Earth Lies

RECORD MEMORIAL DAY SNOWFALL IN USA

2013-05-27T16:20:00.001-07:00

5,000 feet tall Mt. Whiteface had three feet of new snowfall over the Memorial Day weekend in the USA. Local meteorologists said they did not know if that was a record or not. GIVE ME A BREAK! These guys are liars and extreme Greens, trying to soften what they know is bad news for their theories on Global Warming. Nearby Mt Mansfield had 13.2 inches which Mt Mansfield meteorologists acknowledged WAS a record. Their previous record was 12.0 inches for the weekend. Thank you Mt Mansfield meteorologists, who apparently are honest humans. Click here for the full report from ABC News. We are all, most of us, honest humans. There are a few who are trying to change the rest of us and steal our money. Red and yellow, black and white, we are all precious in his sight! God rules this planet and its climate.

My two cents- Tal Leverett.

MARCH AND APRIL RECORD COLD FOR CONTINENTAL USA

2013-05-15T13:08:00.001-07:00

According to the Weather Channel ( "www.weather.com") April 2013 was the 23rd coldest in US history and March 2013 was the 43rd coldest ever. North Dakota had its coldest April on record. Six other mid-western states all had top ten coldest Aprils on record. Click here for the full report. I had similar information two weeks ago but could not confirm the data so did not publish it. In that article it was reported that March and April, taken together was the 2nd coldest for the two month period on record. How can that be when each was only 23rd and 43rd? In the past after a month of extreme cold a month followed which was warmer than normal or vice versa. The article also stated that January through April, taken as a whole was the 20th coldest for the period in the history of weather records in the USA.

RECORD COLD CAUSED BY GLOBAL WARMING?

2013-05-06T08:10:00.001-07:00

An interesting article published by "floridatoday.com" reports that winter 2009-2010 was the coldest since 1947 for the five eastern Central Florida counties which hold the 156 miles long Indian River Lagoon. This caused a major die off of algae, the remains of which were fed off of by and caused an explosion or "superbloom" of phytoplankton. The agressive plankton destroyed over 31,000 acres of sea grass. The whole base for sea life in the lagoon was thrown out of balance. Small salt water creatures which used the sea grass for cover now lost their habitat. Major die offs of manatees, dolphins, and pelicans followed, a trend which continues today. The native crab populations were decimated. Of course, there is a chorus of pseudoscientiests who blame it on global warming. I have a few questions:

          (1) How can global warming cause record cold?
          (2) Why doesn't the "green" press report this?
          (3) How can someone call themself a scientist when they only have one answer for any negative

event?

Click here for the full article.

My two cents...Tal Leverett.

RECORD MAY SNOWFALLS IN CENTRAL U.S.

2013-05-03T09:10:00.000-07:00

As Joe Friday would have said, "The facts, ma'am. Just the facts."

May 2, 2013:

(1) 18 inches of snow in Blooming Prairie, MN, a record.

(2) 18 inches of snow in Hayward, WI, a record.

(3) The snow falling in northeastern Arkansas is the first time snow has been recorded there in May.

(4) Tulsa, OK had a few snow flurries. The first time snow has been observed there in May since records were kept.

(5) One opening day fishing tournament is likely to be postponed. Because of snow? Nope. Because the lake is still frozen.

Have you heard the words "Global Warming" uttered by a sentient being lately?

Tal Leverett

TODAY'S CHUCKLE

2013-04-21T12:30:00.002-07:00

COLD WINTER-FREEZING TEMPS DESTROY 40% OF BEE HIVES

2013-04-21T08:53:00.003-07:00

Winter weather is typically tough on US honeybee populations. Normally 5% to 15% of bees die, unable to adapt to the cold. This year the die off was around 40% due to abnormally cold temperatures, extended cold, and excessive snow. Did the Weather Channel publish this information? If so I haven't seen it. They are still whining about global warming. Explain that to the bees. Click here for the full report.

CLIMATE CHANGE (GLOBAL WARMING) TO BE TAUGHT IN US CLASSROOMS

2013-04-12T09:53:00.004-07:00

An organization named "Next Generation Science" develops standards for American classrooms (K-12) via textbook standards. 26 states and some national scientific organizations provided input into the new standards. Textbooks will be amended to blame Climate Change on fossil fuel emmisions. Click here for the full report.

ICELAND GLACIER MELT CAUSED BY CO2? NOPE!

2013-04-10T12:57:00.001-07:00

Attached is an interesting article posted by the BBC on December 1st, 2011. The melting glaciers in Iceland caused near hysteria among the Global Warming crowd. They blamed it on CO2 and so called Global Warming. However, as the article points out there is a river of lava less than 1/2 mile below the surface under these glaciers. Its heat is melting the glaciers. The runoff, as you can imagine, is much warmer than traditional runoff from normal seasonal ice melt of the glacier. What does that warmer runoff do? It causes the sea water temperature to rise. DUHH!! The lava flow has Icelanders worried that the volcano under the glaciers is going to erupt. If you have followed my site then you know that over two years ago I gave these volcanoes in that region, many under the ocean, as one of the culprits in ice melt as well as rising ocean temperatures in the region. I'll remind you that many of the global warmers were stating that volcanoes under the arctic ice would not heat the water. How stupid can they be? Professor Ford Cochran is quoted as saying the eruption in 1755 produced volumes of water greater than all of the world's rivers combined. He also stated "It actually changed the world's climate!" Meanwhile global warmers continue trying to prove that CO2 is the culprit. One is quoted at the end of the article as saying that "volcanoes are not the largest enemy of the Icelandic glaciers. Global warming is." Just writing this makes me need a Rolaid and an aspirin.

Click here for the link to the BBC article.

My two cents-Tal Leverett

JAMES HANSAN, GLOBAL WARMING ADVOCATE, RETIRES TO SUE GOVERNMENT

2013-04-02T13:51:00.003-07:00

James Hansan activist in the global warming movement has retired from his executive position at NASA. According to reports he will appear as a witness in several lawsuits against the United States Government.

For the full report click here.

WIND ENERGY DEVELOPER FINED AS THE FEATHERS HIT THE FAN

2013-03-31T12:03:00.001-07:00

A Nevada company has developed a large wind turbine farm to provide "green" renewable energy to Las Vegas. Cool, eh? Doing the right thing, eh? Nope. A golden eagle flew into the blade of one of the turbines and was dead likely before it hit the ground. Well, that's when the feathers hit the fan. The developer reported the death of the bird to proper authorities, trying to do the right thing. They immediately threatened a fine on him since he did not have a permit to kill eagles. Seems like every form of green energy has unplanned for and unacceptable side effects. For the full story Click here It does seem that these extreme greens, either promoting energy or else promoting wildlife and nature, want it both ways. People who try to actually do something are continually being punished for their efforts. In this case, hoping to avoid a $200,000 fine, the company donated $50,000 for a study of Mexican Free Tailed Bats in a nearby cave. Do you need further proof of incompetence and lack of common sense in our government?

LATEST UN REPORT ON CLIMATE CHANGE IS SLAMMED AS SAME OLE SAME OLE

2013-01-23T08:29:00.001-08:00

Adraft of the latest United Nations report on Global Warming has been slammed as one sided with many articles by groups who have no scientific background in Meteorology. For the full Fox News report click on the following link.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/01/23/leaked-un-climate-report-slammed-for-citing-wwf-greenpeace/?test=latestnews

Numerous articles by Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Federation attempt to build their case for what they wish would happen. Whatever happened to science and the scientific method?

ALL TIME HOTTEST AND COLDEST TEMPS USA

2012-10-06T14:42:00.001-07:00

I decided to crunch some data from the National Climatic Data Center. Below is a schedule of my findings. You will notice that I put the record temps (record for the USA, not the state), showed where and when it happened. I then put an * beside any record, hot or cold, since 1990. About all that can be said is (1) 1994 was a very hot year; (2) 1996 was a very cold year; (3) 1936 was a super hot year; (4) It got pretty darned cold in 2009.

Since 1990 there have been four times when an all time top high temperature record was set (same year).

Since 1990 there have been four times when an all time cold temperature record was set (2 separate years).

I included more data for the hottest years lest I be blamed for understating hot temperature records.

For those of you who still believe in Anthropogenic Global Warming, think again. For those of you who still believe in Global warming, think again, also. Play with the facts presented. Then decide. Click on the chart to make it larger.

MORE LIES AND MISDIRECTION

2012-09-03T10:52:00.003-07:00

Below is a quote from an ABC News article posted on Labor Day 2012.

"By mid-August, headlines around the country were announcing that massive drought — firmly linked by virtually all the world’s climate scientists to manmade global warming — would be sending food prices up in America and other countries."

That has to be true because it came from ABC which is owned by Disney and Disney would never lie. Right? Has the writer of this misleading information ever considered that 40% of the corn crop in the US is used for ethanol production? How much of the grain, potatoes and other crops are now similarly used? What happens when demand for these food stuffs increases? Prices rise. Not just on veggies either. How much corn is fed to cattle? The inflated demand for corn also makes the price of beef and milk rise. If this corn were redirected into the food supply food prices would plummet. Another unintended consequence of the limited thinking AGW folks.

Maybe there is a grain of truth in their statement, however. Their belief in AGW caused the whole ethanol bust so I guess that did cause food prices to rise. Now most of them realize and freely admit that ethanol is a net producer of CO2. The very thing they tried to do to reduce CO2 actually has increased it.

My 2 cents. Tal Leverett.

QUIZ ON CO2

2012-08-10T11:02:00.000-07:00

Below is an article written by Gregg D Thompson, his credentials are at the bottom. I do not know Mr Thompson but generally agree with his views taking issue only slightly that he ommitted that plants absorb CO2 and release oxygen using the carbon in their growth. Thanks to Mert Greif for forwarding this interesting quiz.

How Well Has The Media And Government Informed The Public About CO2 Levels In The Air?

Ask yourself, your friends, family and work associates if they know the answers to the following questions about Carbon Dioxide (CO2). Be sure to write your answers before looking at the following pages.

Question 1. What percentage of the atmosphere do you think is CO2?

Question 2. Have you ever seen the percentage given in any media?

Question 3. What percentage of the CO2 is man-made?

Question 4. What percentage of the man-made CO2 does Australia produce?

Question 5. Is CO2 is a pollutant?

Question 6. Have you ever seen any evidence that CO2 causes a greenhouse effect?

I have asked over 100 people these questions. Virtually everyone says they don’t know the answers so ask them to tell you what their perception is by what they have learnt from the media, the government and Green groups. Let them know there is no right or wrong answer as you are just doing a survey as to what people have perceived the answers to be from these sources.

The answers to these questions are fundamental to evaluating the global warming scare YET almost no one knows the facts. However, without this knowledge we can’t make an informed decision about whether Climate Change is natural or not.

On the following pages are respondent’s perceptions followed by the correct answers. The bulk of the respondents (over 100 to date) are educated fairly well to very well. They comprise business managers in a diversity of large and small companies, those in medical profession, accounting, law, sales, engineering as well as scientists and trades people.

2

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

Q1. What % of the air is CO2?

Respondent’s Answers: nearly all were 20% - 40%, the highest was 75% while the lowest were 10%- 2%.

The Correct Answer: CO2 is less than a mere four 100ths of 1%! As a decimal it is 0.038%. As a fraction it is 1/27th of 1%. (Measurements for CO2 vary from one source to another from 0.036%- 0.039% due to the difficulty in measuring such a small quantity and due to changes in wind direction e.g. whether the air flow is from an industrialized region or a volcanic emission etc)

Nitrogen is just over 78%, Oxygen is just under 21% and Argon is almost 1%. CO2 is a minute trace gas at 0.038%. We all learnt the composition of the air in both primary and high school but because most people don’t use science in their day to day living, they have forgotten this. Also, the vast bulk of the population have very little knowledge of science so they find it impossible to make judgements about even basic scientific issues let alone ones as complex as climate. This makes it easy for those with agendas to deceive us by using emotive statements rather than facts. For a detailed breakup of the atmosphere go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Earth#Composition

Q2. Have you seen a percentage for CO2 given in the media?

Respondent’s answers: All said ’No’.

Q3. What % of CO2 do humans produce?

Respondent’s answers ranged from as high as 100% with most estimating it to be between 75% to 25% and only four said they thought it was between 10% and 2 %.

The Correct Answer: Nature produces nearly all of it. Humans produce only 3%. As a decimal it is a miniscule 0.001% of the air. All of mankind produces only one molecule of CO2 in around every 90,000 air molecules! Yes, that’s all.

Q4. What % of man-made CO2 does Australia produce?

Respondent’s Answers ranged from 20% to 5%.

The Correct Answer is 1% of the 0.001% of man-made CO2. As a decimal it is an insignificant 0.00001% of the air. That’s one, one-hundredth thousandth of the air. That is what all the fuss is about! That’s one CO2 molecule from Australia in every 9,000,000 molecules of air. It has absolutely no affect at all.

We have been grossly misled to think there is tens of thousands of times as much CO2 as there is!

Why has such important information been withheld from the public? If the public were aware that man-made CO2 is so incredibly small there would be very little belief in a climate disaster so the media would not be able to make a bonanza from years of high sales by selling doomsday stories. Governments and Green groups would not be able to justify a carbon tax that will greatly raise the cost of everything. Major international banks and the stock market would not make massive profits out of carbon trading and many in the science community would not be getting large research grants.

Q5. Is CO2 is a pollutant?

Respondent’s Answers: All thought it was a pollutant, at least to some degree.

The Correct Answer: CO2 is a harmless, trace gas. It is as necessary for life - just as oxygen and nitrogen are. It is a natural gas that is clear, tasteless and odourless. It is in no way a pollutant.

Calling CO2 a ‘pollutant’ leads many to wrongly think of it as black, grey or white smoke. Because the media deceitfully show white or grey ‘smoke’ coming out of power station cooling towers, most think this is CO2. It is not: it’s just steam (water vapour) condensing in the air. CO2 is invisible: just breathe out and see. Look at it bubbling out of your soft drinks, beer or sparkling wine. No one considers that a pollutant - because it’s not. CO2 in its frozen state is commonly known as dry ice. It is used in camping eskys, in medical treatments and science experiments. No one considers that a pollutant either. CO2 is emitted from all plants. This ‘emission’ is not considered a pollutant even though this alone is 33 times more than man produces! Huge quantities of CO2 are dissolved naturally in the ocean and released from the warm surface. This is not considered a pollutant either.

The two large cooling towers are emitting only steam. A tiny amount of CO2 is trickling out of the thin chimney at centre. It is only barely visible due to a small quantity of smoke particles, most of which is filtered out nowadays. The media doesn’t like to show skinny CO2 chimneys emitting nothing visible because this is unimpressive and not the least bit emotive so it doesn’t make for sensationalist journalism. So they typically choose to deceive the public by showing cooling towers.

Q6. Have you seen any evidence that CO2 causes a greenhouse effect?

Respondent’s Answers: Most did not know of any definite proof. Some said they thought the melting of the Arctic and glaciers was possibly proof.

The Correct Answer: There is no proof at all. The Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (the IPCC) has never produced any proof. There are, however the following proofs that it can’t cause a greenhouse effect.

• It is true that CO2 can absorb heat a little faster than nitrogen and oxygen but it becomes no hotter because it cannot absorb anymore heat than there is available to the other gases. This is against the laws of thermodynamics. All gases share their heat with the other gases. Gas molecules fly around and are constantly colliding with other gas molecules so they immediately lose any excess heat to other molecules during these collisions. That’s why the air is all one temperature in any limited volume.

• Even if CO2 levels were many times higher, radiative heating physics shows that it would make virtually no difference to temperature because it has a very limited heating ability. With CO2, the more there is, the less it heats because it quickly becomes saturated. For a detailed explanation go to: http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

The following facts show that even high levels of CO2 can make almost no impact on heating the atmosphere.

1. Glasshouses with high levels of CO2 - hundreds of times higher than in the air to make plants grow faster – heat up during the day to the same temperature as glasshouses with air in them. This is also true for bottles of pure CO2 compared to ones with air.

2. The planets Venus and Mars have atmospheres that are almost entirely CO2 (97%) yet they have no ‘runaway’ greenhouse heating effect. Their temperatures are stable.

3. The geological record over hundreds of millions of years has shown that CO2 has had no affect whatsoever on climate. At times, CO2 was hundreds of times higher, yet there were ice ages.

4. In recent times when Earth was considerably warmer during the Roman Warming and the Medieval Warming, the higher temperatures then were totally natural because there was no industrialization back then.

• Water vapour is 4% of the air and that‘s 100 times as much as CO2. Water vapour absorbs 33 times as much heat as CO2 making CO2’s contribution insignificant. But like CO2, water vapour also gives this heat away to air molecules by contact (conduction) and radiation, thereby making the surrounding air the same temperature.

• The Earth’s atmosphere is very thin so its heat is continually being lost to the absolute coldness of outer space (-270 C). As there is no ‘ceiling’ to the atmosphere, surface heat cannot be retained. The Sun renews warmth every day.

Over the last few years Earth has had much colder winters due to very few magnetic storms on the Sun. These four increasingly colder winters have been particularly noticeable in the northern hemisphere where most of the land is. Because of this, the Arctic has re-frozen and glaciers that were receding are now surging due to the heavy snow falls. The Arctic showed some melting around its edges from the mid 90s to the mid 2000s due to the very high level of solar storm activity at that time. But as the Sun is now entering probably 2-4 decades of low solar activity, this is expected to cause global cooling. For more detail, see the following page. 3

4

The climate has always been naturally cyclic and variable due to numerous natural drivers of which CO2 is not one. Over millions of years the climate has shown far greater changes in the geological record than we have seen over the last 200 hundred years - and there was no industrialization back then. The very minor variations we have witnessed over the last 100 years have all occurred several times even in that short period. Today’s changes in climate are common and completely natural. There are now over 50 books that provide numerous reasons why man-made global warming is false.

The Effect of the Sun on Earth’s climate

It has long been known that the Sun is by far the major driver of all weather on Earth because it is the source of all heat and energy. There is absolutely no real-world evidence that the temperature has continually risen as we were led to believe. The hottest records in the USA and Greenland were in the 1930s due to a strong solar cycle. It became cooler from 1940 to 1970. This was due to a weak solar cycle. It has again become increasingly colder since 2006 due to another weak solar cycle. The Sun’s magnetic storm activity has now moved to an extended minimum so the next 2-4 maximums are expected to be much weaker than the last few have been. By 2011 the solar cycle should have risen half way back to its 11 year maximum but it hasn’t! It’s only just started. The last time the Sun acted this way was during the Dalton Minimum from 1790 to 1830 which produced 40 years of very cold winters with subdued, wetter summers globally - just as we are expiring now. From 1450 -1750 a more intense Maunder Minimum occurred which caused the Little Ice Age. The next 2-4 solar cycles will very likely be low in solar activity causing noticeably cooler global temperatures for a few decades.

For details see: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/02/solar-cycle-24-update

and http://www.climatechangedenier.com.au/climate-change/another-dalton-minimum/

The effect of the current Solar Minimum is particularly obvious in the northern hemisphere where increasingly colder winter temperatures have caused massive snow falls disrupting transportation across Europe, Asia and the US.

Despite more than a decade of continual doomsday predictions of increasing temperatures and never-ending drought globally, the opposite has happened. There have been lower temperatures globally with greatly increased rain and snows over much of the planet since 2006. This has caused floods across most of Australia and most other counties, as seen on the TV news. This ended the global 10 year drought conditions from the mid 90s to the mid 2000s. There has been no drop in CO2 to cause this: in fact, CO2 has risen. There is no correlation between CO2 levels and climate. The reason CO2 levels have gone up a little is most likely due to the surface of the oceans warming very slightly during the later half of the century and therefore releasing a little CO2. (The oceans are currently cooling very slightly.) Mankind’s contribution to CO2 is so small it’s not measurable.

Polls on Climate Change

Polls in western countries now show that believers in man-made global warming are now in the minority with a sizable percentage of over 20% who “don’t know” if CO2 is causing any change. The obvious change to a cooler, wetter climate combined with the revelations of climate fraud shown by the Climategate emails has led to the change in public perception. Polls asking people what is the most important threat to them out of a list of 20 issues, place global warming at the bottom!

Popular beliefs are not fact

The bulk of the population of the western world believed that the 2000 Bug would destroy much of our technology on New Year’s Eve 2000 yet not one disaster occurred anywhere. We were told CFCs caused the Ozone ‘hole’ yet after billions of dollars were spent removing CFCs over 30 years, the slight depletion of Ozone at the South Pole has not changed. Scientists now think it is natural. Popular beliefs are often based on blind faith, ideology and profit rather than proven scientific evidence. History is littered with popular consensuses that were wrong.

A Carbon Tax

Taxing CO2 achieves nothing for the environment; in fact, it deprives real environmental issues from receiving funds. A carbon tax will have a disastrous impact on lower and middle income earners. Even if drastic measures were imposed equally on all countries around the world to reduce the total human CO2 contribution by as much as 30%, this would reduce total CO2 by an insignificant percentage. It would have no affect whatsoever on the climate but it would totally destroy the economies of every country and dramatically lower everyone’s living standards. Most people and politicians are making decisions emotively, not factually about a complex science they know virtually nothing about.

Gregg D Thompson

Climate Researcher

Astronomer

Environmentalist

Author of two science books

Business Manager and Director of 3 companies

Author of science magazine articles

Designer and project manager of special effects attractions

Nature photographer

Has a great interest in most sciences

Loves creating innovation in art

BURT RUTAN'S WEBSITE NOW OPERATIONAL

2012-08-06T12:53:00.002-07:00

Burt Rutan is one of the great men of the 20th and 21st Centuries. He is now officially retired yet still working on subjects dear to him. Click here for a link to that website. Mr Rutan has contributed much to humankind over the years. We all know of his cutting edge work in aircraft and spacecraft design. However, here is a chance to see the full scope of his creativity. Of particular interest to this blog site click on "Hobbies" The first item up is his thesis on errors and fallacies in the global warmers' arguments.

FORMER SKEPTIC OF GLOBAL WARMING NOW CHANGES MIND

2012-07-31T09:16:00.002-07:00

A new study from the Physics Department at UC Berkely indicates that the planet has warmed by 1.5 degrees over the last 250 years. One previous skeptic of global warming is now convinced that it is occuring. Click here for the full article. It also quotes another scientist, Judith Curry, who take issue with the conclusion of the study. Interesting reading. Bear in mind that UC Berkely is not exactly a bastion of conservatism. What else would their study be likely to conclude? I present this to add some objectivity to this site, not that I believe it's a valid unbiased study.

GLOBAL WARMERS AT IT AGAIN AND JUST CAN'T GET IT RIGHT!

2012-07-21T14:11:00.002-07:00

As past readers of this site already know I am frequently amused at the inconsistency of data promoted by the Global Warmers. I know, it's a dirty job monitoring these bunch of incompetents but I actually enjoy it. You see, it's too easy if you can only read.

I recently reviewed data published by the National Climatic Data Center, a USA government organization paid for with your tax dollars. Click here for a link to their announcement. However, let me prep you on what a very quick read showed me. The whole article is about the hottest June on record and the hottest 12 month period ever on planet Earth. When you look at the map they present, click on it to enlarge it and you will find some interesting reading. Conflicts I immediately noticed are as follows:

(1) "The USA had scorching temperatures in June resulting in the warmest 12 month period since national records started in 1895." Then they state "June average global land and ocean temperatures were the 4th warmest since records began in 1880." I know it might seem I am being petty but when did the records begin? 1895 or 1880? Small point but not insignificant because these scoundrels likely mix apples and oranges in their analyses. If you want to confuse the truth use a different baseline each time. One time include the range of years which will maximize the temperature. The next time use a different one which will keep out a cooler period which destroys your arguments. Keep reading.

(2) Going back to the first statement in quotes above I listened with my own two ears to a report on the Weather Channel which said that "despite lots of record high temps during the end of June, overall June was slightly below average for the United States." Who do we believe?

(3) "Australia was below average for June." Well, we all know there are hot spots and cold spots on the planet and they do move around.

(4) "New Zealand experienced its coolest maximum temperatures in over 130 years." Well let's take 2012 and back up 130 years. We find that the year is 1882. Okay, guys which year do we take for a baseline? 1895? 1880? or 1882? I am a retired CPA as well as a meteorologist and also have a Bachelor's degree in Mathematics. One of the base concepts of accounting and numbers is consistency of presentation. You use the same standard every time and your numbers will be better than if you use one baseline on some numbers and a different baseline on other numbers. I know if your going to cook the books, so to speak, you do compare apples and oranges and hope that no one notices, that your analysis just slides right by.

(5) I understand that there could have been a lingering cold pocket over Australia and New Zealand and the rest of the planet could have been very warm. No argument from me there. I like the consistency that their area of the planet was cold. However, let's look at their map for other anomalies. Hummm. See it? Finland had the coolest June since 2004. How could that be with heat flaming all around it's tiny perimeter? Something is wrong somewhere! That is not possible. There could not have been one little spot of cooler air just lingering over Finland. It had to be part of a cooling trend over the whole region.

(6) Notice as you read their statements that sometimes they use "average worldwide land and oceanic temperatures" and in other statements they only use "worldwide land" temperatures. Apples and oranges. Also, how in the heck did they have data for ocean temperatures early last century or much less in the eighteen hundreds. Oh, yeah, now I remember. Patrick O'Brien, in one of his fictional accounts of the life of a British Naval officer, relates their having kept logs on the daily sea water temperature on their travels. Hey, that's really scientific. Right. Besides it was recorded in a hit movie "Master and Commander Far Side of the World". If Hollywood put it in a movie it has to be true. Right? How much data was left out? Were there ships covering all of the oceans 24 hours a day? I don't think so. Did they all make it back home with their data? I don't think so. Trying to compare data for the early 20th century and the late 19th century is like apples and oranges.

(7) If we look at their map again we will notice that ONLY the US was in a red heat zone of abnormal temperatures. If you followed Climategate you remember that the Global Warmers lied about numbers and were caught red handed. Are they doing it again? If so we need to burn them at the stake! All the dollars wasted in industry trying to meet every higher standards! All the government dollars wasted on fabricated studies, new ineffective laws targeting their pet peeves, needless regulations. All a waste. All driving the United States towards a slow motion bankruptcy.

(8) Let's discuss a little microclimatology and see if we can find any other discrepencies. I spent June in Palm Bay, Florida. I was amazed at the temperatures. I had expected brutal heat and humidity normally associated with that area. I held my breath all month as the average high temperatures were in the low eighties. Low nineties would have been expected. Do these lower temperatures make the headlines? No, indeedy. Are they averaged in with the rest of the country to come up with a national average. Who knows? Only James Hansen and his global warming buddies at NASA.

(9) Friends in Northern Nevada complained to me how cool it was in June. Does that show on the map? No.

One point in favor of warming statistics. Even though the daily high temperature was cooler than normal in Palm Bay and the surrounding areas, the daily low was consistently three to four degrees higher than normal. Humidity keeps nightly temperatures from falling lower than they might have in a dryer climate and it was likely more humid than normal. However, most of us are interested in how hot the high temperature for the day was. When these people speak of global warming it doesn't mean that its getting hotter each day although they would like you to believe it was. Would you rather accept living on a planet where it is a little warmer at night but a little cooler during the day? Certainly better than one where it is hotter than Hades during the day. However, many of the weather statistics can be misleading because of averaging in the low temperatures and you cannot tell because certain so called scientists are falsifying the statistics.

Tal Leverett

EXCERPT FROM NEW ARTICLE BY BURT RUTAN

2012-06-03T15:34:00.000-07:00

Mr Rutan coordinated on this article. He is one of the people attempting to bring truth and science to the global warming issue.

"Earth had six to eight times as much CO2 in the atmosphere when dinosaurs roamed. That period also held the greatest diversity of species ever and the earth was green from pole to pole with no deserts.

"If you want a green planet, then you want our air to be like your green house where you pump CO2 into it," he said. "CO2 is not a pollutant, it is the essence of life for plants."

Within the last several million years, our atmosphere got down to only about 180 parts per million (PPM) of CO2. That was a severe threat, since below 150 PPM, all plants die.

"Now, we are being told we are at risk of catastrophe because we have a small increase of plant food in our atmosphere, even though the increase is beneficial.”

The article also found that we are currently at what could be the tail end of an unusually long and stable 11,000-year warm period between ice ages, which occurs every 80 to 100 thousand years."

BURT RUTAN (WHICH THOSE WHO FOLLOW THIS BLOG WORLDWIDE ALREADY KNOW) WAS ONE OF TIME MAGAZINE'S 100 MOST INFLUENTIAL PEOPLE IN THE WORLD IN 2004. THE FULL ARTICLE WILL FOLLOW IN A FEW DAYS ON "cdapress.com". . GRAB YOUR COATS!

The editor of this site, Tal Leverett, is grateful to Burt Rutan for his friendship and for sharing his genius with this website.

ONE OF THE NEW CONVERTS

2012-05-31T18:38:00.000-07:00

Dr. Klaus-Eckhart Puls, a German Physcists and Meteorologist) states that he is a new convert. Previously he decided that AGW (Man Caused Global Warming) was caused by Mankind (and Woman kind) Now he differs. Check out this link. Now he knows it's utter non-sense! He is German. I am American, but....he is my Brother from another Mother!

GLOBAL WARMER SCIENTISTS JUMPING SHIP!

2012-05-22T16:45:00.002-07:00

I attach an article by United States Senator James Inhofe. In it he cites that so many Anthropogenic Global Warmers have changed their minds that a website now tracks their daily defections.Thanks to Stephen Bowman in North Carolina for this article. The full article is published below.

Global warming alarmism, anyone? "The public is cooling to the rhetoric" by Sen. James Inhofe05/22/2012

President Barack Obama recently told Rolling Stone that he plans to make global warming a key part of his re-election campaign, but since American families pay more at the gas pump and more for energy in their homes because of this administration’s policies, we have our doubts.

To be sure, President Obama has many major green “accomplishments” to tout. By imposing backdoor global warming regulations through the EPA, he is fulfilling his 2008 campaign promise that energy prices would “necessarily skyrocket.” By vetoing the Keystone pipeline, he gave the far left what one of his supporters called the “biggest global warming victory in years.” By finalizing the most expensive EPA rule in history, he is making good on his campaign promise that if anybody wants to build a coal-fired power plant they can—“it’s just that it will bankrupt them.” And, he succeeded in throwing hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars out the window on companies like Solyndra, which he said would lead us to a “brighter and more prosperous future.”

The irony, of course, is that through all of these great green “triumphs,” President Obama has presided over the collapse of the global warming alarmist movement. Long gone are the days of the hysteria from the left. When is the last time he or anyone has heard from Al Gore?

Alarmists jump ship

Furthermore, global warming alarmists continue to jump ship. Shortly after Al Gore’s science fiction movie, I started to document the number of scientists deserting the alarmist camp. Today, Marc Morano of ClimateDepot.com keeps tabs on the latest count, with well over 1,000 scientists disputing climate alarmism.

And the list keeps growing. Last month, British environmentalist James Lovelock admitted that, “The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books—mine included—because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened.” The prominent environmentalist told MSNBC, “The climate is doing its usual tricks. There’s nothing much really happening yet. We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now.”

He is not alone either. German physicist and meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls told Swiss Factum Magazine that, “Ten years ago I simply parroted what the IPCC told us. One day I started checking the facts and data—first I started with a sense of doubt but then I became outraged when I discovered that much of what the IPCC and the media were telling us was sheer nonsense and was not even supported by any scientific facts and measurements. To this day I still feel shame that as a scientist I made presentations of their science without first checking it.”

This dramatic shift has not gone unnoticed on Capitol Hill. In fact, at no time has a global warming bill reached the Senate Floor during President Obama’s presidency. Even when the Democrats had a filibuster-proof majority, they never dared to bring a global warming bill to the Senate Floor.

ZERO CO2 SUVS NOW AVAILABLE (NOT A HYBRID)

2012-05-04T06:33:00.001-07:00

I recently rented an auto from Hertz. While reviewing what models were available I was surprised to see many models, including SUVs, advertising "0 CO2 Emmisions". They were not hybrids. They were good ole' USA gas guzzlers. Therefore, I am inclined to ask "Why all the fuss from global warmers?"

All along they have hung their "pointy little hats" on the premise that the USA as well as the rest of the world should get away from a dependence on gas driven engines. Their reason has consistently been that CO2 emmisions are bad for the planet. We have argued that it is not necessarily bad. Now, however, the argument must be over. If we have gas driven vehicles which produce zero CO2 emmisions then it is time for the president to allow drilling on federal lands in the USA. It is time for the AGW to quit demonizing gasoline.

"Pointy little hats?" Remember the old pictures of the class dunce in the 1800s? They always sat in a corner and had on a pointy little hat, assumedly on their pointy little head. It's time for the global warmers to go sit in the corner with their "pointy.....".

I was unable to establish a link to the Hertz site. However, I do include an example I copied from the site. I hope I am not violating any copyright law. If Hertz complains I shall take it down. However, applause to Hertz for finding and renting such vehicles.

IGNORE THE HYPE FROM THE WEATHER CHANNEL

2012-04-24T17:51:00.002-07:00

Two weeks ago it was snowing in Reno, NV. During this last week's reports of abnomally high temps in the west, Global Warmers have warned us of record highs in the west and the southwest. They decry abnormal high temps. I, your earstwhile reporter of the truth, not The Weather Channel, give to you the offsetting truth. Tonight, The Weather Channel, forecasted "near all time record lows" for much of Middle to eastern Florida. 49 F forecasted for Melbourne, FL. These climatic adjustments all equal out to zero climate change. What's the big deal? They wish to sensationalize the headlines. None of these matter, however. It's what's going on on the entire planet. Not one sensationalized microcosm. If you average out all of the sensationalism you shall find that Mother Nature, God to us believers, is still in control. The planet is safe.

NEW BOOK: DON'T SELL YOUR COAT YET"

2012-04-14T18:28:00.003-07:00

A new book titled "Don't Sell Your Coat Yet: Surprising Truths About Climate Change" is written by "a card carrying liberal" according to the description by one reviewer. Then he woke up! Other reviews in part state: "Manmade Global Warming is an Enron style hoax!" .... this author exposes it. To get a precise on the book as well as sample chapters click on this link. Thanks to Bob Merrick for this link.

CORN FED BEEF OR GRASS FED?

2012-03-25T09:35:00.005-07:00

I recently received a link to an article on seven foods that are bad for you. One of these was corn fed beef. The author posits that cattle evolved eating grass and not corn. He wants to eliminate all corn feeding of beef a rather extreme position. This would mean more free range beef, already very expensive. See...there are other extremists other than global warmers.

Does this come into conflict with the global warmers, some of whom might also be labeled food extremists? Of course it does. Just because someone is a kook in one area doesn't mean they are rational in other areas. Global warming adherents have long wanted to eliminate cattle as a food source because of their flatulence. As cited in another article herein (click here for the link) I explained, after an interview with a dairy farmer, that dairy cattle are not allowed to eat grass because grass does cause much flatulence in the cow. While producing flatulence the cattle produce less milk. Thus the dairy farmers are not so interested in reducing greenhouse gases in cattle as they are in producing more milk.

How does this cause conflict in the beliefs of glabal warmer/food extremists? They want more natural meat (i.e. grass fed). A good thing to them. Grass feeding causes more greenhouse gases. A bad thing for global warmers. So they are in violation of their beliefs in either case.

Click here for the link to the article.

Thanks to Kelly Breeden for the link.

MORE THOUGHTS ON CLIMATIC CYCLE 25

2012-02-12T09:08:00.000-08:00

A few posts below you will find a piece on Climatic Cycle 25. NASA agrees that we are entering a period of low solar activity. This should bottom out by 2022 with cooling each year before then. The Global Warmers, of course, trying to minimize any information which makes their theories of global warming any less threatening, have announced that the impacts will be much less than during the same event which occured in the 1700s and which some believe triggered a period of cooling known as The Little Ice Age. They say that CO2 has increased so much that the effect will be dampened and little cooling will occur.

I can almost agree, for once with the Global Warmers on this. However, their analysis is so sketchy that one cannot tell why they believe this. Are they guessing? If so maybe we should all go to Vegas together and bet on their intuitions on a craps table or a little Black Jack, Vingt et Un for our French readers. Why do I say this?

The Little Ice Age lasted for around two hundred years, much longer than Climatic Cycle 25 and it began much earlier than that cycle did. As I posted elsewhere herein The Little Ice Age was triggered by a variety of causes.

1. The Plague, otherwise known as The Black Death, decimated populations in Europe from 1350 AD until 1450 AD. So many people died that there was a reforestation in Europe and England. Remember that back then there was little materials for homes other than trees or rocks. Trees being more abundent that rocks and easier for lay people to work with a large amount of trees had been cut and not replanted. Why not? Because people fed themselves in large part by growing gardens of their own. When they cut down trees for their homes they also created open space for farming. When the trees grew back CO2 was scrubbed from the air.

2. In the early 1500s there were around 60 million Aztecs and Mayas living in Central America and South America. When the Europeans came they carried swords and superior arms and a slaughter of those people began. They also carried microbes and strange diseases which finished the job that the swords and lances had started. Hundred of thousands of square miles of farmland were taken over by tropical jungles. This lush foliage scrubbed even more CO2 from the air and the air cooled.

Wow! I just wrote some facts which makes the Global Warmers seem to be right. Now for the rest of the facts.

Unlike the Global Warmers I believe that there will be significant cooling. Not another Ice Age but noticably cooler. There are other natural forces at work which will contribute to the cooling. Also remember that so called greenhouse gases may keep heat in but they also reflect radiation back into space not allowing it into our atmosphere. Recent studies by NASA show a net loss of radiation recently even though there was an increase in CO2.

A very good question and one which should be asked is "Why did the Little Ice Age end before the Age of Industrialization begin?" It ended in the early 1800s before serious pollution began, a fact even the Global Warmers admit. They don't want to talk about it because it doesn't fit their theory. Why did heating peak in the 1930s when man was busily increasing polution for decades after that?

Again this is not a religious website. However, I believe that God created a perfect habitat for Mankind. Sure there are variations as we see each year from season to season and historically from century to century. What a boring place it would be without those variations.

My two cents. Tal Leverett