Shades of Galileo

Recently, a second round of emails taken from the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia were released online. This release -- dubbed "ClimateGate 2.0" -- is once again revealing that those scientists and politicians pushing an alarmist view of Earth's climate being in danger due to manmade carbon dioxide emissions have engaged in deception, distortion, intimidation and even criminal activities as pertains to Freedom of Information legislation.

As bad as the revelation has been, the response by those whose careers and financial interests are dependent upon such alarmist dogma has been draconian.

Donna Laframboise who hosts the excellent climate change skeptic blog No Frakking Consensus and is the author of The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken For The World's Top Climate Expert recently reported on how fellow blogger Roger Tattersall -- who runs Tallbloke's Talkshop -- was recently subjugated to officially sanctioned persecution.

Tallbloke just happened to be one of the first people to report and link to the latest batch of released emails. Because of it, last week the police came to his home and seized both his computers and router and even attempted to coerce access to his blog. You can read more about it via a National Post article authored by Ms. Laframboise: Climate Crackdown.

And Tallbloke was not the only person being targeted. As it turns out, the U.S. Justice Department had sent a formal request to blogging company WordPress to have all communications and records ("evidence" as they put it) for Tallbloke as well as Jeff ID at the Air Vent (http://NOconsensus.wordpress.com) as well as noted Canadian mathematician -- and co-destroyer of Michael Mann's hockey stick -- Steve McIntyre's Climate Audit blog.

This is more than a little disturbing. The original ClimateGate emails clearly revealed criminal breaches of Access to Information laws on both sides of the ocean. Did the U.S. Justice Department send the police out to seize the computers of those involved? No. Did they send any notice to the University of East Anglia or Penn State (Michael Mann's employer) to have their data files and emails frozen as "evidence" of a crime? No.

The only action taken in response to the original ClimateGate release were complete whitewashes (greenwashes as it were) by both UK officials who barely lifted a finger in their examinations and Penn State who didn't even depose key figures who would have revealed a great deal about what was really going on.

And yet average citizen bloggers who simply redirected readers to information from another source that was out on the internet are being treated as criminals. Why? Because they did the one thing that is not to be tolerated when dealing with climate change alarmism: they were skeptics.

It just goes to show, one cannot question the supposed science nor the stances of the religious leaders of the day without facing totalitarian authority.

Science is the child of skepticism.

When skeptics are treated as heretics, you are no longer dealing with science. You are dealing with the blind faith of a religion.

From the makers of Scam Wow!

Definitely the solution to global warming / climate change / climate disruption / insert-next-ill-conceived-and-deceptive-terminology-here.

* Viewer Discretion is Advised *

China's Increase = Canada's Total

So, it looks like John Baird is once again taking flak from global warming / climate change / climate disruption / [insert next useless term here] critics. Again. Why? Because he happened to say the truth: all the efforts by countries like Canada to decrease greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are going to be pointless when placed alongside the increases made by China.

It's completely mind-blowing how climate change alarmists can keep a straight face talking about how there are no other options when it comes to "saving" the planet Earth except to stop our contributions to GHG... and at the same time they try and downplay the dramatic increase of GHG in China.

As if the Earth is going to hold different countries to different standards the way alarmists do.

Let's just look at the CO2 component of the GHG equation. Now, these are 2007 figures but we'll use them just to give an example:

• Canada's total CO2 emissions in 2007 were 557,340 thousand metric tons.
• China's total CO2 emissions in 2007 were 6,538,367 thousand metric tons.

According to the numbers, Canada's emissions decreased by 2% while China's increased by 8%. If we were to apply that figure to the 2007 levels:

• Canada reduced emissions by 11,147 thousand metric tons to 546,193 thousand metric tons
• China increase emissions by 523,069 thousand metric tons to 7,061,436 thousand metric tons

So, basically, the total of all emissions by Canada are barely above just what China increased in terms of GHG emissions. And yet the politico alarmists say that Canada is the problem in this equation?

I think these critics need to start looking at basic mathematics courses.

If China is allowed to do whatever it wants -- as is status quo -- just to maintain present GHG levels, every year a country the size of Canada would have to eliminate all of it's GHG emissions. That's just to maintain present levels. And yet the alarmists claim to want to lower levels back to where they were a couple of decades ago.

John Baird is right and these idiots know it. They don't want to admit it because it usurps their position as some kind of holier-than-thou moral authority. Too bad they don't realize that your average Canadian -- when given the numbers -- are going to see right through this and know that the alarmists are lying about how close to the edge we are.

Climate change skepticism is on the rise. With leaders like this, I wonder why...

Climate Change? SuperGod will stop it!

I just have to shake my head.

First off, I'm a climate change skeptic. The evidence that has been put forth that humans are causing a catastrophic shift in the Earth's climate has more holes than it takes to fill the Albert Hall.

When you have systems that chart sections of Lake Michigan at being well above boiling and of course Michael Mann's "hide the decline" and you have a temperature monitoring system that fails its own basic quality controls, but with the alarmists not even acknowledging it? Sorry, but if somebody can't acknowledge even the most glaring mistakes, they can't be following the scientific method.

And the court of public opinion is swaying away from the alarmists' side to the more rational point of view that the science still needs to be ironed out before we destroy our entire economies chasing a measly 1 degree temperature correction. People are starting to notice how the alarmists' arguments are downright hysterical and that there seems to be a more calm, rational point of view amongst those who aren't really buying into the climate change catastrophe.

And then... we have people like this...

I'm sorry, but what the hell?!? Did I just hear that right? In one breath this guy talks about the "word of God" being infallible while quoting from the Book of Genesis and in the next he's talking about the dinosaurs?

This is why the left and political moderates don't take the skeptical point as seriously as it should. Instead of having scientific discussions to debate scientific issues, we have religious-zealot, government representatives arguing against science with anecdotal creation stories.

It's people like this who drive the whole climate change debate right into the ditch.