[FlingWingFlyer]

I’m always skeptical when someone says, you can keep doing what you’re doing, I just want you to pay me to do it. That’s what is going on with the commie Cap and Tax scheme.

[labette]

".. making fools and liars out of our politicians."

The three words aren't synonymous ?

[True Republican Patriot]

AMEN!! Fantastic Article by an Expert and a Fantastic Post!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Trying out a new ....to me....Linux operating system to help with my vision problems (Vinux) ....hope this looks OK.

[fred2008]

Thanks for the find!

[rlmorel]

Excellent. Ping for later...

[Wuli]

ping

[Senator_Blutarski]

Bump for later

[The_Media_never_lie]

If I had only had the wisdom to short carbon futures when this debacle was unfolding, I could have made lots of money! Such a silly scam!!!

[SuziQ]

AGW Hoax ping!

[TigersEye]

Let’s be perfectly clear. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, and other things being equal, the more carbon dioxide in the air, the warmer the planet. Every bit of carbon dioxide that we emit warms the planet. But the issue is not whether carbon dioxide warms the planet, but how much.

I'm glad this guy is coming around but he's still willfully ignoring some basic tenets of science. If the theory proves itself to not be the operative factor the question of whether the theory is valid or not becomes irrelevant.

No Smoking Hot Spot (The Australian)

The missing hotspot (JoNova)

Those two articles take Greenhouse Theory at face value and by the criterion set up in the theory itself finds no evidence of warming on the basis of greenhouse effect.

The Hidden Flaw in Greenhouse Theory

Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics

Harvard astrophysicist dismisses AGW theory, challenges peers to 'take back climate science'

It Is Impossible For A 100 ppm Increase In Atmospheric CO2 Concentration To Cause Global Warming

Simple Chemistry and the Real Greenhouse Effect.

Those five articles each show that Greenhouse Theory has no basis in reality due to a direct conflict with the known laws of physics. No wonder the smoking gun "hotspot" can't be found.

Claim That Sea Level Is Rising Is a Total Fraud

That article pretty much puts the kibosh on any serious trend of planetary warming from any cause. Think about it. If there is absolutely no sign at all of rising sea levels how could the planet be warming? Beyond the centuries long slow warming of the earth and rising of the seas of course. But that is only a few millimeters per century due to the inter-glacial period we are in.

------------------------------------------------------------

The absence of a 'hotspot' means that we can assume, for sake of argument, that Greenhouse Theory is correct and conclude that both man and nature put together are not increasing greenhouse gasses enough to cause any warming that may be happening. A theory cannot simultaneously prove itself right and wrong.

[Northern Yankee]

Outstaning article.

[Windflier]

Great article, Ernest. Thanks for posting it. I may just pass it along to my email list.

The article brings up a pet peeve of mine, which is, that the so-called science channels and programs on cable (and PBS) continue to sing the ‘Climate Change’ mantra, even when the whole subject has been proven to be rife with fraud and untruths.

[Carry_Okie]

Good piece, but still missing both solar forcing and the resulting amount of CO2 released from the ocean due to the change in solubility in sea water, both of which are major factors in what we see.

[rogue yam]

ping

[Paradox]

This is a GREAT article. I am in agreement with him pretty much. I am not a GW denier, nor a denier in the effects of CO2, I just question the HOW MUCH that the alarmists have been trumpeting for years now. It good to see some rationality returning to at least some of the scientists involved.

[Halgr]

Great Post.

[Steely Tom]

There are now several independent pieces of evidence showing that the earth responds to the warming due to extra carbon dioxide by dampening the warming. Every long-lived natural system behaves this way, counteracting any disturbance, otherwise the system would be unstable. The climate system is no exception, and now we can prove it.

The person who wrote this may be a scientist, I don't know, but he makes an embarrassing mistake in technical language here.

Dampening is, I suppose, the use of water to knock down a fire or moisten a cloth.

The word for a dynamic effect that tends to decrease the amplitude of a system that's oscillating about an equilibrium value is damping, as in "damping constant" or "damping factor" or "damping coefficient."

[JDoutrider]

Bookmark

[Tunehead54]

Can’t believe AGW is not dead yet bump! ;-)