Monthly Archives: December 2015

NIPCC Reference: Biological Impacts

A number of you have written telling me that you liked the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change—Science. So I will add the NIPCC’s second reference book: Biological Impacts. Click here to link.


Year End Global Warming Cartoons

Year end cartoons  courtesy of







Have a great 2016.  Happy New Year!!!



Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science–An Unbiased Report

The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issues a report every three or four years about global warming. This UN agency’s charter is not to examine the science of global warming but rather to show that man produced greenhouse gases will result in catastrophic damage to the globe.   IPCC does as directed by giving little consideration to data, science or reports that would contradict the charter.

A relatively new report, compiled by the Nongovernmental International Panel cover of part2FrontCover2on Climate Change (NIPCC) has been written to answer the IPCC’ reports. The first installment is Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science (CCR-II). This installment is an independent, comprehensive, and authoritative report on the current state of climate science. It is the fourth in a series of scholarly reports produced by the (NIPCC), an international network of climate scientists sponsored by three nonprofit organizations: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), and The Heartland Institute. Real data and unbiased studies were used in the preparation of this installment.

You can link to Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science (CCRII) by clicking here.





Double standards in the Government’s Gold King mine disaster whitewash

Reblogging this posting on how the EPA blew it and let millions of gallons of polluted mine water go into Western rivers and nobody has been arrested, fined or even fired. The following are quotes from the posting to give you some idea of what is going on.

“When a private citizen or company violates rules, misrepresents facts or pollutes a river, government penalties are swift and severe. It’s different when the government lies or screws up.

Their actions were grossly negligent. In fact, they are criminal offenses under the Clean Water Act and other laws that the government routinely uses to fine and jail private citizens and company employees, such as John Pozsgai, Bill Ellen, and employees of Freedom Industries and the Pacific & Arctic Railway. None of these “convicted felons” intended to cause those accidents, and all were “absolutely, deeply sorry” for what happened. Why should the state and federal culprits be treated any differently – get off scot free – after causing far worse environmental damage?”


Watts Up With That?

Double standards and pollution continue, while the feds exonerate themselves from blame

Guest essay by Paul Driessen


When a private citizen or company violates rules, misrepresents facts or pollutes a river, government penalties are swift and severe. It’s different when the government lies or screws up.

Two weeks ago, Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell testified before Congress on a toxic spill that federal and state agencies unleashed into western state rivers last August. Supervised by officials from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (DRMS), an Environmental Restoration (ER) company crew excavated tons of rock and debris that had blocked the portal (entrance or adit) to the Gold King Mine above Silverton, Colorado.

The crew kept digging until the remaining blockage burst open, spilling 3,000,000 gallons of acidic water laden with iron, lead, cadmium, mercury and other heavy metals. The toxic flood…

View original post 1,246 more words

The Perilous Business Of Predicting The Future

The National posted “Why Climate Change Won’t Matter in 20 Years”. They subtitled the posting “The perilous business of predicting the future.” The subtitle accurately depicts what happens when politicians or anyone for that matter, think they can safely make the future an extension of the present.

First of all, the warmers should be willing to take seriously the abject failure of their vaunted climate models to make prediction on any time frame. Yet they insist that the Earth in 2100 will be x degrees hotter and the sea level will be y meters higher than today because the climate models told them so. The odds are that they might do just as well talking to Madame Charmaine, the village palm reader.

The author of this posting, Josh Gelernter, put in a lot of effort into showing why projecting the present as a representation of the future is very unlikely to be successful. So I will let him speak:

“Michael Crichton — the brilliant novelist and thinker — posed this horsespulling streetcarquestion in a speech at Caltech in 2003, re climate predictions for 2100. What environmental problems would men in 1900 have predicted for 2000? Where to get enough horses, and what to do with all the manure. “Horse pollution was bad in 1900,” said Crichton. How much worse would someone in 1900 expect it to “be a century later, with so many more people riding horses?”

Continue reading

“The Most Comprehensive Assault On ‘Global Warming’ Ever”.

Mike Van Biezen is a physicist and former believer in catastrophic man-made global warming. His epiphany occurred about 7 years ago, he says, when he realized that between 1940 and 1980, global temperatures had actually declined mallorcatempsscreen_shot_2015-12-23_at_9.47.41_ama bit all the while CO2 was accumulating in the atmosphere at a high rate. Since then, his research into the theory of global warming has converted him to skepticism. Van Biezen says there are many scientific problems with the assumption that human activity is causing “global warming” or “climate change”. He has picked 10 of the many scientific problems and listed them in his posting on the titled “The Most Comprehensive Assault On ‘Global Warming’ Ever”.

I will use his heading for each of the ten problems and pick out parts of his explanation of the nature of that specific problem. Of course you will get much more out of this if you use the link to his posting and read all of his explanation.

Continue reading

“California Dreamin’” Or Perhaps Hallucinatin’.

California, always trying to be an environmental leader, has recently enacted SB 350 which will require that, by 2030, electrical utilities must get 50% of their power from renewable resources. The bill also requires greenhouse gases emissions (GHGE) be reduced by 40% by 2030 and 80% by 2050 versus the carsonhighwayimages1990 GHGE baseline. Dropped from the bill were measures to compel a 50% reduction in petroleum use by 2030.

These reductions are more stringent than those that failed to get accepted by the nations of the World at the COP21 meeting in Paris. California against the world. Further, even if these SB350 mandated changes are met, they will be too small to even be measureable. That is the definition of futility.

Continue reading