NASA's JPL Climate Symposium

This is the whole presentation of the 350.0rg event at JPL I attended.ClimateSymposium

Climate Consensus Treaty

In honor of an unlikely candidate in my circles, former Reagan SOS George Schultz, I propose a San Francisco Protocol on climate change. Not a bad piece. Never mind Kyoto, the name alone is synonymous with failure and overused by wingnuts. We need a new treaty, one that works to curb greenhouse gases because we live on a ball spinning in the wilderness of space. There is nowhere to go, and roasting like a chestnut, isn't much fun, as last week in California proved all too well. Let's get busy!

Winger Science

Times of London Congratulations are in order. They've discovered Phlogiston, and just in time. Here's the explanation of the flaws. Stated simply, cosmic rays and the Sun cycles have had a minute effect on global warming to date. You can almost see these clowns twisting inside out.

It's a Hoax!

Jennifer Marohasy the Brisbane based botanist and climate sceptic does her country a great disservice with her denialism. This is illustrated in this sceptical Op-ed from down under. There is a good reason I used some Aussie deniers in Warm Front as The Kookaburra Consortium. Like the birds, they mock reality. I'm hearing the Song of the Dodo though in their chant.

Lying Liars

That's what the new fake science Fraser Institute is. Their denier analysis of the new IPCC report is just the same old same old: already disproven crap, which unfortunately, is easy for any conservative to buy as illustrated below. Realclimate points out the sad reality: it isn't true.

The National Research Council, like the official SPM, affirms that recent warming really does appear anomalous in light of the past millennium. The Fraser report obscures this point by cleansing the recent period of warming from their graphs. The discussion of solar variability consists of a lot of vague talk about unexplored possibilities, while skirting the basic problem with solar variability as an explanation of recent warming: There is no observed trend in solar activity of a type that could explain recent warming, and if the problem were an unobserved trend in solar ultraviolet, it would make the stratosphere (where UV is absorbed by ozone) trend warmer relative to a constant-solar baseline. In reality, the stratosphere is cooling strongly, and at about the rate the models predict.

Wall Street Tards

The Wall Street Tards Let's see the Raelians or NASA, IPCC, National Academies of Science? Duh we'll go with the first. Frggin idiots.

My unpublished response:

Re: Climate of Opinion

Comment:
"For example, the Center for Science and Public Policy has just released an illuminating analysis written by Lord Christopher Monckton, a one-time adviser to Margaret Thatcher who has become a voice of sanity on global warming."

No, it hasn't and he's not on the panel, and is not recognized as an expert in anything. The two organizations are not equivalent. One belongs to your columnist pete du Pont. Hello! This is typical wingnuttery. You guys will fail. In fact your denial shows you already have. Get some education. Perhaps if your paper had opinion editors who have graduated from college, you wouldn't be having this much trouble grasping reality? What a disgrace to Wall Street and main street. The religion of money in full view. Idiots!