noworldsystem.com


U.N. Kicks-Out Journalist For Asking ClimateGate Question

U.N. Kicks-Out Journalist For Asking ClimateGate Question

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUtzMBfDrpI

 



Global Warming: Poor Paul McCartney has been duped

Global Warming: Poor Paul McCartney has been duped

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8NFoaClXH0

 



50% of the U.S. is covered in snow already

50% of the U.S. is covered in snow already

NoWorldSystem.com
December 11, 2009

It didn’t take long for half of the United States to get slammed with snow (December 11, 2009), last year on December 11, 2008 the U.S. was only covered in 29% of snow. Next week will be even more snow-packed and temperatures even more miserable then last year.

A blizzard has blanketed pretty much all of the Upper Midwest, expecting 16 inches of snow in some areas of the country. The cold this year is so serious that the governor of Wisconsin declared a state of emergency.

Go to NOAA’s NOHSRC National Snow Analysis page to keep track of the white stuff.

San Francisco: People shiver, birds drop dead

As World Considers Treaty to Fight “Global Warming,” Much of U.S. Buried by Blizzard

Russian Scientist: We Should Fear Deep Global Cooling, Not Global Warming

 



Doomsday Climate Cultists Attempt to Convert Kids

Doomsday Climate Cultists Attempt to Convert Kids

NoWorldSystem.com
December 11, 2009

These next clips would be funny if it wasn’t so creepy that the internationalist criminal-scum elite are attempting to convert kids into this new “doomsday cult” and to fear the most unimaginable like huge floods, massive hurricanes and suicidal polar bears. They’re asking kids to have faith in the globalists at Copenhagen to ‘save the world’ and to believe all their doom-and-gloom scenarios so they can pass a ‘global treaty’ or ‘global agreement’ to rip-off mommy and daddy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_9mjBUSDng

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVGGgncVq-4

 



Copenhagen Treaty Creates Global Government Tax

Copenhagen Treaty Creates Global Government Tax

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
December 9, 2009

Lord Christopher Monckton warns that the secretive draft version of the Copenhagen climate change treaty represents a global government power grab on an “unimaginable scale,” and mandates the creation of 700 new bureaucracies as well as a colossal raft of new taxes including 2 percent levies on both GDP and every international financial transaction.

Speaking with The Alex Jones Show, Monckton, who is in Copenhagen attending the UN climate summit, said that when he attempted to obtain a copy of the current draft of the negotiating text agreement, he was initially rebuffed before he threatened an international diplomatic incident unless the document was forthcoming.

“I insisted and it took about 10 minutes and they consulted each other with three or four of them arguing over it – none of them would produce the document….I said I know this treaty exists because this is what the conference is all about,” said Monckton.

Only after Monckton threatened repercussions was he handed the the current draft of the treaty, and the details it contained are perhaps a clue as to why the UN officials were so keen to keep it under wraps.

“Once again they are desperately trying to conceal from everybody here the magnitude of what they’re attempting to do – they really are attempting to set up a world government,” said Monckton, adding that the word “government” was no longer used but the process of further centralization of power into global hands was clearly spelled out in the treaty.

Monckton said that the new world government outlined in the treaty would be handed powers to, “Tax the American economy to the extent of 2 percent GDP, to impose a further tax of 2 percent on every financial transaction….and to close down effectively the economies of the west, transfer your jobs to third world countries – all of that is still in the treaty draft.”

As the leaked document out of Copenhagen reported on by the London Guardian revealed yesterday, this massive new system of global taxation will be paid not to the UN, but directly into the coffers of the World Bank.

“The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions,” reported the Guardian.

Monckton illustrated the size of the new taxes being proposed by noting they amounted to at least half of the entire US defense budget.

“This is how they are going to fund this vast new government they’re setting up,” said Monckton, adding that he counted around 700 new bureaucracies that would be created as a result of the treaty, which would be bankrolled by taxpayers even outside of the raft of new taxes the treaty would create.

Monckton outlined how the new taxes would be enforced, stating, “They’re going to auction allowances to emit greenhouse gases and if you don’t buy an allowance to emit greenhouse gases, you won’t be allowed to emit them,” adding that the text contained a provision for a “uniform global levy of $2 dollars per ton of CO2 for all fossil fuel emissions,” as well as an additional tax on every commercial plane journey, except ones that go in or out of poorer countries.

There would also be a “global levy on international monetary transactions – that means every transfer of money across borders will be taxed,” said Monckton, adding that this would be on top of the GDP tax.

 

Lord Monckton: Obama may sign a “Copenhagen Agreement” instead of Treaty

LifeSiteNews
December 9, 2009

In a brief video released on the Internet, Lord Christopher Monkton is seen giving a speech today in Copenhagen warning that President Obama will try to use his Executive Authority to sign an agreement, rather than a treaty, to commit the United States to undertake measures against climate change that will seriously damage the freedoms and prosperity of America.

Monkton states, “President Obama is going to come here (Copenhagen) and sign the Copenhagen Agreement.” He says it’s no longer being called a treaty specifically because US Senators “know they can’t get a treaty through the US Senate.” Monkton continues explaining, “so, President Obama is going to sign this agreement by his executive authority and he will then put it through both houses of Congress by a vote of simple majority.”

Monkton states that this executive agreement will stand “with almost the same force as a treaty” under the US Constitution. The one large difference, Monkton however notes, is that an Executive Agreement can be repealed by a following president, but a treaty cannot be repealed. Therefore, The British Lord and science adviser to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher noted, “one power that President Obama does not have is to commit the United States unilaterally to measures of a scale and horror envisaged in this treaty or agreement…”

The recent “climategate” revelations provided the basis for especially condemning closing comments from the internationally famous climate sceptic and campaigner against climate hysteria.

Monkton emphasized, “there is no longer any basis whatsoever for saying that any action is required over the climate. We have seen now in the climategate that a couple of dozen bad and extremely malevolent and unpleasant scientists – this clique, this cabal, this conspiracy, because that is what it is, have tried to bend, fiddle and fudge the data, year after year and they’ve now been caught and exposed by the activities of one gallant whistleblower at this very moment when we now know that the climate fraud is the fraud that we all expected it to be.”

Monckton concluded with a warning that the president, “either unaware or aware and uncaring wishes to sign” American “freedom and prosperity away.”

See Lord Monkton’s detailed, one hour, fascinating expose of climate change

Also see Lord Monkton interview on Michael Coren television program

UK’s richest man could make more than £1bn from carbon trading scheme

Abbott warns of $400bn tax bill under draft Copenhagen agreement

 



Al Gore Confrontation Makes ABC National News

Al Gore Confrontation Makes ABC National News

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPeq-qsRrVk

Al Gore Confronted on ClimateGate

 



EPA to Regulate All Aspects of American Life

EPA to Regulate All Aspects of American Life

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gtuuntl8Ylc

Krauthammer: EPA Move May Bring a ‘Revolution on the Administration’s Hands’

“Look, it’s blackmail, a way of saying to Congress: ‘either you do cap-and-trade or we’re gonna do cap, no trade. We’re gonna regulate every aspect of American life.’ This is – if the EPA now has in its power – perhaps it will when acted over time – to intrude into every aspect of American life.” -Charles Krauthammer

 

The EPA Steps In To Regulate Greenhouse Gases In Case Of Cap And Trade Failure

Tyler Durden
Zero Hedge
December 8, 2009

Goldman’s tentacles are smart, and know all about contingency planning. With so much of the firm’s future strategy contingent on Cap And Trade derived profits, the firm is hedging for a downside case scenario. The attached presentation by the Environmental Protection Agency is just the fall back plan. UEA debate notwithstanding, the EPA, after “careful consideration of the full weight of scientific evidence and a thorough review of numerous public comments received on the Proposed Findings published April 24, 2009″ has found that “six greenhouse gases taken in combination endanger both the public health and the public welfare of current and future generations.” Truly an opportune timing for the EPA to come up with this report, seeing how suddenly scientific evidence does not really mean as much as it used to…oh, one month ago. And not to mention that whole Goldman/Cap And Trade backlash of course.

Here are the “definitive” conclusions from the report:

CO2 is dangerous (p.8):

    Pursuant to CAA section 202(a), the Administrator finds that greenhouse gases in the atmosphere may reasonably be anticipated both to endanger public health and to endanger public welfare. Specifically, the Administrator is defining the “air pollution” referred to in CAA section 202(a) to be the mix of six long-lived and directly-emitted greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). In this document, these six greenhouse gases are referred to as “well-mixed greenhouse gases” in this document (with more precise meanings of “long lived” and “well mixed” provided in Section IV.A)

Read Full Article Here

Pelosi: Every Aspect Of Life Must Be Subjected To Inventory

EPA to Bypass Congress to Regulate CO2

 



EPA Says Co2 is Deadly, But Fuel is Good to Drink!

EPA HYPOCRISY

EPA: CO2 is a deadly gas, but uranium, mercury, arsenic, rocket-fuel and drugs in drinking water is perfectly safe.

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
December 8, 2009

While the EPA declares the gas that we exhale to be a deadly poison, as protesters at Copenhagen decry the suffering of polar bears as their population figures increase to record levels, and as delegates in the Danish capital warn of the dastardly peril of cows farting, a New York Times report confirming that U.S. drinking water contains dangerous levels of arsenic, uranium and other radioactive substances barely gets noticed.

Furthermore, the new study shows that the Environmental Protection Agency knew that water systems all over the United States were contaminated with dangerous levels of numerous toxic substances, yet failed to punish the vast majority of water authorities involved.

Since the environmental movement was completely hijacked by globalists hell bent on world government and devastating carbon taxes, real environmental problems have been swept aside as the contrived scam of man-made global warming swallows up all the attention.

Our drinking water is contaminated with toxic waste, our food supply is poisoned by genetically modified garbage, and our consumer products are laced with cancer-causing chemicals, but who cares right? Surely all this pales in comparison to the effort to stop the world warming by a percentage of a degree over the next 100 years?

    More than 20 percent of the nation’s water treatment systems have violated key provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act over the last five years, according to a New York Times analysis of federal data.

    That law requires communities to deliver safe tap water to local residents. But since 2004, the water provided to more than 49 million people has contained illegal concentrations of chemicals like arsenic or radioactive substances like uranium, as well as dangerous bacteria often found in sewage.

But unlike the mammoth threat posed by the life-giving gas carbon dioxide, which the EPA yesterday classified as a health threat to the same humans that exhale it, the Environmental Protection Agency is noticeably less concerned about the fact that our water is filled with contaminants that are “linked to millions of instances of illness within the United States each year.”

Indeed, records show that fewer than 6 percent of the water systems that broke the law were ever punished or fined by the EPA.

“In some instances, drinking water violations were one-time events, and probably posed little risk. But for hundreds of other systems, illegal contamination persisted for years, records show,” according to the article.

The Senate Environment and Public Works committee will question a high-ranking E.P.A. official about why they allowed water companies to continue such contamination without punishment at a hearing today.

According to the study, not only were water systems contaminated with radioactive substances like uranium as well as arsenic, but they were also found to contain cancer-causing solvents and illegal amounts of bacteria.

“The amount of radium detected in drinking water was 2,000 percent higher than the legal limit,” adds the report. Radium is described as “extremely radioactive” and has a half-life of 1602 years. People exposed to radium suffer serious health effects including sores, anemia and bone cancer. The use of radium in paints as late as the 1950’s was eventually halted after many deaths were attributed to exposure to the chemical.

True to form, the NY Times chooses to characterize water which contains deadly radioactive chemicals as “dirty” in its headline!

Millions in U.S. Drink Dirty Water, Records Show – oh its just a bit of dirt you know! Cancer-causing radioactive toxins and poisonous arsenic – its just a little dirty!

“The problem, say current and former government officials, is that enforcing the Safe Drinking Water Act has not been a federal priority,” reports the Times, adding that current and former EPA officials who attempted to make the agency enforce the drinking water law were targeted.

“I proposed drinking water cases, but they got shut down so fast that I’ve pretty much stopped even looking at the violations,” said one longtime E.P.A. enforcement official who, like others, requested anonymity for fear of reprisals. “The top people want big headlines and million-dollar settlements. That’s not drinking-water cases.”

So there you have it – according to the EPA – breathing is a threat to human health – but drinking water laced with arsenic, cancerous carcinogens, and radioactive chemicals is perfectly nutritious!

So pour a fresh glass of toxic tap water, drink up and say cheers to the fact that the government really cares about our health and the real environmental issues – before you drop dead.

Millions in U.S. Drink Dirty Water, Records Show

Court strikes down EPA’s plan on mercury

EPA: American lives less valuable

EPA won’t remove rocket fuel from drinking water

41 Million Americans Have 56 Types of Drugs in Tap Water

 



UN IPCC Chairman Attacks ClimateGate Scandal

UN IPCC Chairman Attacks ClimateGate Scandal

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzQ5f6dzmBs

 



Saudis Call for ClimateGate Investigation

Saudis Call for Independent Investigation on ClimateGate

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jvR05e1KYY

 



EPA to Bypass Congress to Regulate CO2

EPA to Bypass Congress to Regulate CO2

NoWorldSystem.com
December 8, 2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5At6a3c4eVE

The EPA declares itself the regulator of CO2 emissions, allowing itself to cut CO2 emissions without the approval of Congress, bypassing legislation that is currently stalled in the Senate.

Obama’s administration formally declared that CO2 is a dangerous pollutant and will “endanger the public health and welfare of the American people” empowering the EPA to regulate across the country under the law of the Clean Air Act that seeks emissions cut by roughly 17 percent by 2020.

The ruling was welcomed at the opening day of the talk in the Danish capital; “This is very significant in the sense that if…the Senate fails to adopt legislation (on emissions), then the administration will have the authority to regulate,” Yvo de Boer, head of the UN Climate Change Secretariat, told Reuters in Copenhagen.

But top congressional republican James Inhofe warned that EPA’s new “endangerment finding” will “lead to a wave of new regulations, new bureaucracy that will wreak havoc on the American economy and destroy millions of jobs and of course consumers to pay more for electricity and gasoline”. Many republicans are calling for the EPA to rebuke its claims that CO2 is a dangerous pollutant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81RaMybU1ug

Lisa Jackson, the EPA administrator said the move to declare CO2 a toxic pollutant “relied on decades of sound, peer-reviewed, extensively evaluated scientific data”. Jackson denied any manipulation was carried out by the ClimateGate scientists saying that there’s “nothing in the hacked emails that undermines the science upon which this decision is based”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vj1goTq3-rk

President Barack Obama and Al Gore will be attending the Copenhagen conference late next week to further push the illusion that CO2 is a toxic gas. On the same day of the EPA’s announcement, Al Gore visited the White House.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Js8stuihg4M

The Copenhagen globalists including the EPA base their entire argument on the back of the UNIPCC’s CRU scientists which are involved in one of the greatest scandals in modern science, ClimateGate which consists of; Manipulation, Deception, Suppression of Evidence, including having AGW-skeptics fired and removed from the peer-reviewed process and of course breaking FOIA requests by deleting emails and urging other scientists to do so as well. [Source]

With that in mind, EPA’s decision to call CO2 a dangerous pollutant falls flat on its face. The entire Copenhagen summit is all about creating another bubble by the same crooks that gave us the dot-com bubble and the subprime mortgage crisis; Enron and Goldman Sachs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pA6FSy6EKrM

From a massive cap-and-trade derivatives scheme, to a global carbon tax, this is all about plummeting what’s left of the U.S. economy and shutting down life on the planet by reducing CO2 in the atmosphere.

WITHOUT CO2 THERE IS NO LIFE!

“CO2 is not a pollutant. In simple terms, CO2 is plant food,” notes John R. Christy, professor of Atmospheric Sciences at the University of Alabama. “The green world we see around us would disappear if not for atmospheric CO2. These plants largely evolved at a time when the atmospheric CO2 concentration was many times what it is today. Indeed, numerous studies indicate the present biosphere is being invigorated by the human-induced rise of CO2. In and of itself, therefore, the increasing concentration of CO2 does not pose a toxic risk to the planet.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPNiBVU2QIA

In fact, as S. Fred Singer, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia has noted, an increase in CO2 would raise GNP and therefore average income. “It’s axiomatic that bureaucracies always want to expand their scope of operations. This is especially true of EPA, which is primarily a regulatory agency,” writes Singer.

The EPA is may soon be tasked with regulating life in the United States at the behest of a coterie of globalists who are keen to limit economic and industrial activity and check the growth of the herd which they despise and want to scale back to 500 million, as they have proudly announced on the Georgia Guidestones. [Source]

 

Fox News Analysis: ClimateGate, EPA Ruling, Copenhagen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lp9ABzPgC5g

 



ClimateGate: the UN investigation will be a whitewash

ClimateGate: the UN investigation will be a whitewash
Having the IPCC investigate climategate would be like Ken Lay heading up the Enron enquiry.

London Telegraph
December 5, 2009


Rajendra Pachauri

It is rather ironic that the United Nations, a world body that has done more to push the global warming agenda that any other organization, is now vowing to investigate the leaked Climategate emails. Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), told BBC Radio 4:

We will certainly go into the whole lot and then we will take a position on it. We certainly don’t want to brush anything under the carpet. This is a serious issue and we will look into it in detail.

Forgive my scepticism over this, but the United Nations happens to be one of the most inefficient, corruption-riddled, unaccountable and untransparent entities on the face of the earth. It is hard to see how the UN is going to conduct this kind of inquiry with a straight face, let alone an ounce of credibility. I spent several years working on UN issues in Washington, and served as an expert on the Gingrich-Mitchell Congressional mandated Task Force on the United Nations, and nothing I have seen of the UN convinces me that it is capable of carrying out a remotely objective investigation.

And who is the man in charge of the United Nations whitewash/inquiry? Rajendra Pachauri is one of the world’s biggest prophets of climate change doom, which he argues is “the greatest challenge facing humanity.” Last year he shared the Nobel Peace Prize on behalf of the IPCC with Al Gore. Like his colleague Lord Stern, Pachauri ludicrously believes that people should eat less meat to curb carbon emissions.

We don’t need a fake UN panel on Climategate. What is needed is a full Senate investigation as well as Parliamentary inquiry into a massive scandal with major implications for both the US and the UK and their future approach to the global warming issue. And if Congressional hearings are held, who better to have leading the charge on Capitol Hill than the brilliant James Delingpole, who deserves huge credit for almost single-handedly bringing the Climategate débacle to the attention of the American public.

Climategate Investigator Is Member Of Vehemently Pro-Man Made Global Warming Organization

 



ClimateGate CRU Sought Funds From Shell Oil

ClimateGate CRU Sought Funds From Shell Oil

News Busters
December 5, 2009

The Climatic Research Unit at the heart of the ClimateGate scandal sought funds from Shell Oil in the year 2000.

Other e-mail messages obtained from the University of East Anglia’s computers also showed officials at the school’s CRU solicited support from ExxonMobil and BP Amoco, although the nature of this support was not identified.

As climate alarmists and their media minions love to claim that global warming skeptics are all paid shills of Big Oil, it makes one wonder how the press will report these startling revelations discovered by Anthony Watts Friday:

Mick Kelley to Mike Hulme

    Mike
    Had a very good meeting with Shell yesterday. Only a minor part of the
    agenda, but I expect they will accept an invitation to act as a strategic
    partner and will contribute to a studentship fund
    though under certain
    conditions. I now have to wait for the top-level soundings at their end
    after the meeting to result in a response. We, however, have to discuss
    asap what a strategic partnership means, what a studentship fund is, etc,
    etc. By email? In person?
    I hear that Shell’s name came up at the TC meeting. I’m ccing this to Tim
    who I think was involved in that discussion so all concerned know not to
    make an independent approach at this stage without consulting me!
    I’m talking to Shell International’s climate change team but this approach
    will do equally for the new foundation as it’s only one step or so off
    Shell’s equivalent of a board level. I do know a little about the Fdn and
    what kind of projects they are looking for. It could be relevant for the
    new building, incidentally, though opinions are mixed as to whether it’s
    within the remit.
    Regards
    Mick

Earlier that same year, the recipient of this e-mail message, Mike Hulme, sent a message of his own concerning getting “support” from a number of entities (emphasis added):

Mike Hulme to Simon Shackley

    Simon,

    I have talked with Tim O’Riordan and others here today and Tim has a wealth of contacts he is prepared to help with. Four specific ones from Tim are:

    – Charlotte Grezo, BP Fuel Options (possibly on the Assessment Panel. She is also on the ESRC Research Priorities Board), but someone Tim can easily talk with. There are others in BP Tim knows too.
    – Richard Sykes, Head of Environment Division at Shell International
    – Chris Laing, Managing Director, Laing Construction (also maybe someone at Bovis)
    – ??, someone high-up in Unilever whose name escapes me.
    […]
    >SPRU has offered to elicit support from their energy programme
    >sponsors which will help beef things up. (Frans: is the Alsthom
    >contact the same as Nick Jenkin’s below? Also, do you have a BP
    >Amoco
    contact? The name I’ve come up with is Paul Rutter, chief
    >engineer, but he is not a personal contact]
    >
    >We could probably do with some more names from the financial sector.
    >Does anyone know any investment bankers?
    >
    >Please send additional names as quickly as possible so we can
    >finalise the list.
    >
    >I am sending a draft of the generic version of the letter eliciting
    >support and the 2 page summary to Mike to look over. Then this can be
    >used as a basis for letter writing by the Tyndall contact (the person
    >in brackets).
    >
    >Mr Alan Wood CEO Siemens plc [Nick Jenkins]
    >Mr Mike Hughes CE Midlands Electricity (Visiting Prof at UMIST) [Nick
    >Jenkins]
    >Mr Keith Taylor, Chairman and CEO of Esso UK (John
    >Shepherd]
    >Mr Brian Duckworth, Managing Director, Severn-Trent Water
    >[Mike Hulme]
    >Dr Jeremy Leggett, Director, Solar Century [Mike Hulme]
    >Mr Brian Ford, Director of Quality, United Utilities plc [Simon
    >Shackley]
    >Dr Andrew Dlugolecki, CGU [Jean Palutikof]
    >Dr Ted Ellis, VP Building Products, Pilkington plc [Simon Shackley]
    >Mr Mervyn Pedalty, CEO, Cooperative Bank plc [Simon Shackley]
    >
    >
    >Possibles:
    >Mr John Loughhead, Technology Director ALSTOM [Nick Jenkins]
    >Mr Edward Hyams, Managing Director Eastern Generation [Nick
    >Jenkins]
    >Dr David Parry, Director Power Technology Centre, Powergen
    >[Nick Jenkins]
    >Mike Townsend, Director, The Woodland Trust [Melvin
    >Cannell]
    >Mr Paul Rutter, BP Amoco [via Terry Lazenby, UMIST]
    >
    >With kind regards
    >
    >Simon Shackley

Now who is the shill for Big Oil again? Next time somebody brings up that ridiculous argument about skeptics, show them this.

Read Full Article Here

Exxon Calls for a Carbon Tax, Again.

Oil Companies Support Global Warming Hoax, Not Skeptics!

Shell calls for derivatives on carbon trading

 



Gore Confonted on Global Warming Hoax

Gore Confonted on Global Warming Hoax

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ja8TIeaH2pk

 



Copenhagen Will Have HUGE Carbon Footprint

Copenhagen Will Have HUGE Carbon Footprint
At least 41 tons of co2 will be released during Copenhagen Summit

Dailymail
December 7, 2009

It is being hyped as the summit that will save the planet. But, according to critics, next week’s climate change talks in Copenhagen are more likely to cost the earth.

Researchers yesterday estimated that the bill for the 12-day jamboree will top £130million – and will generate as much greenhouse gas as an entire African country.

More than 15,000 delegates and 45,000 green activists are due to descend on the Danish capital over the next two weeks in a meeting described by British economist Lord Stern as ‘the most important since the Second World War’.

They will be joined by at least 5,000 journalists – including 35 from the BBC alone – and 100 world leaders, including Gordon Brown and Barack Obama.

The UN has confirmed flights, rail and bus travel, food and energy from the conference will generate at least 41,000 tons of carbon dioxide.

Read Full Article Here

 

Copenhagen climate summit: 1,200 limos, 140 private planes and caviar wedges


display show it’s religion with halos over figures heads, people swarm around TVs like flies

Telegraph
December 5, 2009

On a normal day, Majken Friss Jorgensen, managing director of Copenhagen’s biggest limousine company, says her firm has twelve vehicles on the road. During the “summit to save the world”, which opens here tomorrow, she will have 200.

“We thought they were not going to have many cars, due to it being a climate convention,” she says. “But it seems that somebody last week looked at the weather report.”

Ms Jorgensen reckons that between her and her rivals the total number of limos in Copenhagen next week has already broken the 1,200 barrier. The French alone rang up on Thursday and ordered another 42. “We haven’t got enough limos in the country to fulfil the demand,” she says. “We’re having to drive them in hundreds of miles from Germany and Sweden.”

And the total number of electric cars or hybrids among that number? “Five,” says Ms Jorgensen. “The government has some alternative fuel cars but the rest will be petrol or diesel. We don’t have any hybrids in Denmark, unfortunately, due to the extreme taxes on those cars. It makes no sense at all, but it’s very Danish.”

The airport says it is expecting up to 140 extra private jets during the peak period alone, so far over its capacity that the planes will have to fly off to regional airports – or to Sweden – to park, returning to Copenhagen to pick up their VIP passengers.

Read Full Article Here

Gore cancels on Copenhagen lecture in the midst of ClimateGate

 



Exxon Calls for a Carbon Tax, Again.

Exxon Calls for a Carbon Tax, Again.

TreeHugger
August 17, 2009

Exxon, the largest oil company in the world has stated that it prefers a carbon tax to a cap and trade system–again–this time, specifically in Australia. This comes on the heels of news last week that Australia’s parliament rejected a cap and trade system for curbing emissions–there won’t be another vote on the bill for at least 3 months (Aussies voted ‘no’ again!). So what’s behind Exxon’s vocal pro-carbon tax stance?

From Bloomberg:

    “A carbon tax is more transparent to consumers, will achieve greater environmental benefits and is more difficult to manipulate than a cap-and-trade program,” John Dashwood, chairman of Exxon’s Australian unit, said in speech notes e- mailed ahead of an address today in Melbourne.

A little puzzling is the fact that Australia’s proposed carbon cap featured relatively low emission reduction targets–as low as 5% reduction from 2000 levels by 2020. Hardly a demanding commitment, at least in the short term (this is why many members of Australia’s own Green party voted against the cap and trade themselves–it wasn’t strict enough).

Nonetheless, some economists, along with experts like James Hansen and Al Gore, prefer the carbon tax option. Throw in Exxon Mobil, and you’ve got yourself an eclectic band of misfits. Economists (and presumably Exxon) argue that the tax is a more efficient and inexpensive way to curb carbon. From Bloomberg:

    Imposing a global carbon tax would ease pressure on the climate more cheaply than emissions trading, according to a study released last week by Danish professor Bjoern Lomborg. A $0.50 tax for each ton of emissions may generate $1.51 in avoided climate damage, compared with costs as high as $68 per ton, resulting in 2 cents of avoided damage, under some emissions-mitigations models, the study said.

Another possible reason for Exxon’s sudden support could be good old fashioned political gamesmanship–the idea of a carbon tax is potentially extremely unpopular (as is anything that includes the word “tax” in its moniker). If the company has reason to believe a carbon tax is very unlikely to actually pass Australian parliament, it can voice support for it and appear environmentally inclined without having to make any actual adjustments. However, Exxon makes for a powerful voice of support, and having the oil giant in favor could draw other businesses’, politicians’, and citizen support for a carbon tax, which could eventually create stricter regulations on the oil giant than a cap would.

Oil Companies Support Global Warming Hoax, Not Skeptics

Shell calls for derivatives on carbon trading

 



MSNBC: It’s ‘Psycho talk’ to say Global Warming is a Hoax

MSNBC: It’s ‘Psycho talk’ to say Global Warming is a Hoax

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmtWFhcnxMY

 



ClimateGate: Mann throws Jones under the bus

ClimateGate: Mann throws Jones under the bus

Andrew Bolt
Herald Sun

The Climategate conspiracists are now blaming each other, with Michael Mann clouting his former friend Phil Jones with his hockey stick:

    One of the scientists to whom the emails were addressed, Professor Michael Mann, the Director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University has moved to distance himself from some of the comments in the emails that suggest scientists did not want the IPCC, the UN body charged with monitoring climate change, to consider studies that challenged the view global warming was genuine and man-made.

    Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s The World Tonight, Prof Mann said: “I can’t put myself in the mind of the person who wrote that email and sent it. I in no way endorse what was in that email.”

    Prof Mann also said he could not “justify” a request from Prof Jones that he should delete some of his own emails to prevent them from being seen by outsiders.

    “I can’t justify the action, I can only speculate that he was feeling so under attack that he made some poor decisions frankly and I think that’s clear.”

    Prof Mann then argued however that there was “absolutely no evidence” that he too had manipulated data, while he also said “I don’t believe that any of my colleagues have done that”.

 



Australian Senate defeats carbon trading bill

Australian Senate defeats carbon trading bill

Guardian
December 2, 2009

The Senate, where the government of the prime minister, Kevin Rudd, does not hold a majority, rejected 41-33 his administration’s proposal for Australia to become one of the first countries to install a so-called cap-and-trade system to slash the amount of heat-trapping pollution that industries pump into the air.

It follows a tumultuous week in Australian politics, which saw the ousting of Malcolm Turnbull as opposition leader, after he had pledged to support the government’s plans for the trading scheme.

The defeat further undermines Australia’s already ailing credibility at the upcoming UN climate change talks in Copenhagen.

Read Full Article Here

 



NASA Involved in ClimateGate

NASA Involved in ClimateGate

Gregg Knapp
Big Government
December 3, 2009

It’s not just the scientists at the Climate Research Unit of East Anglia University who may have criminally violated the Freedom of Information Act (some profesors in the UK and some in the USA), NASA has been stonewalling a FOIA request as well… for years.

    Chris Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, said NASA has refused for two years to provide information under the Freedom of Information Act that would show how the agency has shaped its climate data and would explain why the agency has repeatedly had to correct its data going as far back as the 1930s.

    “I assume that what is there is highly damaging,” Mr. Horner said. “These guys are quite clearly bound and determined not to reveal their internal discussions about this.”

NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies is saying they’re “working on” the FOIA request.

Right. For two years?!

The public affairs guy at GISS is using the Sgt. Schultz defense (”I hear nothing, I see nothing, I know nothing!”)

    He said he was unfamiliar with the British controversy and couldn’t say whether NASA was susceptible to the same challenges to its data. The White House has dismissed the British e-mails as irrelevant.

What we are seeing is in total contradiction to the scientific method. Honest scientists don’t delete their data or use tricks to hide data they don’t like. They don’t insist the science is settled and that anyone who questions them is a nut. They gladly release their data to other scientists so their results can be replicated or errors can be corrected.

Once upon a time the “science was settled” that the world was flat. The “science was settled” that the world was the center of the universe. Whoops.

Much of the data used for the “consensus” that manmade global warming is real came from the CRU and NASA’s GISS. If that data is not accurate and/or has been manipulated it undermines everything. When you consider the trillions of dollars at risk here by policy pushed by this “science,” it’s understandable that Christopher Booker is calling it The Worst Scientific Scandal of Our Generation.

 



We should fear global cooling, not global warming

Prominent Russian Scientist: ‘We should fear a deep temperature drop — not catastrophic global warming’

Climate Depot
October 27, 2009

Total Solar Irradiance over time in watts per square Variation in the TSI during the period 1978 to 2008 (heavy line) and its bicentennial component (dash line), revealed by us. Distinct short-term upward excursions are caused by the passage of faculae on the solar disk, and downward excursions by the passage of sunspot groups.

Co2 is ‘not guilty’, climate change is a natural earthly occurrence that is controlled by solar cycles. We are currently in a dangerous cooling period as the sun is inactive and could last several decades.

(Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc. – Head of Space research laboratory of the Pulkovo Observatory, Head of the Russian/Ukrainian joint project Astrometria – (translated from Russian by Lucy Hancock) Dr. Abdussamatov is featured on page 140 of the 2009 U.S. Senate Report of More Than 700 Dissenting Scientists Over Man-Made Global Warming. Also see “Related Links” below.)

Key Excerpts: Observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in temperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies ahead in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global, and very prolonged, temperature drop. […] Over the past decade, global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global warming has ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep temperature drop. […] It follows that warming had a natural origin, the contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant, anthropogenic increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide does not serve as an explanation for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2 will not be able to cause catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse effect will not avert the onset of the next deep temperature drop, the 19th in the last 7500 years, which without fail follows after natural warming. […] We should fear a deep temperature drop — not catastrophic global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social, demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop, which will directly affect the national interests of almost all countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably weaken the crisis.

Excerpts: Experts of the United Nations in regular reports publish data said to show that the Earth is approaching a catastrophic global warming, caused by increasing emissions of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. However, observations of the Sun show that as for the increase in temperature, carbon dioxide is “not guilty” and as for what lies ahead in the upcoming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global, and very prolonged, temperature drop.

Life on earth completely depends on solar radiation, the ultimate source of energy for natural processes. For a long time it was thought that the luminosity of the Sun never changes, and for this reason the quantity of solar energy received per second over one square meter above the atmosphere at the distance of the Earth from the Sun (149 597 892 km), was named the solar constant.

Until 1978, precise measurements of the value of the total solar irradiance (TSI) were not available. But according to indirect data, namely the established major climate variations of the Earth in recent millennia, one must doubt the invariance of its value.

In the middle of the nineteenth century, German and Swiss astronomers Heinrich Schwabe and Rudolf Wolf established that the number of spots on the surface of the Sun periodically changes, diminishing from a maximum to a minimum, and then growing again, over a time frame on the order of 11 years. Wolf introduced an index (“W”) of the relative number of sunspots, computed as the sum of 10 times number of sunspot groups plus the total number of spots in all groups. This number has been regularly measured since 1849. Drawing on the work of professional astronomers and the observations of amateurs (which are of uncertain reliability) Wolf worked out a reconstruction of monthly values from 1749 as well as annual values from 1700. Today, the reconstruction of this time series stretches back to 1611. It has an eleven-year cycle of recurrence as well as other cycles related to onset and development of individual sunspot groups: changes in the fraction of the solar surface occupied by faculae, the frequency of prominences, and other phenomena in the solar chromosphere and corona.

Analyzing the long record of sunspot numbers, the English astronomer Walter Maunder in 1893 came to the conclusion that from 1645 to 1715 sunspots had been generally absent. Over the thirty-year period of the Maunder Minimum, astronomers of the time counted only about 50 spots. Usually, over that length of time, about 50,000 sunspots would appear. Today, it has been established that such minima have repeatedly occurred in the past. It is also known that the Maunder Minimum accompanied the coldest phase of a global temperature dip, physically measured in Europe and other regions, the most severe such dip for several millennia, which stretched from the fourteenth to the nineteenth centuries (now known as the Little Ice Age).

The search for a relationship between large climate variations and phenomena observed in the Sun led to an interest in finding a connection between periods of change in the terrestrial climate and corresponding significant changes in the level of observed solar activity, because the sunspot number is the only index that has been measured over a long period of time.

Determinative role of the Sun in variations in the climate of the Earth

The Earth, after receiving and storing over the twentieth century an anomalously large amount of heat energy, from the 1990’s began to return it gradually. The upper layers of the world ocean, completely unexpectedly to climatologists, began to cool in 2003. The heat accumulated by them unfortunately now is running out.

Over the past decade, global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global warming has ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep temperature drop (Fig. 7, 11). Meantime the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere over these years has grown by more than 4%, and in 2006 many meteorologists predicted that 2007 would be the hottest of the last decade. This did not occur, although the global temperature of the Earth would have increased at least 0.1 degree if it depended on the concentration of carbon dioxide. It follows that warming had a natural origin, the contribution of CO2 to it was insignificant, anthropogenic increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide does not serve as an explanation for it, and in the foreseeable future CO2 will not be able to cause catastrophic warming. The so-called greenhouse effect will not avert the onset of the next deep temperature drop, the 19th in the last 7500 years, which without fail follows after natural warming.

The earth is no longer threatened by the catastrophic global warming forecast by some scientists; warming passed its peak in 1998-2005, while the value of the TSI by July – September of last year had already declined by 0.47 W/m2 (Fig. 1).

For several years until the beginning in 2013 of a steady temperature drop, in a phase of instability, temperature will oscillate around the maximum that has been reached, without further substantial rise. Changes in climatic conditions will occur unevenly, depending on latitude. A temperature decrease in the smallest degree would affect the equatorial regions and strongly influence the temperate climate zones. The changes will have very serious consequences, and it is necessary to begin preparations even now, since there is practically no time in reserve. The global temperature of the Earth has begun its decrease without limitations on the volume of greenhouse gas emissions by industrially developed countries; therefore the implementation of the Kyoto protocol aimed to rescue the planet from the greenhouse effect should be put off at least 150 years.

[…]

Consequently, we should fear a deep temperature drop — not catastrophic global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social, demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop, which will directly affect the national interests of almost all countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably weaken the crisis.

For complete paper see here:

UN Fears (More) Global Cooling Commeth! IPCC Scientist Warns UN: We may be about to enter ‘one or even 2 decades during which temps cool’

‘Sun Sleeps’: Danish Scientist declares ‘global warming has stopped and a cooling is beginning…

Global Warming could stop ‘for up to 30 years! Warming ‘On Hold?…’Could go into hiding for decades’ study finds

Paper: Scientific evidence now points to global COOLING, contrary to UN alarmism

Meteorologist: ‘Global cooling in its 8th year, declining ocean heat content, sea level rises slowed or stopped, sun in a deep slumber’

Geologist: ‘Records of past natural cycles suggest global cooling for first several decades of the 21st century to about 2030’

Astronomers: ‘Sun’s output may decline significantly inducing another Little Ice Age on Earth’

Indian Geologist: ‘Enjoy Global Warming: Its natural’

Solar wind weakest since beginning of space age

 



Why Global Warming is a Hoax

Why Global Warming is a Hoax

 



Climategate Ringleader Phil Jones to Step Down

Climategate Ringleader Phil Jones to Step Down

Kurt Nimmo
Prison Planet.com
December 1, 2009


Phil Jones

CRU’s Phil Jones will step down from his position as director of the unit that cooked climate change data to hide global cooling. Britain’s East Anglia University says Jones will relinquish his position until the completion of an independent review.

The CRU scandal emerged after anonymous persons gained access to 160 MB of emails and source code. It is uncertain if the evidence implicating Jones and the CRU came from hackers or whistle-blowers.

Lord Monckton, the third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley and adviser to Margaret Thatcher’s policy unit in the 1980s, went on the Alex Jones Show last week and called from criminal prosecution of Jones and his crew of climate change fraudsters.

In a blog entry posted prior to talking with Alex Jones, Monckton noted how Phil Jones and his co-conspirators “have refused, for years and years and years, to reveal their data and their computer program listings.”

Phil Jones and the CRU have stonewalled FOIA requests demanding access to the data. It is alleged he destroyed evidence in an effort to cover-up the fraud.

On Sunday, the Times Online reported that scientists at the University of East Anglia admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based. The CRU was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

On Saturday, the University of East Anglia said that 95% of the CRU climate data set concerning land surface temperatures has been made available to the public for “several years” and that all data will be released as soon as they are clear of non-publication agreements.

Phil Jones told the science journal Nature that he was working to make the data publicly available with the agreement of its owners but this was expected to take some months.

Read Full Article Here

 



Climate Change Data Shredded To Cover Tracks

Climate Change Data Shredded To Cover Tracks

Times Online
November 29, 2009

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

The admission follows the leaking of a thousand private emails sent and received by Professor Phil Jones, the CRU’s director. In them he discusses thwarting climate sceptics seeking access to such data.

In a statement on its website, the CRU said: “We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.”

The CRU is the world’s leading centre for reconstructing past climate and temperatures. Climate change sceptics have long been keen to examine exactly how its data were compiled. That is now impossible.

Roger Pielke, professor of environmental studies at Colorado University, discovered data had been lost when he asked for original records. “The CRU is basically saying, ‘Trust us’. So much for settling questions and resolving debates with science,” he said.

Jones was not in charge of the CRU when the data were thrown away in the 1980s, a time when climate change was seen as a less pressing issue. The lost material was used to build the databases that have been his life’s work, showing how the world has warmed by 0.8C over the past 157 years.

He and his colleagues say this temperature rise is “unequivocally” linked to greenhouse gas emissions generated by humans. Their findings are one of the main pieces of evidence used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which says global warming is a threat to humanity.

 



Al Gore Set To Make Billions On Carbon Tax Scam

Al Gore Set To Make Billions On Carbon Tax Scam


Obama to help Gore’s pocketbook by signing the ‘global climate treaty’ in Copenhagen, Denmark on Dec.7-18

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
November 3, 2009

The New York Times has lifted the lid on how Al Gore stands to benefit to the tune of billions of dollars if the carbon tax proposals he is pushing come to fruition in the United States, while documenting how he has already lined his pockets on the back of exaggerated fearmongering about global warming.

As is to be expected, the article is largely a whitewash and takes an apologist stance in defense of Gore.

However, the NY Times‘ John M. Broder does reveal how one of the companies Gore invested in, Silver Spring Networks, recently received a contract worth $560 million dollars from the Energy Department to install “smart meters” in people’s homes that record (and critics fear could eventually regulate) energy usage.

“Kleiner Perkins and its partners, including Mr. Gore, could recoup their investment many times over in coming years,” states the report, highlighting the fact that Gore is “well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if and when it comes.”

“Critics, mostly on the political right and among global warming skeptics, say Mr. Gore is poised to become the world’s first “carbon billionaire,” profiteering from government policies he supports that would direct billions of dollars to the business ventures he has invested in,” writes Broder.

Since he left office, Gore’s personal net worth has skyrocketed on the back of his advocacy for global warming issues and the financial dividends this has reaped. Gore’s assets totaled less than $2 million in 2001 and although he refuses to give a figure for his current net worth, a recent single investment of $35 million in Capricorn Investment Group, a private equity fund, illustrates just how fast Gore has enriched himself from his climate change bandwagon.

The Times report notes how Gore “has a stake in the world’s pre-eminent carbon credit trading market.” As we reported back in March, before he became President Barack Obama also helped fund the profiteers of the carbon taxation program that he is now seeking to implement as law.

The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) has direct ties to both Al Gore and Maurice Strong, two figures intimately involved with a long standing movement to use the theory of man made global warming as a mechanism for profit and social engineering. Gore’s investment company, Generation Investment Management, which sells carbon offset opportunities, is the largest shareholder of CCX.

Read Full Article Here

 

ClimateGate: Phil Jones has collected a staggering $22.6 million in grants

IceAge Now
November 21, 2009

Excerpts from a post by Michael Shedlock – “It’s now official. Much of the hype about global warming is nothing but a complete scam. The global warming thesis was completely fabricated.

“Inquiring minds are reading Hacked: Hadley CRU FOI2009 Files on The Reference Frame by Luboš Motl, a physicist from the Czech Republic.

“So far, the most interesting file I found in the “documents” directory is pdj_grant_since1990.xls which shows that since 1990, Phil Jones has collected a staggering 13.7 million British pounds ($22.6 million) in grants.

“Phil Jones, the main criminal according to this correspondence, has personally confirmed that the website was hacked and that the documents are authentic. See Briefing Room.

 



White House on ClimateGate: The Debate is Over

White House on ClimateGate: The Debate is Over

 



Rise of sea levels is ‘the greatest lie ever told’

Rise of sea levels is ‘the greatest lie ever told’

Telegraph
March 28, 2009

If one thing more than any other is used to justify proposals that the world must spend tens of trillions of dollars on combating global warming, it is the belief that we face a disastrous rise in sea levels. The Antarctic and Greenland ice caps will melt, we are told, warming oceans will expand, and the result will be catastrophe.

Although the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) only predicts a sea level rise of 59cm (17 inches) by 2100, Al Gore in his Oscar-winning film An Inconvenient Truth went much further, talking of 20 feet, and showing computer graphics of cities such as Shanghai and San Francisco half under water. We all know the graphic showing central London in similar plight. As for tiny island nations such as the Maldives and Tuvalu, as Prince Charles likes to tell us and the Archbishop of Canterbury was again parroting last week, they are due to vanish.

But if there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change. And the uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story.

Despite fluctuations down as well as up, “the sea is not rising,” he says. “It hasn’t risen in 50 years.” If there is any rise this century it will “not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm”. And quite apart from examining the hard evidence, he says, the elementary laws of physics (latent heat needed to melt ice) tell us that the apocalypse conjured up by
Al Gore and Co could not possibly come about.

The reason why Dr Mörner, formerly a Stockholm professor, is so certain that these claims about sea level rise are 100 per cent wrong is that they are all based on computer model predictions, whereas his findings are based on “going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world”.

When running the International Commission on Sea Level Change, he launched a special project on the Maldives, whose leaders have for 20 years been calling for vast sums of international aid to stave off disaster. Six times he and his expert team visited the islands, to confirm that the sea has not risen for half a century. Before announcing his findings, he offered to show the inhabitants a film explaining why they had nothing to worry about. The government refused to let it be shown.

Similarly in Tuvalu, where local leaders have been calling for the inhabitants to be evacuated for 20 years, the sea has if anything dropped in recent decades. The only evidence the scaremongers can cite is based on the fact that extracting groundwater for pineapple growing has allowed seawater to seep in to replace it. Meanwhile, Venice has been sinking rather than the Adriatic rising, says Dr Mörner.

One of his most shocking discoveries was why the IPCC has been able to show sea levels rising by 2.3mm a year. Until 2003, even its own satellite-based evidence showed no upward trend. But suddenly the graph tilted upwards because the IPCC’s favoured experts had drawn on the finding of a single tide-gauge in Hong Kong harbour showing a 2.3mm rise. The entire global sea-level projection was then adjusted upwards by a “corrective factor” of 2.3mm, because, as the IPCC scientists admitted, they “needed to show a trend”.

When I spoke to Dr Mörner last week, he expressed his continuing dismay at how the IPCC has fed the scare on this crucial issue. When asked to act as an “expert reviewer” on the IPCC’s last two reports, he was “astonished to find that not one of their 22 contributing authors on sea levels was a sea level specialist: not one”. Yet the results of all this “deliberate ignorance” and reliance on rigged computer models have become the most powerful single driver of the entire warmist hysteria.