Climategate: two more bricks fall out of the IPCC wall of deceit – rainforests and polar bears

rainforestBy Gerald Warner

Oops! There go another two bricks, tumbling out of the IPCC wall of deceit on man-made global warming – there is not a lot left now; even the Berlin Wall (to which the AGW construct is ideologically allied) has survived better. Unhappily for Al, Phil, Michael, George and the rest of the scare-mongers, these two discredited components are among the most totemic in the AGW religion.Firstly, a new study, funded by Nasa (which may be feeling the need to rehabilitate itself post-Climategate) has revealed that the ridiculous claim in the notorious IPCC 2007 report that up to 40 per cent of the Amazon rainforest could be drastically affected by even a small reduction in rainfall caused by climate change, so that the trees would be replaced by tropical grassland, is utter nonsense. That assertion has already been exposed as derived from a single report by the environmentalist lobby group WWF.

Now Dr Jose Marengo, a climate scientist with the Brazilian National Institute for Space Research and himself a member of the IPCC, says: “The way the WWF report calculated this 40 per cent was totally wrong, while (the new) calculations are by far more reliable and correct.” These calculations were done by researchers at Boston University and were published in the scientific journal Geophysical Research Letters. They used satellite data to study the drought of 2005, when rainfall fell to the lowest in living memory, and found that the rainforest suffered no significant effects.

Read the rest of this article at the London Telegraph.

34 Responses to Climategate: two more bricks fall out of the IPCC wall of deceit – rainforests and polar bears

  1. McHarris March 17, 2010 at 7:50 pm #

    have linked back to you today. Thanks for the great work

    Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,
    Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.
    All the King’s horses and all the King’s men
    Couldn’t put Humpty together again!
    (Even with the help of the UN!)

    http://just-me-in-t.blogspot.com/2010/03/when-walls-come-tumbling-down.html

  2. René Brioul March 18, 2010 at 3:03 am #

    I think the IPCC should publish a report stating the things they DIDN’T lie about.
    It would turn out to be a very short report, about half a page including the usual header and bottom stuff.

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD March 18, 2010 at 11:23 pm #

      Yes, and most of that half a page would be puncuation marks, nouns, pronouns, and conjunctions. Because the adjectives and verbs are all bogus!!

  3. Neil F. AGWD/BSD March 18, 2010 at 7:28 am #

    You know, when they say that two more bricks fall out of the wall of deciet, it reminded me of a video I watched a few years ago that talks about four pillars supporting the greenhouse theory. I just watched it again, and given what we now know from climategate, this video seems to have got it right and it was produced in the late 80′s.
    This is the video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5949034802461518010# It is 51:49, but I think it is worth taking the time to watch.

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD March 18, 2010 at 11:41 pm #

      Actually it is from the early 90′s but it’s still spot on.

  4. Rob N. Hood March 19, 2010 at 10:12 am #

    Friends, our premise from the beginning has been that we must first speak out for policy change to our elected officials. For unless we are in fact speaking out, only then can we know if they will listen to us or not. AFTER we do that, it becomes clear who is listening and who is not, and THEN we have the base to hold them to account accordingly, and to remove from office those who will not listen. We have now arrived at the latter point with regard to each and every sitting member of Congress of both major parties without exception, and the fake Independents can go too. We are calling for all citizens of the United to declare that under no circumstance will they vote for any candidate associated with either the Democratic or Republican parties, and that we instead dedicate our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor, to electing worthy independents who can demonstrate a lifetime of public policy advocacy on behalf of the people, true citizen legislators.

  5. Neil F. AGWD/BSD March 19, 2010 at 12:55 pm #

    Ok Rob, name one.

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD March 19, 2010 at 1:37 pm #

      Ok, I’ve done a little research and have found that you have posted this: http://laudyms.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/pledge-of-independence-no-votes-for-dems-or-gop/
      This is a response from PROGRESSIVES who are upset that the Democrats are not going to pass a healthcare bill with a PUBLIC OPTION included in it. Which is stupid because anyone that understands what the bill they are trying to pass has in it, knows that it will destroy private insurance companies leaving the only option to be a public option. I.e the government will take over the health insurance industry when the private companies collapse. Which has been the goal all along.
      Are you so blinded by your own ideaology that you can’t see that this is just a bunch of progressive liberals whining that there is no public option? They are only doing this because of that. They already hated republicans, so that was no leap for them. Do you really believe that they are looking for independents? They are looking for people who are farther left than democrats!!!!!!!!!
      And, I think that this does have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH BRICKS FALLING OUT OF THE AGW WALL OF DECIET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      I want to say more to you Rob, but Dan would edit it because what I want to say now would be personal insults directed at you.

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD March 19, 2010 at 2:38 pm #

      [:-(

    • Rob N. Hood March 20, 2010 at 5:48 pm #

      Anyone but a registered Democrat or Republican… uhhh, get it? Not that hard. How do you expect any real changes unless real changes occur? It can start wtih voting, as old Paul has told us, ummm, a few hundred times. It is only logical however: if you vote Rep or Dem NOTHING WILL CHANGE!!!!!!

  6. Hal Groar March 19, 2010 at 6:23 pm #

    So he did again huh? That Rob cracks me up. Nice find Neil!

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD March 19, 2010 at 7:45 pm #

      Our friend Rob is here to promote his agenda. Which is, as far as I can surmise, very anti-capitalist. He tries very hard to present it in a way that does not show his true motivation, but all it takes is a little searching and you can find the whole story easily enough. Terms like “independent” are used by the far radical left to mask their real intent. As in the example above they are irate that there is no public option in the health care bill, which means they want government to control health care. Or to be more precise, they want the government to pay for everyones health care, which boiled down means socialized health care. When I read things like that I ask myself things like: Would a true independent want government control over anything? After all you would be dependent on government to provide a service. How is that independent? It’s not. It is dependence. So when a progressive like Rob says anything, suspect that they mean the exact opposite, and you won’t ever be far off the mark.
      The BSD has spoken.

    • Rob N. Hood March 20, 2010 at 5:50 pm #

      Oh, so smug, for people who cannot think logically and rationally. Again, what does it matter where info/thoughts come from. Isn’t is the thought that counts? Or do you just want another bogus way of dismissing damaging or otherwise logical thought? You can’t debate it so you cry about it instead?

  7. Rob N. Hood March 20, 2010 at 3:12 pm #

    Is being a self-described “BSD” kind of like being the Decider? Poor Neil. Lack of imagination leaves him stuck in the mud.

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD March 20, 2010 at 4:30 pm #

      Stands for Bull Sh** Detector. And you peg out the meter. What’s the matter, can’t argue the accuracy of what I wrote? Have to insult me now? Oh, and that’s such a lame insult too. Actually that does not work in your favor, you should have said I have an overactive imagination. Cause then you could have just attributed my above statement to an overactive imagination.

  8. Rob N. Hood March 20, 2010 at 5:55 pm #

    I got what it “stands” for… I graduated from HS (oh just so you know, that means “High School”) And you are yelling at me about insults? Like you never have? And identifying your lack of imagination is not so much an insult as an observation. I believe you and your cohorts are much better at the insults. And I believe my equating your BSD to also being “The Decider” was apt and funny too.

  9. Neil F. AGWD/BSD March 21, 2010 at 7:33 am #

    Back to topic.
    http://joannenova.com.au/2010/03/the-mystery-deepens-where-did-that-decline-go/
    “Frank Lansner has done some excellent follow-up on the missing “decline” in temperatures from 1940 to 1975, and things get even more interesting. Recall that the original “hide the decline” statement comes from the ClimateGate e-mails and refers to “hiding” the tree ring data that shows a decline in temperatures after 1960. It’s known as the “divergence problem” because tree rings diverge from the allegedly measured temperatures. But, Frank shows that the peer reviewed data supports the original graphs, and that real measured temperatures did decline from 1960 onwards…sharply. Yet, in the GISS version of that period, temperatures from the cold 1970’s were repeatedly “adjusted” years later, and progressively made warmer.”

  10. Neil F. AGWD/BSD March 21, 2010 at 8:06 am #

    http://american.com/archive/2010/march/when-to-doubt-a-scientific-consensus
    “Anyone who has studied the history of science knows that scientists are not immune to the non-rational dynamics of the herd. Many false ideas enjoyed consensus opinion at one time. Indeed, the “power of the paradigm” often shapes the thinking of scientists so strongly that they become unable to accurately summarize, let alone evaluate, radical alternatives. Question the paradigm, and some respond with dogmatic fanaticism.”

  11. Cubanshamoo March 22, 2010 at 1:26 am #

    Who is talking about insults? The guy who call us fascists? Who is talking about logic and racionality? The guy who is unable to understand that you can’t create welfare dividing and sharing the money of others? Do you know what is corruption Rob? It exist in sciences too.

  12. Rob N. Hood March 22, 2010 at 10:53 am #

    Yes, insults, at me. But I just brush them off in most cases. I need to point out that I haven’t exactly called you or anyone else a fascist. I’ve just pointed out their/your fascist leanings, and where I think the current government is headed. The real problem is you all see it just the opposite way- you all think it’s headed Left, towards communism. I contend that that is false, and all you have to do is pay attention without having a predisposed mind-set and it is obvious.

    I still don’t understand this dilemma. It is an interesting psychological phenomenon that obviously occurs in most if not all cultures.

    My other point is this: since we have boiled things down things in this country to Right and Left, and most of those on each side believe in their view to an unwavering extent- there is at least a 50 percent chance that one side is wrong. That is a big factor- 50 % !! Think about that for a minute. I guess that is why I beleive it would be a good thing for all of us to try and keep an open mind. But I was insulted by Paul for saying the same thing elsewhere. If a person gets insulted for that, I really wonder what will become of us if those kind of people get their way. It can’t be anything very positive that’s for sure.

  13. Neil F. AGWD/BSD March 23, 2010 at 5:18 am #

    One brick falls out…… another takes it’s place.
    http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Malaysia/Story/A1Story20100322-206015.html
    “This is the concern of environmentalists as flowers are losing their scent due to climate change and air pollution. And their fragrance may be lost forever.”

    • Dan McGrath March 23, 2010 at 9:39 am #

      Wow.

      • Rob N. Hood March 23, 2010 at 11:52 am #

        I agree Dan, this is a perfect example of letting the private sector do its thing. Let the perfume industry step up and do something about this smelly issue. Actually, you know, that’s not such a bad idea…

  14. Rob N. Hood March 23, 2010 at 7:26 am #

    Nice re-direction.

    I can do that too.

    Number of U.S. Military Personnel Sacrificed (Officially acknowledged) In America’s War On Iraq: 4,703 Number Of International Occupation Force Troops Slaughtered In Afghanistan : 1,692 http://icasualties.org/oef/ But here is a shocking statistic that you won’t hear in most western news media: over the past nine years, more US military personnel have taken their own lives than have died in action in either the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan. These are official figures from the US Department of Defense, yet somehow they have not been deemed newsworthy to report. Last year alone, more than 330 serving members of the US armed forces committed suicide – more than the 320 killed in Afghanistan and the 150 who fell in Iraq (see wsws.org).

  15. Cubanshamoo March 25, 2010 at 4:43 am #

    In Switzerland the cow are now guilty for GW, do you have an idea what we will do without a chance to by Gruyere cheese?

  16. Rob N. Hood March 25, 2010 at 7:40 am #

    Cows do “expell” a lot of methane. It’s a fact. Now- is anyone suggesting cows alone, even added in all types of fart-happy animals, is a major cause of global warming? Not that I’m aware of. As stated it is one factor, possibly, but not the biggest. If the Russian and other arctic circle tundra areas, start to melt, that will become a concern because there is a whole lot of methane stored there, that would then be released and rather relatively quickly as well.

  17. Cubanshamoo March 26, 2010 at 3:26 am #

    Funny Rob, do you know how many words I saw with expelling problems in your texts? Don’t be so arrogant Robby William. And apart of English what other language you abuse? I do abuse another 5. Poor boy, go to school and be a little bit modest!!!!!

  18. cubanshamoo March 27, 2010 at 1:17 am #

    Sorry Rob, my English is terrible, I didn’t read you correctly. I’m so use that to see you treat me as dude, that I replay without thinking. You know, you have the special capacity to make me pass over your bla,bla,bla’s without taking you seriously anymore. Never mind, I am a fair person.

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD March 27, 2010 at 11:20 pm #

      MoooooooooOOOOOoooooo

      • Rob N. Hood March 30, 2010 at 7:28 am #

        Brown chicken brown cow…

  19. Neil F. AGWD/BSD March 28, 2010 at 8:31 am #

    All and all it was just another brick in the wall -Pink Floyd
    http://westinstenv.org/sosf/2010/03/26/soils-co2-and-global-warming/
    “Meta-studies suffer from inherent publication bias, and in this case the biases are huge. They also violate the scientific method. It seems that in this meta-study, the numbers don’t add up. The uncertainties are vastly larger than the tiny “effect” the authors claim to have extracted from research papers by others.”

  20. paul wenum March 31, 2010 at 11:41 pm #

    Whatever happened to debunking global warming nonsense and the defeat of Cap N trade? Am I missing something or is this about a brick and a cow farting? Bricks fall daily as well as cows that fart. Ever milk one? Trust me. They fart or should I say “expel noxious gases.” Get back on point.

  21. Rob N. Hood April 1, 2010 at 6:50 am #

    Thanks Paul. I believe I can speak for everyone here and say that we dearly missed your poetic musings.

  22. paul wenum April 1, 2010 at 10:45 pm #

    Back to defeating Cap N Trade! By the way, I amuse a lot. Yes, I know the difference. Couldn’t help it.

Leave a Reply

A project of Minnesota Majority