate fled her interview with a major election-forecasting group after being asked why she believed global warming was a hoax and whether President Barack Obama was born in the United States, according to a new report in The Washington Post.

In the Post, David Wasserman, the House editor at the Cook Political Report, detailed his strange encounter with the "frightening" and "fact-averse" Louisiana State Rep. Lenar Whitney.

Whitney, who is running for Louisiana's open sixth district, gained some prominence in June when she released a campaign video blasting global warming as a "hoax" and the press as "lamestream media." Wasserman said he pressed Whitney on the issue of climate change only to find her unable to answer his questions.

"But it’s not unreasonable to expect candidates to explain how they arrived at their positions, and when I pressed Whitney repeatedly for the source of her claim that the earth is getting colder, she froze and was unable to cite a single scientist, journal, or news source to back up her beliefs," he wrote.

Wasserman said he attempted to "change the subject" and ask whether she believed Obama was born in the United States. Her aides then ended the interview.

"When she replied that it was a matter of some controversy, her two campaign consultants quickly whisked her out of the room, accusing me of conducting a 'Palin-style interview,'" he continued. "It was the first time in hundreds of Cook Political Report meetings that a candidate has fled the room."

Whitney could not immediately be reached for comment.

Update (10:10 a.m.): In a Facebook post last week, after the interview was conducted, Whitney slammed the Cook Political Report. "It was obvious, from the onset of the interview, that Wasserman had planned to jump me simply because I am a Conservative Woman and liberal shills like Dave Wasserman want to destroy us," she wrote.

[papasmurfbell]

https://screen.yahoo.com/popular/why-2050-terrifying-040000631.html?vp=1