Mike Bloomberg Targets Coal Industry With $30 Million Donation To Sierra Club

Mikey Bloomburg getting off of his private jet. which, as we all know, emits no CO2.

Give Me Liberty

This is from Deneen Borelli.

The United Mine Workers Union and its employees

endorsed and voted for Obama.

Now they are getting screwed by Obama as thanks for their blind support.

The progressive mob is driving the coal industry into bankruptcy.

President Obama is leading the charge by having the Environmental Protection Agency issue regulation after regulation targeting coal-fired power plants.

Now billionaire and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is adding his significant financial weight in an effort to kill the coal industry. Bloomberg recently announced Bloomberg Philanthropies is donating $30 million to the Sierra Club’s anti-coal campaign.

Bloomberg’s latest donation adds to the $50 million he gave to the Sierra Club in 2011.

According to the Sierra Club, its Beyond Coal grassroots campaign is responsible for closing 187 coal-fired power plants in the U.S. and with its new funds, its goal is to shut down half of the remaining units by…

View original post 151 more words

How do you make money with your retreat | Charles Carroll Society

Liberty, Catholicism, Redoubt
click to go over to Alex Barron’s CCS
  • News: Obama outlawing bullets. Reclassification & Internet
  • News: IRS emails found criminal probe started. Paid 122K in bonus
  • News: Clinton’s email. I want you to have the same ability
  • Redoubt: Local nursery
  • Thinking on making your retreat a business

via » Podcast Episode 05-2015: How do you make money with your retreat #podcast #prepper #catholic Charles Carroll Society.

And then they came for The Holocene: New paper suggests “removing the Holocene Epoch from the geologic timescale”

Watts Up With That?

Holocene_Temperature_Variations_Rev[1]
From The Hockey Schtick
Is there any limit to the extremes some climate propagandists will go?The Climategate team removed the warm 1940’s “blip”, erased the Medieval Warm PeriodHid the Decline, and tortured temperature & sea level data until it confessed, but a paper published Monday in Earth’s Future could take the cake by suggesting removal of “the Holocene Epoch from the geologic timescale” and replacing it with the fictitious, scary-sounding “geologic” timescale “The Anthropocene.”

Excerpt from “Hello Anthropocene, Goodbye Holocene”:

: “As the official timescale keepers deliberate the introduction of the Anthropocene and a Holocene-Anthropocene boundary (Anthropocene Working Group of the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy; Zalasiewicz, J., M. et al., 2010; http://goo.gl/wIm6X0 ), they should consider the alternative: Remove the Holocene Epoch from the geologic timescale. Whereas any timescale change is a contentious issue, let alone changes to an existing epoch, modern human society’s interactions with its planet and…

View original post 511 more words

A Global Temperature Conundrum: Cooling Or Warming Climate? | II&I

…Writing in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences today, Liu and colleagues …  describe a consistent global warming trend over the course of the Holocene, our current geological epoch, counter to a study published last year that described a period of global cooling before human influence.

via A Global Temperature Conundrum: Cooling Or Warming Climate?

Why Climate Change Doesn’t Scare Me

Watts Up With That?

Guest essay by Walter Starck

Be scared, the experts tell us, be very scared. Well there is certainly cause for concern, but not about those “rising” temperatures, which refuse to confirm researchers’ computer models. A far bigger worry is the corruption that has turned ‘science’ into a synonym for shameless, cynical careerism

Despite the increasingly shrill insistence by climate alarmists that we face an imminent  catastrophe, reason and evidence continue to indicate otherwise. Both the theoretical understanding of anthropogenic global warming (a.k.a. climate change) and the empirical evidence remain highly uncertain, tainted by dubious claims and manipulations.

View original post 2,206 more words

In Praise of: Red Ice Radio

So I have been listening to some of these shows lately and find them thought provoking, balanced, fair and well outside the mainstream pap shoveled at us.  Sort of like Coast-to-Coast radio but without the delusionas and voices coming out of the toasters and such. Go here and check it out:  http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/nonsubscriber.php  I will add a permalink to the blogroll.  GE.

Dueling climate reports | Dr. Craig Idso [via WUWT]

NOTE: This op-ed is apparently too hot for some editors to handle. Late last week it was accepted and posted on politix.topix.com only to be abruptly removed some two hours later. After several hours of attempting to determine why it was removed, I was informed the topix.com editor had permanently taken it down because of a strong negative reaction to it and because of “conflicting views from the scientific community” over factual assertions in the piece.

Fortunately, some media outlets recognize a vigorous scientific debate persists over humanity’s influence on climate and those outlets refuse outside efforts to silence viewpoints that run counter to prevailing climate alarmism. My original piece follows below…

Guest essay by Dr. Craig D. Idso

The release of a United Nations (UN) climate change report last week energized various politicians and environmental activists, who issued a new round of calls to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Some of the most fiery language in this regard came from Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), who called upon Congress to “wake up and do everything in its power to reduce dangerous carbon pollution,” while Secretary of State John Kerry expressed similar sentiments in a State Department release, claiming that “unless we act dramatically and quickly, science tells us our climate and our way of life are literally in jeopardy.” 

Really? Is Earth’s climate so fragile that both it and our way of life are in jeopardy because of rising carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions?

In a word, no. The human impact on global climate is small; and any warming that may occur as a result of anthropogenic CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions is likely to have little effect on either Earth’s climate or biosphere, according to the recently-released contrasting report Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts, which was produced by the independent Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC).

This alternative assessment reviews literally thousands of peer-reviewed scientific journal articles that do not support and often contradict the findings of the UN report. Whether the subject is the effects of warming and rising CO2 on plants, animals, or humans, the UN report invariably highlights the studies and models that paint global warming in the darkest possible hue, ignoring or downplaying those that don’t.

To borrow a telling phrase from their report, the UN sees nothing but “death, injury, and disrupted livelihoods” everywhere it looks—as do Senator Boxer, Secretary Kerry, and others. Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts demonstrates that life on Earth is not suffering from rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2 levels. Citing reams of real-world data, it offers solid scientific evidence that most plants actually flourish when exposed to both higher temperatures and greater CO2 concentrations. In fact, it demonstrates that the planet’s terrestrial biosphere is undergoing a great greening, which is causing deserts to shrink and forests to expand, thereby enlarging and enhancing habitat for wildlife. And much the same story can be told of global warming and atmospheric CO2 enrichment’s impacts on terrestrial animals, aquatic life, and human health.

Why are these research findings and this positive perspective missing from the UN climate reports? Although the UN claims to be unbiased and to have based its assessments on the best available science, such is obviously not the case. And it is most fortunate, therefore, that the NIPCC report provides tangible evidence that the CO2-induced global warming and ocean acidification debate remains unsettled on multiple levels; for there are literally thousands of peer-reviewed scientific journal articles that do not support a catastrophic, or even problematic, view of atmospheric CO2 enrichment.

Unfortunately, climate alarmism has become the modus operandi of the UN assessment reports. This fact is sad, indeed, because in compiling these reports, the UN either was purposely blind to views that ran counter to the materials they utilized, or its authors did not invest the amount of time, energy, and resources needed to fully investigate an issue that has profound significance for all life on Earth. And as a result, the UN has seriously exaggerated many dire conclusions, distorted relevant facts, and omitted or ignored key scientific findings. Yet in spite of these failings, various politicians, governments, and institutions continue to rally around the UN climate reports and to utilize their contentions as justification to legislate reductions in CO2 emissions, such as epitomized by the remarks of Senator Boxer and Secretary Kerry.

Citing only studies that promote climate catastrophism as a basis for such regulation, while ignoring studies that suggest just the opposite, is simply wrong. Citizens of every nation deserve much better scientific scrutiny of this issue by their governments; and they should demand greater accountability from their elected officials as they attempt to provide it.

There it is, that’s my op-ed. It’s what some people apparently do not want you to read. While the over 3,000 peer-reviewed scientific references cited in Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts are likely more than sufficient to establish scientific fact in a court of law, they are not sufficient to engage the real climate deniers in any debate. The rise in atmospheric CO2 is not having, nor will it have, a dangerous influence on the climate and biosphere. But don’t take my word for it, download and read the report for yourself (available at http://www.nipccreport.org). Compare it with the UN report. You be the judge!

Dr. Craig D. Idso is the lead editor and scientist for the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC).

Continue reading

Legitimacy | ol’ remus and the woodpile report

The federal government was not intended to be a charity, nor an insurance or retirement agency, nor doctor, pharmacist or health advisor, champion of the poor or rich, changer of foreign regimes, protector of the planet, educator, space explorer, diet and nutrition czar, arbiter of interest rates or prices or wages, nor trafficker in currency unsecured by gold or silver. As legally constituted it may neither promote nor restrict transfats, sugar, tobacco, alcohol, coal, gasoline, drugs, salt or food of any kind; nor may it enact legislation favoring or victimizing or exempting any gender, race or ethnicity. In short, those things DC is doing outside of its enumerated powers are unlawful...

via ol remus and the woodpile report

Global Warming Caused By CFCs, Not Carbon Dioxide, Study Says | WorldScientific

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are to blame for global warming since the 1970s and not carbon dioxide, according to new research from the University of Waterloo published in the International Journal of Modern Physics B this week.
CFCs are already known to deplete ozone, but in-depth statistical analysis now shows that CFCs are also the key driver in global climate change, rather than carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.


Continue reading

Soda-Obessed Mayor of Illiterate City to Convene Climate Change Summit in World’s Rape Capital | FrontPage

[GE NOTE:  I laughed so hard at the title of this article coffee shot out of my nose.  Well done Frontpage!!]

Click to read the latest of escapades of Napoleon Bloomberg Quixote.
(If Hell has an “insipid room” it will, no doubt, be reserved for this tool)

80 percent of New York City high school students seem to have some trouble reading, but Mayor Bloomberg has no time for them. He’s too busy dealing with serious issues, like soda sizes, gun control in Illinois and the impending destruction of the planet

via Soda-Obessed Mayor of Illiterate City @ FrontPage

Climate Change without Catastrophe: Interview with Anthony Watts | OilPrice.com

Interview by James Stafford of Oil price.com.   We couldn’t pin down global warming, exactly, so now it’s re-labelled as climate change, which is an incredibly vague loaded term that no-one fully understands. The difficulty of pinning down this “wicked problem” has produced more uncertainty than ever and rendered the subject the purview of politics that has polarized the public and turned the issue into something reminiscent of the dark ages and conjuring up of weather-focused demons.

Amid these dark ages, the voice of former TV meteorologist and meteorological instrumentation specialist Anthony Watts has become unusually controversial. The knee-jerk reaction of a polarized public has been to place him in one of two climate change camps, and to categorize him as a “denier”. But Watts insists his latent climate change scepticism is pragmatic and based on his experience as a meteorologist and a long process of connecting the scientific dots. His message, he says, is misunderstood, and he best describes himself as “lukewarm” on the issue. He believes that climate change is happening, but that there’s no need for panic. Continue reading

Mandatory Reading for 3/5/13 – The Woodpile Report

Go here, right now, and read it all. That’s an order.

Journal of The long sunspot cycle 23 predicts a significant temperature decrease in cycle 24 | ScienceDirect.com

Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics.  Relations between the length of a sunspot cycle and the average temperature in the same and the next cycle are calculated for a number of meteorological stations in Norway and in the North Atlantic region. No significant trend is found between the length of a cycle and the average temperature in the same cycle, but a significant negative trend is found between the length of a cycle and the temperature in the next cycle. This provides a tool to predict an average temperature decrease of at least View the MathML source from solar cycle 23 to solar cycle 24 for the stations and areas analyzed. We find for the Norwegian local stations investigated that 25–56% of the temperature increase the last 150 years may be attributed to the Sun. For 3 North Atlantic stations we get 63–72% solar contribution. This points to the Atlantic currents as reinforcing a solar signal.

via ScienceDirect.com

Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate | Forbes

“The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guid[e] what’s included and what is left out” of IPCC reports, writes Jonathan Overpeck, coordinating lead author for the IPCC’s most recent climate assessment…

via Climategate 2.0: Forbes.

Climate sensitivity to carbon dioxide more limited than extreme projections, research shows | Science Daily

“… A new study suggests that the rate of global warming from doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide may be less than the most dire estimates of some previous studies — and, in fact, may be less severe than projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report in 2007…”

via Climate sensitivity to carbon dioxide more limited than extreme projections, research shows.