Cloudy With A Chance of Executions: Kim Jong Un Warns Meteorologists About “Incorrect Forecasts”

Kim_Jong-il_PortraitWe have all cursed the weather man on occasion but North Korean forecasters are facing a more tangible threat this week. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has turned his menacing eye on meteorologists and warned that there are “many incorrect forecasts.” Since reports state that Kim Jong Un had his wife’s former musical group executed, forecasters are understandably concerned that one unpredicted rain shower could bring lead showers. If Al Roker gets a call with a job offer from Pyongyang he might want to read the fine print.


Kim has of course continued his father’s policy of cutting off his country and virtually starving the population while he lives lavishly as a type of community godhead. There is no indication that he is anything more than a thuggish dolt. However, he went to the state-run Hydro-Meteorological Service to give guidance to the meteorologists that they need to avoid wrong forecasts. The problem is that his government has not only cut itself off from the world but the world’s technology. While spending a good portion of his revenues on weapons and a nuclear program, Kim has left North Korean in the stone age. Forecasters would have probably pointed out that they have been left with the scientific equivalent to a rock and metal rod for predictions, but that would result in a 100% chance of dead weathermen.

With a drought worsening the nation’s lack of food, Kim reportedly visited the site “to learn in detail about meteorological observation and weather forecast.” He is shown giving instructions to the meteorologists from his official state-recognized natural brilliance.

173 thoughts on “Cloudy With A Chance of Executions: Kim Jong Un Warns Meteorologists About “Incorrect Forecasts”

  1. Wish he would do the same with climate scientist as Earth celebrates it’s 18th year in a row in no significant Global Warming. “The Pause” continues.

  2. “He is shown giving instructions to the meteorologists”

    Obama is no different he gave instructions to the EPA a few weeks ago.

  3. Kim Jong Un with the weather. Today there is a 90% chance of executions.

    Deniers are entertaining:

    Objection: Global temperatures have been trending down since 1998. Global warming is over.

    Answer: At the time, 1998 was a record high year in both the CRU and the NASA GISS analyses. In fact, it blew away the previous record by .2 degrees C. (That previous record went all the way back to 1997, by the way!)

    According to NASA, it was elevated far above the trend line because 1998 was the year of the strongest El Nino of the century. Choosing that year as a starting point is a classic cherry pick and demonstrates why it is necessary to remove chaotic year-to year-variability (aka: weather) by smoothing out the data. Looking at CRU’s graph below, you can see the result of that smoothing in black.

    http://grist.org/climate-energy/global-warming-stopped-in-1998/

    At least Un has a (reported) belief in science, which is more than can be said for deniers…..:

    Kim said there had been “many incorrect forecasts as the meteorological observation has not been put on a modern and scientific basis,” according to the official Korean Central News Agency. He added that the country needed proper meteorological observations in order to protect people and property from disaster.

    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/06/12/north-korean-leader-kim-complains-about-inaccurate-weather-service/

  4. Kim Jong Un may not have heard of global warming induced climate change, or the currently forming El Nino.

    Those realities make weather prediction like landing planes in a fog.

    It is easier to predict the climate than it is the local weather.

    Like Darren said, meteorologists in wrong-wing denier districts and in Kim Jong Un’s district should consider: “Forecasters predict incidents of weather in Pyongyang”

    Or perhaps the Kim should consider what the wing-nuts in the Carolinas did.

    They outlawed sea level rise:

    There is virtually universal agreement among scientists that the sea will probably rise a good meter or more before the end of the century, wreaking havoc in low-lying coastal counties. So the members of the developers’ lobbying group NC-20 say the sea will rise only 8 inches, because … because … well, SHUT UP, that’s because why.

    That is, the meter or so of sea level rise predicted for the NC Coastal Resources Commission by a state-appointed board of scientists is extremely inconvenient for counties along the coast. So the NC-20 types have decided that we can escape sea level rise – in North Carolina, anyhow – by making it against the law. Or making MEASURING it against the law, anyhow.

    (Social Dementia Causes Heated Misunderestimations – 2). And Kim, don’t forget to give a hat tip to those republicans down in NC for the idea.

  5. joe blow: Some of us were wondering when you’d turn up since one of the threads turned to global warming.

    You and your co-worker, schulte aren’t swaying any minds here. The overwhelming amount of science, data, and observation confirm predictions of a global climate change.

    You guys carry on and the rest of the world will set about doing what needs to be done.

  6. At least Al Roker tells the truth. If Kim can top the $7-10 million/year salary, he’d be worth every penny. Steer clear of the garlic and broccoli rabe AL. Kim might not like the after effects.

  7. Longest Stretch in the Hurricane Record to go without a MAJOR Hurricane Strike on the U.S. Coast Cat 3-5 will be nine years October 24 2014 if one does not strike before then.

    2013 One of the Least Active Hurricane Seasons on Record and World Wide Tropical Activity remains between 30-40 year lows for the 4th year in a row.

    What you heard was as the globe warms so do the oceans leading to more intense hurricanes.

    Record Low Tornadic activity 2013 one of the least on record, so far well below average to start 2014. No increasing trends in F3-5 over the last 50 years.

    What you heard was as the globe warms violent tornadoes will become more frequent and intense.

    Arctic Ice NOT Ice Free 2013. NW Passage is not open for business. After achieving near record low levels the Arctic is FULL of Ice. Greenland is not melting, at least not from temperature, barley gets above 32 degrees on a sunny day in summer.Niagara falls froze over twice this past winter and the Great Lakes had over 90% of Ice coverage. IT”S STILL THERE IN LAKE SUPERIOR IN THE MONTH OF JUNE.

    What you heard was the Arctic will be Ice Free in 2013. Al Gore say 2014 how ever with the VERY QUICK refreeze experienced it’s gonna be a while as there is only about 60 days left before the temperatures start trending towards winter again and the Great Lakes will never freeze again.

    Antarctic same as Arctic above except they don’t put a year on it. The Truth ? Global Sea Ice is WAY WAY WAY above average. How much ? IT”S A RECORD LEVELS

    Northern Hemisphere Snow Cover Highest on Record for the last 5 years.

    What you heard was as the globe warms it will warm in winter and “Snowfall will become a thing of the past” Dr. David Viner

    Listen I could go on and on and on. To call me a denier is name calling and is in violation of the civility rule. If you wish to address me or my comments please refer to me as MR. BLOW. Joe to the people who know me at the NSA.

  8. Dredd,

    Want to go on a camping trip? Mt. Shasta 10,000Ft, Ca. (the peak of sanity). Got to get up at 5:00am to beat the ice pack melt. Had a freeze dried meal the night before.
    I was in a tent, unzipped the sleeping bag, rolled over, and we were climbing to the summit of Mt. Shasta in less than half an hour. Now that’s what I call progress.

  9. Turley wrote “lives lavishly as a type of community godhead”

    Actually, he reminds me of a typical American CEO, making an insanely high salary, screwing his workers, and being generally incompetent (e.g. Target’s Gregg Steinhafel). The two main differences are that CEOs generally don’t kill people (except in 1948 Donora, the nuclear industry, and a few other areas) and instead of an obscene golden parachute, he lives the life of Jack Welch until he dies. I’m shocked you don’t admire Kim Jong-un.

    “Kim Jong Un had his wife’s former musical group executed”

    Kim Jong-un’s former girlfriend appears to have reappeared alive, so the story of the Unhasu Orchestra executions is murky.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/10837897/Executed-Kim-Jong-Un-girlfriend-reappears-on-North-Korea-television.html

    And the photo you chose is of Kim Jong-il, Kim Jong-un’s father (go to the Wikipedia page on Kim Jong-il, go halfway down, and find the photo with the caption, “Portraits of Kim Jong-il and his father in the Grand People’s Study House in Pyongyang”).

    Your Honor, we move for a mistrial.

  10. If Kim Jong Un is as goofy as he is portrayed in the Western press, yet he still has enough support by the military and Korean money to stay in power, then there is a good chance that any other country – including the US, could have an equally goofy leader supported by the military and the 1%. Germany did. Satisfy your local military industrial/security complex and nothing else matters.

  11. Joe Blow

    Longest Stretch in the Hurricane Record to go without a MAJOR Hurricane Strike on the U.S. Coast Cat 3-5 will be nine years October 24 2014 if one does not strike before then.

    2013 One of the Least Active Hurricane Seasons on Record and World Wide Tropical Activity remains between 30-40 year lows for the 4th year in a row.

    What you heard was as the globe warms so do the oceans leading to more intense hurricanes.

    Record Low Tornadic activity 2013 one of the least on record, so far well below average to start 2014. No increasing trends in F3-5 over the last 50 years.

    What you heard was as the globe warms violent tornadoes will become more frequent and intense.

    Arctic Ice NOT Ice Free 2013. NW Passage is not open for business. After achieving near record low levels the Arctic is FULL of Ice. Greenland is not melting, at least not from temperature, barley gets above 32 degrees on a sunny day in summer.Niagara falls froze over twice this past winter and the Great Lakes had over 90% of Ice coverage. IT”S STILL THERE IN LAKE SUPERIOR IN THE MONTH OF JUNE.

    What you heard was the Arctic will be Ice Free in 2013. Al Gore say 2014 how ever with the VERY QUICK refreeze experienced it’s gonna be a while as there is only about 60 days left before the temperatures start trending towards winter again and the Great Lakes will never freeze again.

    Antarctic same as Arctic above except they don’t put a year on it. The Truth ? Global Sea Ice is WAY WAY WAY above average. How much ? IT”S A RECORD LEVELS

    Northern Hemisphere Snow Cover Highest on Record for the last 5 years.

    What you heard was as the globe warms it will warm in winter and “Snowfall will become a thing of the past” Dr. David Viner

    Listen I could go on and on and on. To call me a denier is name calling and is in violation of the civility rule. If you wish to address me or my comments please refer to me as MR. BLOW. Joe to the people who know me at the NSA.
    =======================
    You forgot “See! the Earth is flat after all.”

    Once upon a time the Earth was flat, causing the stars and planets to orbit around it, because it was also the center of the universe.

    Weather on the flat Earth was stable, in that, it was always either winter, summer, fall, or spring at the same time on the vast flatness.

    Then the Earth was changed into a globe by librul scientists.

    So, all those planets went into orbit around stars like our Sun, and now even the stars are no longer orbiting the Earth.

    Additionally, ever since the Earth became no longer flat, instead becoming a globe orbiting the Sun, there has been both summer and winter at the same time on Earth.

    For example, now as we speak “it” has been threating to become 122 deg. F. (50 deg. C) in Australia, while “it” is super cold at the very same time in the flat lands in the U.S. Midwest.

    Libruls have made it difficult for some to “get it” now, because “it” is summer near Antarctica and “it” is winter in Kansas at the same time.”

    (The Damaged Global Climate System).

    You really do live on a globe, so you need a global perspective on climate.

    Not even a year ago 6,000 people were killed by a hurricane (typhoon) which is typical of what is happening on the globe.

  12. I wish there was a like button Mr. Keebler. Can you please pass out some of your cookies so I don’t have to worry about it. I know that as soon as people eat your cookies and step outside their door they will start to feel better. They’ll remember that don’t believe in any of that fake global warming crap and that they are in control of their own life. I promise as soon as you finish eating Mr. Keeblers cookies you’ll feel right as rain.

  13. Joe Blow

    Longest Stretch in the Hurricane Record to go without a MAJOR Hurricane Strike on the U.S. Coast Cat 3-5 will be nine years October 24 2014 if one does not strike before then.

    =======================
    Wrong.

    One hit Alaska last year:

    This year had fewer hurricanes than expected, nevertheless we had a lot of typhoons and cyclones.

    One typhoon, Wipha, of the several to hit nations around Japan, went all the way from the south west Pacific up through Japan, on to Alaska with hurricane force winds there, then diminishing into a low and going across Canada then back down into the central part of the U.S., then weakening more before going off into the Atlantic.

    (How Fifth Graders Analyze Hurricane Sandy – 2).

    Last time I checked Alaska has more coastline than all the rest of the continental U.S. put together.

  14. doglover wrote “If Kim Jong Un is as goofy as he is portrayed in the Western press”

    I have written about the DPRK extensively on my blog and “goofy” is not an accurate word to describe Kim Jong-un. Kim is a Korean Henry VIII, with Western media concentrating on the tawdry and bizarre. I would not describe a country which imprisons as many as 200,000 people in concentration camps as goofy.

    “Satisfy your local military industrial/security complex and nothing else matters”

    This is a good comment. Kim will not stay in power unless he panders to the military, which is allowed to steal donated food and sell it on the black market while ordinary North Koreans starve.

  15. Judge Dredd During the past five decades, an average of 5.6 MAJOR Hurricanes struck the United States per decade. During the preceding five decades, and average of 8.4 Major Hurricanes struck the United States. Major Hurricane strikes occurred 50 percent more often 50-100 years ago than they have during the past 50 years. World Wide Tropical Cyclone activity remains between 30-40 year lows for the 4th year in a row and THERE IS NO INCREASING TRENDS IN SUPER TYPHOONS. Baboon deaths however are on the increase.

  16. Judge Dredd bumped his head

    One hit Alaska last year ? Really ? Just because an area of Low Pressure produces “Hurricane Force Winds” DOES NOT MAKE IT A HURRICANE

    Both the North Atlantic and North Pacific often produce areas of low pressure FREQUENTLY in Winter.leading to Low pressure systems that produce “Hurricane Force Winds”

  17. Oh and Dredd Remnants of Typhoon Whipa doesn’t work either.
    Of course it all depends on what your definition of is, is

  18. Joe Blow

    Judge Dredd During the past five decades, an average of 5.6 MAJOR Hurricanes struck the United States per decade. During the preceding five decades, and average of 8.4 Major Hurricanes struck the United States. Major Hurricane strikes occurred 50 percent more often 50-100 years ago than they have during the past 50 years. World Wide Tropical Cyclone activity remains between 30-40 year lows for the 4th year in a row and THERE IS NO INCREASING TRENDS IN SUPER TYPHOONS. Baboon deaths however are on the increase.
    =======================
    Denier Blow.

    It has been a long time since the U.S. was the center of the universe.

    That happened when about 7 billion people were discovered on the other side of the flat Earth when librul scientists took over.

    Now we have to consider the Earth’s climate on a glove with hundreds of nations.

    Except deniers who do not understand geography or climate science.

    Have you heard about the U.S. Report and the IPCC report, both of which should stop you from advocating pollution.

    Pollution which a recent scientific paper said will cause human extinction if it is not stopped:

    Despite the uncertainty in future climate-change impacts, it is often assumed that humans would be able to adapt to any possible warming. Here we argue that heat stress imposes a robust upper limit to such adaptation. Peak heat stress, quantified by the wet-bulb temperature TW, is surprisingly similar across diverse climates today. TW never exceeds 31 °C. Any exceedence of 35 °C for extended periods should induce hyperthermia in humans and other mammals, as dissipation of metabolic heat becomes impossible. While this never happens now, it would begin to occur with global-mean warming of about 7 °C, calling the habitability of some regions into question. With 11–12 °C warming, such regions would spread to encompass the majority of the human population as currently distributed. Eventual warmings of 12 °C are possible from fossil fuel burning.

    Heat stress is already a leading cause of fatalities from natural phenomena. While fatalities appear associated with warm nights, hot days alter the lifestyles and work productivity of those living at low latitudes. Both impacts will clearly worsen in warmer climates, but most believe humans will simply adapt, reasoning that humans already tolerate a very wide range of climates today. But when measured in terms of peak heat stress—including humidity—this turns out to be untrue. We show that even modest global warming could therefore expose large fractions of the population to unprecedented heat stress, and that with severe warming this would become intolerable.

    (The Military NSA Can’t Hack My Car Nor Can AGW Make Us Extinct).

    Even Kim Jong Un wants to be happy with the weather.

    But he too lives on a flat Earth.

  19. Oh and Dredd Hurricane Force winds means winds to NEAR 72mph far from being any type of MAJOR or SUPER TYPHOON status LOL

  20. Joe Blow,

    You are still dangerously silly.

    Things have gotten much worse on the globe and you say they have gotten much better.

    I am glad your denier people in congress do not have the power that Kim Jung Un has.

    “There will be no climate change and that is an order.”

  21. So lets recap. You give the remnants of a Super Typhoon that barley produced winds of 72mph and get it confused with it still being a Super Typhoon that strikes Alaska when common areas of Low pressure during the Northern Pacific winter produce the same on a more frequent basis as a rebuttal to my comment and I’m a flat earthier. Well I would rather be that than have a flat head LOL

  22. Could it possibly be in the North Pacific Winter months because there are alot of Low pressure systems that produce winds to HURRICANE FORCE LOL

  23. Joe Blow

    Oh and Dredd Hurricane Force winds means winds to NEAR 72mph far from being any type of MAJOR or SUPER TYPHOON status LOL
    ====================
    Hurricane force winds hit the coastal U.S. last October.

    Wipha was the first typhoon to first go west in the Pacific then north to Japan, then northeast to Alaska with hurricane force winds, then east across Alaska to Canada, then southeast across Canada down to the U.S., and then east out into the Atlantic ocean.

    The typhoon following it in November, Haiyan, killed over 6,000 people in the Philippines and was the strongest to ever reach land.

    “Typhoon Haiyan, the deadliest typhoon to hit the island nation in its history, destroyed or damaged about 16 million homes when it struck in early November.”

    “Haiyan is also the strongest storm recorded at landfall, and unofficially the strongest typhoon ever recorded in terms of wind speed. As of January 2014, bodies were still being found.”

    That was about 6 months ago.

    At least one typhoon off Australia halted searches for the missing airliner that still has not been found.

    On the other side of your flat Earth.

  24. Joe Blow

    So lets recap. You give the remnants of a Super Typhoon that barley produced winds of 72mph and get it confused with it still being a Super Typhoon that strikes Alaska when common areas of Low pressure during the Northern Pacific winter produce the same on a more frequent basis as a rebuttal to my comment and I’m a flat earthier. Well I would rather be that than have a flat head LOL
    =====================
    You need a globe shaped head if you want to think about global warming and the damaged global climate system scientifically.

    All weather is local to yokels.

    Think big.

    Think global.

  25. Hurricane force winds hit the coastal U.S. last October.

    THAT DOESN’T MEAN THEIR WAS A HURRICANE

    Wipha was the first typhoon to first go west in the Pacific then north to Japan, then northeast to Alaska with hurricane force winds, then east across Alaska to Canada, then southeast across Canada down to the U.S., and then east out into the Atlantic ocean.

    SO ARE YOU SAYING THE ATLANTIC HAD A PACIFIC TYPHOON WAS IT STILL CALLED TYPHOON WIPHA AS IT CROSSED INTO CANADA THE U.S. AND INTO THE ATLANTIC LOL

    The typhoon following it in November, Haiyan, killed over 6,000 people

    TROPICAL STORM THELMA 1991 KILLED OVER 5000 AND YOUR POINT IS. ONE STORM DOES NOT MAKE THE LONG TERM TREND. WORLDWIDE TROPICAL CYCLONE ACTIVITY REMAINS AT 30-40 YEAR LOWS. NO INCREASING TREND IN THE NUMBER OF SUPER TYPHOONS IN THE RECORD.

  26. Joe Blow,

    You are your favorite weatherman.

    Some of us don’t trust your ability in that realm, so, could you kindly do a favor and quote an official weather source for your assertions?

  27. Who knew with the preponderance of science that in this modern age we would have our modern day flat earthers? It’s mindboggling.

  28. Dear Joe Blow and Kim Jung Un,

    “January 21, 2014
    RELEASE 14-024

    NASA Finds 2013 Sustained Long-Term Climate Warming Trend

    NASA scientists say 2013 tied with 2009 and 2006 for the seventh warmest year since 1880, continuing a long-term trend of rising global temperatures.

    With the exception of 1998, the 10 warmest years in the 134-year record all have occurred since 2000, with 2010 and 2005 ranking as the warmest years on record.

    NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York, which analyzes global surface temperatures on an ongoing basis, released an updated report Tuesday on temperatures around the globe in 2013. The comparison shows how Earth continues to experience temperatures warmer than those measured several decades ago.

    The average temperature in 2013 was 58.3 degrees Fahrenheit (14.6 Celsius), which is 1.1 F (0.6 C) warmer than the mid-20th century baseline. The average global temperature has risen about 1.4 degrees F (0.8 C) since 1880, according to the new analysis. Exact rankings for individual years are sensitive to data inputs and analysis methods.

    “Long-term trends in surface temperatures are unusual and 2013 adds to the evidence for ongoing climate change,” GISS climatologist Gavin Schmidt said. “While one year or one season can be affected by random weather events, this analysis shows the necessity for continued, long-term monitoring.”

    Scientists emphasize that weather patterns always will cause fluctuations in average temperatures from year to year, but the continued increases in greenhouse gas levels in Earth’s atmosphere are driving a long-term rise in global temperatures. Each successive year will not necessarily be warmer than the year before, but with the current level of greenhouse gas emissions, scientists expect each successive decade to be warmer than the previous.”


    your pal,
    NASA

  29. No one denies the Earth has warmed just as no one can deny the Earth has cooled. But when you factor everything that a warming world is suppose to produce ie More Hurricanes Droughts Floods Fire Typhoons Tornadoe’s Extra Marital affairs yada yada yada the empirical evidence doesn’t show it.

  30. In case you didn’t know

    Global Warming Makes Couples Cheat, Says Dating Website
    If you’re married in Miami, you might want to get out of town this summer. No, not to avoid the hurricanes — to avoid a nasty divorce.

    A new report blames global warming for rising rates of infidelity, especially bad news for couples in Miami, where rising tides and raging hurricanes remind us all how much extracurricular sex we could be having on a daily basis.

    http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/cultist/2014/05/global_warming_makes_couples_cheat_says_dating_website.php

  31. Joe Blow

    Hurricane force winds hit the coastal U.S. last October.

    THAT DOESN’T MEAN THEIR WAS A HURRICANE
    ======================
    Call it a typhoon on a diet if you want.

    Semantics.

    But be careful of that Kim Jung Un dood.

  32. Joe Blow

    No one denies the Earth has warmed just as no one can deny the Earth has cooled …

    Joe Blow

    … Global Warming Makes Couples Cheat, Says Dating Website
    ======================
    Thanks for at least trying to link to an official site you consider to be authoritative on global warning induced climate change.

    It explains a lot.

  33. Kim Jung Un,

    The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for April 2014 tied with 2010 as the highest on record for the month …” – NOAA / NCDC

    Kimmy, leave those kids alone!

  34. Oh I see so you want authoritative

    The graph shows that in the late 1800’s activity was at the highest. Keep in mind how Hurricanes were recorded back then through observations on land and ship reports. There were no satellites. How many more were not counted because they were Fish Storms and didn’t get seen by satellite imagery. Then followed by a long term decline until we hit around 1930 and a 15 year uptick to around late 1950 then another decline until 1995 when we get another uptick but remaining below the 1800’s when there were no satellites. Then followed by another decline. Now to go with this particular decline the United States is in the longest stretch in the hurricane record going back to the 1800’s to go without a Major Hurricane Strike Cat 3 or Higher. 2013 one of the least active hurricane seasons on record and world wide Tropical Cyclone Activity remains at 30-40 year lows for the 4th going on 5th year in a row.

  35. Nick Spinelli

    All scientists believed that heavier objects fell faster than lighter objects.
    =====================
    Therefore they still do, because there was no scientist to confront them.

    Or, not all scientists believed, therefore, a scientist proved some other scientists wrong.

    Some still believe the olden way because all scientists can be wrong ya know.

  36. “If scientists were wrong on one thing, they are wrong on everything.

    I tell if they are right or not by asking myself.” – Larry Luddite

  37. With increased National Doppler radar coverage, increasing population, and greater attention to tornado reporting, there has been an increase in the number of tornado reports over the past several decades. This can create a misleading appearance of an increasing trend in tornado frequency. To better understand the variability and trend in tornado frequency in the United States, the total number of EF-1 and stronger, as well as strong to violent tornadoes (EF-3 to EF-5 category on the Enhanced Fujita scale) can be analyzed. These tornadoes would have likely been reported even during the decades before Doppler radar use became widespread and practices resulted in increasing tornado reports. The bar charts below indicate there has been little trend in the frequency of the stronger tornadoes over the past 55 years.

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/climate-information/extreme-events/us-tornado-climatology/trends

  38. I Like this part where NOAA says

    “The bar charts below indicate there has been little trend in the frequency of the stronger tornadoes over the past 55 years.”

    since this was written 2013 one of the least active Tornado season on record with a well BELOW average start to 2014

  39. “Since reports state that Kim Jong Un had his wife’s former musical group executed, forecasters are understandably concerned that one unpredicted rain shower could bring lead showers.” – JT

    And since other reports say they saw her singing after the first report of her death, perhaps the weather Uns will predict the resurrection of the dead next.

    No biggy … you get shot … you rise back to life … what’s the worry?

  40. Paul C. Schulte

    Hurricanes are weather, not climate.
    =================
    They are both but who wants to talk semantics in a life and death scenario?

  41. Nick Spinelli

    All scientists believed the liver pumped blood through our circular system up until 300 years ago.
    ================
    So what made it stop … blowviating?

  42. Joe:

    In industry, if someone said he’d homogenized the data to correct for heat island effects, but lost much of the raw data, so it could not be checked by peers, many of the original testing stations are missing, he compared current data from modern equipment with data produced by equipment 100 years old, he blocked requests for data to cover up the loss, and he included a paper written by a non-peer reviewed non-profit, we’ll we’d all have taken him out to get drunk. And then he would have put on his big boy pants and started afresh the next day. And that’s not counting the fact that every single computer model has been wrong. IPCC has consistently had a political agenda, and frequently gets reprimanded for ignoring basic science.

    http://www.naturalnews.com/042304_un_climate_change_report_selective_data_junk_science.html

    I do not know if there is anthropomorphic warming. No one does. When someone loses the raw data, you start over.

    What I do know is that if the climate is not changing today, it will tomorrow. Look at the fossil record. Look at ancient coastlines. Look at the Medieval Warming Period, the Little Ice Age. Look at the fact that Polar Bears evolved white coats to adapt to a cooling climate. Look at the levels of methane gas produced in the time of megafauna, or of dinosaurs.

    Mankind cannot freeze the entire globe at today’s climate, pardon the pun. And why should we? Why is today’s climate “better” than periods when it was warmer, and teemed with life? Or colder, during our Ice Ages? Extinction is the tool of evolution. Our climate has changed since Earth first gathered a gaseous envelope. And it will continue to do so long after we are gone. Flora and fauna evolve and adapt or it goes extinct. And we must adapt, because our world will not stop changing just because mankind walks the Earth.

    “Climate change” has cache, and so we funnel billions of dollars into global cap and trade taxes, carbon markets, etc. Meanwhile, we do very little to address the mercury that has contaminated the oceans. In fact, what do we do? We promote CFLs to combat Global Warming, which will increase mercury pollution in the environment. We leave islands of plastic and trash floating in the Pacific. Arsenic from mining in our water table. We ignore deforestation and de-vegetation, and pollutants that destroy our phytoplankton and algae, and those are the oxygen factories of Earth.

    Of course I want to maintain a gas profile that is optimum to mammalian life. I want to continually improve technology, which helped us evolve beyond chopping down Old Growth Forests for firewood. But can we please turn our attention to the less popular but universally acknowledged problems of mercury contamination and pollution in general?

    Do you know not too long ago there was talk about launching missiles to release particulates to cool the planet? Considering the record cold temperatures we’ve been experiencing, that would have been a bad plan.

    Do you know studies have determined that CA was subject to hundred-year droughts routinely, and the past couple of hundred years have actually been unusually wet? And that was BEFORE the Industrial Revolution!

  43. It’s not really a theory when everything that happens “proves” your theory.

    Record cold proves your theory.

    Record warmth proves your theory.

    No change proves your theory.

    Mild hurricane seasons prove your theory.

    A single tornado proves your theory.

    An earthquake proves your theory.

    A drought proves your theory.

    Studies that determine that droughts used to be longer proves your theory.

    That is not science. That is politics.

    Since we all know that climate has always changed, since the beginning of our atmosphere, how, exactly, do we propose to have mankind force the globe to maintain today’s climate?

  44. When I was in college, my professors predicted another Ice Age as the next climate change. It wasn’t a question of when climate would change, it was when, and in what direction.

    And climate is so complicated, involving complex relationships between oceanic currents and direction, glaciers, sun activity, humidity, vegetation, volcanic activity . . . the list is enormous. Any change in one component can have unforeseen consequences.

    We could be uniting to fight universally agreed upon hazards, like air quality, water pollution, heavy metal contamination, deforestation, etc. But all those funds going to Global Warming take away from the money available for these clear and present dangers.

  45. I enjoyed the discovery that dinosaurs used to roam the Arctic, which was much warmer in the past, with more diverse life.

  46. A recent paper, the first I know of, clearly says if things continue as is, not just civilization will collapse but human species will become extinct (PNAS).

    Video explains why:

  47. My wife has an intense dislike for weather people which borders on homicidal. So, I can sympathize with Kim’s need for tidier weather predictions. :D

  48. Karen S

    When I was in college, my professors predicted another Ice Age as the next climate change.

    =======================
    Those types still exist.

    And still say the same thing.

    Here is a college professor who always stuck with the science, and who will explain where the deniers came from:

  49. Dredd:

    The Earth will continue after humans are gone.

    Any conclusions you copy and paste are based on data with the problems I have already outlined.

    In science, you do not say, “I’ve homogenized the data correctly. Even though I lost some of the original raw data so you cannot check my work, you can TRUST me. And please ignore the fact that 100% of my computer models have been wrong, and failed to predict accurately.”

    Academics and industry function very differently, apparently.

    I am not a “denier.” I cannot form a conclusion from a study that flawed. No one can. Science dictates the experiment must start over from scratch.

    Sometimes scientists have a hard time facing the fact that their experiment failed and they have to repeat. I’m sympathetic, but that is no excuse to keep pressing on.

    Do you not question the reliability of data measured in the hundredths of degrees Celsius taken with equipment more than 100 years old? Were data points taken accurately? What about the vast difficulty of taking 100 years of data points and extrapolating conclusions applicable to forecasting and hind- casting millions of years? Do you have no concerns about the billions of dollars taken away from important issues like mercury contamination and pumped into climate change? Because there is no magic money tree that creates additional funds. They must come from somewhere. If you commit them to one area they cannot be used in another.

  50. Phil Jones, head of the Climate Research Unit, admitted that the rural stations in China were likely moved, which completely undermined his paper on China’s warming. This paper required that the stations had not moved. He also admitted that he lost the original data.

    IPCC is rife with scandals such as this.

    Science looks at all data, the good, the bad, and the ugly. Lost data is part of this overall picture.

    And yet this faulty paper has been used as the cornerstone for many subsequent articles, and probably that little movie above.

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/feb/15/phil-jones-lost-weather-data

  51. Karen S,

    Your sources are obvious from your statements. Anyone with any knowledge of the scientific reality understands that.

    But more than that, some understand the deep fear this type of thinking, and it is thinking, comes from.

    That is not a bad or good thing, just a reality.

    None of us want to see our civilization go down, ourselves and/or our relatives with it.

    You advance the old IBM rhetoric of FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt).

    This is no replacement for anything … it is denialism.

    Which is a psychological dynamic.

    Deniers denying that they are deniers is a classic phenomenon.

    As the video explains, the same propaganda the tobacco industry used until the very last minute was a lie, criminal, and inexcusable.

    The fossil fuel industry is doing exactly the same thing, and it is obvious that you, Paul, Joe, and others here have been had by the propaganda they are fostering.

  52. Karen S

    Dredd:

    The Earth will continue after humans are gone.

    ========================
    Oh Alka-Seltzer, what a relief that is.

    Nothing matters then eh?

    Kill, maim, destroy … whatever … nothing matters.

    Climate has changed in the past … So throw Kim Jung Un into the sea or don’t … it doesn’t matter.

    That is a good one for the kids: “oil qaeda is destroying the place but we don’t care, the Earth will be here after all of you kids are gone, Whoopeee!!!!

    http://exxonhatesyourchildren.com/

  53. Meanwhile, the heat continues. On Wednesday, New Delhi enters day 10 of a blistering heat wave that’s broken at least one long-standing record, with part of the city peaking at 118 degrees Fahrenheit (47.8 degrees Celsius) on Sunday. During that stretch, the average high temperature at the airport in New Delhi has been 109.9 Fahrenheit (43.2 Celsius), with the average low an astonishing 84 Fahrenheit (28.9 Celsius). Days upon days with nighttime low temperatures above 80 Fahrenheit can be deadly, especially for those without a way to keep cool.” (India’s Heat Wave Is Unbearable).

    Just tell India “the Earth will still be here when you are gone” … yeah … that should do it.

    It would be interesting to see Kim Jung Un react to his weather people telling him “don’t worry, be happy, the Earth will still be here is the weather gets bad.”

  54. Dredd,
    I guess that some folks’ concern for other people’s children ends once they are born. This is hyperbole of course, but it sometimes seems to be so.

  55. Paul, Don’t the weather people in Phoenix simply say sunny and warm, sunny and very warm, or sunny and hot?

  56. The last two years in Australia have been the hottest ever recorded, and there’s no sign that the heat wave is going to stop any time soon, a report released Sunday showed.

    According to data compiled by Australia’s biggest crowd-funding campaign, the independent Climate Council, the period from May 2012 to April 2014 was the hottest 24-month period ever recorded in Australia. Next month, when the two-year period spans from June 2012 to May 2014, those above-average temperatures are expected to be even greater, the report said.

    “Climate change is here, it’s happening, and Australians are already feeling its impact,” Professor Will Steffen of the Climate Council told the Guardian on Sunday. “We have just had an abnormally warm autumn, off the back of another very hot ‘angry summer.’”

    (Australia Experiences Hottest Two Years in a Row).

    Nobody is that exceptional on a globe … what is going around is coming around to us all.

  57. dredd – the Climate Council seems unable to tell the difference between climate and weather. If they cannot do that, how can they figure out climate change. Besides, climate is cyclical. We know that from what little data Michael Mann has allowed us to look at or acknowledge.

  58. Paulette, your link isn’t working. Phoenix sounds like a hellish place to live and I’m not even referring to the weather.

  59. Dredd

    Karen S

    When I was in college, my professors predicted another Ice Age as the next climate change.

    ======================
    What years did you go to college?

    Oops … not a fair question perhaps.

    But I think your mind has fooled you, with a little help from your Oil-Qaeda friends:

    n 2008, the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society published a full article dedicated to debunking this myth. Here’s a short excerpt:

    …the following pervasive myth arose: there was a consensus among climate scientists of the 1970s that either global cooling or a full-fledged ice age was imminent.…A review of the climate science literature from 1965 to 1979 shows this myth to be false. The myth’s basis lies in a selective misreading of the texts both by some members of the media at the time and by some observers today. In fact, emphasis on greenhouse warming dominated the scientific literature even then.

    So where did this odd idea—that within relatively recent memory, climate scientists were all worried about cooling, not warming—come from? After all, as far back as 1965, Lyndon Johnson’s President’s Science Advisory Committee detailed the risk of global warming due to fossil fuel burning in an extensive appendix to a report on the environment. Concerns about warming were prominent even then.

    Nonetheless, the 1970s were part of a temporary cooling trend, at least in the northern hemisphere, and some journalists caught on. Some scientists also fanned the flames. Perhaps most notably, in 1975 Newsweek magazine ran a story entitled “The Cooling World.” This is arguably the most frequently cited piece of evidence for those who claim that scientists, at the time, thought global cooling was coming. That’s even though the story’s author, Peter Gwynne, has himself set the record straight, writing, “Several atmospheric scientists did indeed believe in global cooling, as I reported in the April 28, 1975 issue of Newsweek. But that was then.”

    And even then, this was certainly not a consensus position in the scientific community.

    (Bratters Are Wrong).

  60. paulette – you have to get near the end of the article to find out that CA would dry up before Phoenix. Talk about hyperbole.

  61. Paulette’s link, inter alia, says:

    “If, in summer, the grid there fails on a large scale and for a significant period of time, the fallout will make the consequences of Superstorm Sandy look mild. Sure, people will hunt madly for power outlets to charge their cellphones and struggle to keep their milk fresh, but communications and food refrigeration will not top their list of priorities. Phoenix is an air-conditioned city. If the power goes out, people fry.

    In the summer of 2003, a heat wave swept Europe and killed 70,000 people. The temperature in London touched 100 degrees Fahrenheit for the first time since records had been kept, and in portions of France the mercury climbed as high as 104. Those temperatures, however, are child’s play in Phoenix, where readings commonly exceed 100 for more than 100 days a year. In 2011, the city set a new record for days over 110 degrees: there were 33 of them, more than a month of spectacularly superheated days ushering in a new era.”

    Phoenix sounds like a good place to open a Survivalist School.

  62. Darren Smith

    I wonder how many hairdressers he had to execute to achieve his iconic Pompadour hair style.
    ==================
    Yep.

    Hairdressers must have a good reputation.

    RIP.

  63. Thanks Paulette, sounds like New Orleans before Katrina, a natural disaster waiting to happen because of man’s insistence on living where they probably shouldn’t.

  64. Paul ~

    How is that hyperbolic? San Diego is a desert that averages only 10″ of rain a year. During our winter this year we’ve had only 5″ and we’ve already experienced a very early start to our ‘fire season.’

  65. Hyperbolic is making out that the article is all about Phoenix and then admitting at the end that CA will go first.

  66. Annie

    Dredd,
    I guess that some folks’ concern for other people’s children ends once they are born. This is hyperbole of course, but it sometimes seems to be so.
    ============================
    I noticed that with Sarah.

    What if she was a weatherwoman reporting to Kim Jung Un … would he bring her to term?

  67. Dredd:

    Your replies make absolutely no sense. I seriously doubt you have actually read any of the IPCC papers. I have. You failed to address a single one of my valid concerns, such as missing original data, testing stations that were moved when climate change papers depended on their remaining in original locations, reliance on the accuracy of measurements made on equipment over 100 years old, extrapolating data from 100 years to millennia, etc . . . You know . . . science questions. Not emotional questions. Or videos. Or other people’s ideas. Or personal attacks.

    Industry is highly regulated. This would never have passed muster. But apparently it’s a bit more Wild West in academia.

    I cannot say one way or the other if there is any anthropomorphic climate change going on. I can say with absolute certainty that if the climate is not changing now, it will at some time in the future. Because it always has.

    In the meantime, why don’t we clean up the mercury and floating plastic in our oceans?

  68. Dredd:

    In my area, the weather was unseasonably mild. We had the fewest numbers of days over 100 degrees in decades last summer.

  69. Dredd:

    “Your sources are obvious from your statements.” What, you mean the IPCC? If you actually READ their documents, you can see for yourself that their conclusions are not even in keeping with their own data.

  70. Joe Blow
    Wish he would do the same with climate scientist as Earth celebrates it’s 18th year in a row in no significant Global Warming. “The Pause” continues.
    = = =
    April 2014… HOTTEST MONTH ON RECORD!
    http://www.weather.com/news/science/environment/april-2014-global-temperature-ties-warmest-record-noaa-20140520

    13 of the 14 HOTTEST YEARS ON RECORD happened since the year 2000.
    http://www.weather.com/news/science/environment/13-14-hottest-years-record-occurred-21st-century-wmo-20140324

  71. Here is a summary of the IPCC AR4 and AR5:

    http://judithcurry.com/2014/01/06/ipcc-ar5-weakens-the-case-for-agw/

    This is from the IPCC’s OWN reports:

    Lack of warming since 1998 and growing discrepancies with climate model projections
    Evidence of decreased climate sensitivity to increases in CO2
    Evidence that sea level rise in 1920-1950 is of the same magnitude as in 1993-2012
    Increasing Antarctic sea ice extent
    Low confidence in attributing extreme weather events to anthropogenic global warming

    And yet, inexplicably, their conclusion that anthropomorphic climate change is extremely likely has come under intense scrutiny in the scientific community – because it is in direct contradiction to their own preceding data.

    I know that people who are not very interested in science do not follow this very closely. They just latch on to the conclusions propagated in the media.

    But do not let other people tell you what to think. Follow this link, and read for yourself the IPCC’s own report. And then try to reconcile it with the conclusion.

    Pure science and politics do not mix. And having people on the IPCC who have financial interests that benefit from climate change politics is not a good formula for pure science.

  72. From IPCC AR5:

    “[T]he rate of warming over the past 15 years (1998–2012) [is] 0.05 [–0.05 to +0.15] °C per decade)which is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951 (1951–2012) [of] 0.12 [0.08 to 0.14] °C per decade.”

  73. From IPCC AR5:

    “the hiatus is attributable, in roughly equal measure, to a decline in the rate of increase in effective radiative forcing (ERF) and a cooling contribution from internal variability (expert judgment, medium confidence). The decline in the rate of increase in ERF is primarily attributed to natural (solar and volcanic) forcing but there is low confidence in quantifying the role of forcing trend in causing the hiatus, because of uncertainty in the magnitude of the volcanic forcing trend and low confidence in the aerosol forcing trend.”

  74. “After expecting an increase of 0.2oC per decade in the early decades of the 21st century from the AR4 statements, the rate of warming over the past 15 years is only ~0.05C.
    The IPCC AR5 bases its projection for the period 2016-2036 of 0.10 to 0.23oC per decade on expert judgment, rather than on the climate model results
    The IPCC does not have a convincing or confident explanation for the hiatus in warming.”

  75. “It is seen that the rate of rise during 1930-1950 was comparable to, if not larger than, the value in recent years. This IPCC’s analysis does not support an acceleration in the rate of sea level rise in the latter 20th century, and hence the data does not support the IPCC’s conclusion of a substantial contribution from anthropogenic forcings to the global mean sea level rise since the 1970s.”

  76. From AR5:

    “Anthropogenic forcings are very likely to have contributed to Arctic sea ice loss since 1979. There is low confidence in the scientific understanding of the observed increase in Antarctic sea ice extent since 1979, due to the incomplete and competing scientific explanations for the causes of change and low confidence in estimates of internal variability.

    Arctic temperature anomalies in the 1930s were apparently as large as those in the 1990s and 2000s.There is still considerable discussion of the ultimate causes of the warm temperature anomalies that occurred in the Arctic in the 1920s and 1930s.”

    Translation – mankind caused Arctic sea ice decline, but they do not know what is causing Antarctic sea ice increase. Nor do they know what caused the warm anomalies in the Arctic in the 20s and 30s.

  77. Again from AR5:

    “Confidence is low for a global-scale observed trend in drought or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the middle of the 20th century, due to lack of direct observations, methodological uncertainties and geographical inconsistencies in the trends. Based on updated studies, AR4 conclusions regarding global increasing trends in drought since the 1970s were probably overstated.”

    Whoops. That previous AR4 report that global warming was causing droughts was overstated.

    But do you see a correction in the media or in the general body of knowledge? Nope.

  78. People can ridicule me, label me with childish names like “denier”, make fun of my intelligence.

    But my conclusions are based on the International Panel of Climate Change’s own reports. You know, the IPCC whose conclusions mold global policy. And everyone in the science community is, or should be, aware of the recent backlash against IPCC for the contradiction between their conclusions and their own data.

    My conclusions are also based on admissions by the had of the Climate Change Unit, and other scientists. It is based on data that’s come up missing, testing stations that have been moved.

    Look . . . this doesn’t fly in industry science. I have no idea why it would in academia. If anyone does this in the pharmaceutical industry, they get sued.

  79. Max – do you have an opinion on the Arctic ice cores that revealed that there used to be a rich biodiversity there? At one time even dinosaurs roamed in a more temperate Arctic.

  80. Can any of you folk, so steadfast in your faith, explain to me how one species, homo sapiens, proposes to forcibly stabilize the climate at today’s values, when our climate has changed for billions of years?

    Our climate changed before homo sapiens evolved. And if we all left the Earth on a shuttle tomorrow, it would change after we’re gone.

    So, since you guys know so much about science, I’m just wondering how our species shall force the climate to stay the same, and why we should?

  81. Max – the headlines are so great. But the IPCC’s OWN data shows that there has been a hiatus in global warming for 15 years.

    So . . . what does that tell you?

  82. Ah, yes, the controversial Hockey Stick. The reason why the Medieval Warming Period and the Little Ice age were deliberately left off was because they were regional, rather than global. And yet that’s like saying if Europe was plunged into another Little Ice Age, we would just ignore those temperature points from our global climate change data because it was regional. Does that make sense to anyone? Average temperatures across the globe and regions, unless those regions start behaving in a manner that contradicts what you want your data to say, so you just leave it out???

    Academia!

  83. What? No cutesy Twitter slogans or videos to contradict the IPCC’s own data? No explanation for why I’m stupid for reading and copying excerpts from the IPCC’s AR5 paper?

    I do not depend on others to tell me what to think. I research data for myself.

    And from their own omissions, and from their own data, and from the shameless conflict of interest as those on the IPCC financially benefit from global cap and trade, there is only one conclusion: anthropomorphic climate change is all based off of the same flawed study, including data that was missing and testing stations that were moved. Why does it matter if stations were moved? Well, for example, if one was in the shade and then moved next to a reflective building with a heat island effect. Or, conversely, if someone planted a tree nearby that shaded the testing station. Or if they put down hot blacktop nearby. The scientist was supposed to correct for heat island effects and the growth or removal of shade trees, but HE DIDN’T. He lost the original data that he homogenized. We cannot count on that homogenization being done correctly, because every single climate change computer model has been wrong. In science, we don’t “take your word for it.” It must be checked. You know, otherwise cold fusion would have been accepted decades ago. And if all everyone has to work on is the same homogenized data, and the raw data is gone, how is that supposed to be peer reviewed? He wrote a paper based on testing stations remaining stationary, and then admitted they were moved.

    All subsequent studies are all based on this flawed data.

    I have no idea if there is any anthropomorphic climate change. How can I come to a conclusion when the raw data is gone???

    Oh, and for those “of the faith”, remember when it was Global Warming, and then they had to change it to Climate Change because the Earth was not actually warming? And then remember when headlines screamed that hurricanes were caused by Climate Change, and then there was eating crow when a study came out that the hurricane seasons were actually incredibly mild?

    In the meantime, we’re pouring money into Climate Change and ignoring mercury pollution, islands of floating trash in the Pacific, pesticide and herbicide contamination, etc.

  84. Just think what we could have accomplished if we put the money and effort we directed to Climate Change (and fighting about it) into removing mercury from the food chain.

  85. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/359688/new-york-times-op-ed-it-was-mistake-believe-hockey-stick-rich-lowry

    Berkley Professor of Physics Richard Muller, states that the problem with the Hockey Stick graph is that it completely ignores large fluctuations in temperature. It has artificially smoothed out temperatures. His concern is that when we continue to see large fluctuations in temperature, it will seem to contradict the Hockey Graph, and climate change will be abandoned.

    So, even scientists who support the theory of anthropomorphic climate change have a problem with the Hockey Stick graph.

  86. Personally, I do not call losing original data and mistakenly assuming that testing stations remained stationary “scientific integrity.”

  87. You guys are wasting your time trying to argue with paid trolls. The only effective defense against such creatures who insist on sitting beside you on the park bench and dribbling nonsense is…..

    Sharpies!

  88. Hahaha! According to the David Suzuki link, the IPCC would qualify as “climate change deniers!”

    The IPCC’s own data shows they have no understanding for why the Antarctic sea ice has been increasing, that the previous AR4’s report that drought was caused by ACC was over stated, that all their computer models have been wrong, and that there has been a 15 year hiatus with no explanation.

    That is from the IPCC itself!

    But, thank goodness we have bloggers and catchy phrases like “deniers”.

  89. I’m sorry, but I’m finding this so hilarious.

    I’ve posted actual excerpts from the AR5 report released by the IPCC.

    And NO ONE has discussed the ACTUAL data. Just posted cute Tweets, and op-ed blogs, and hurray for science!

  90. Oh, don’t forget that it’s racist to believe the IPCC’s own report.

    For anyone who doesn’t know, the International Panel on Climate Change is the source of climate change data.

  91. Conflict of interest in the most recent AR5 report:

    http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2014/03/21/conflict-of-interest-in-the-ipccs-new-chapter-7/

    “But here’s where the conflict-of-interest comes in. Challinor, while serving as a guest editor for the March 2013 edition of the Agricultural and Forest Meteorology journal, decided that 20 research papers deserved to be published. Via this act of publication, these papers gained “peer-reviewed scientific literature” status.
    As a lead author of the IPCC’s Chapter 7, Challlinor then decided that nine of these 20 papers were crucial to Chapter 7′s conclusions. In other words, the person passing judgment on the merits of these papers was not independent. He had an agenda. He was an IPCC lead author who wished to cite these papers in his IPCC chapter.
    But it gets better. Challinor is himself the co-author of three of these 20 papers (see here, here, and here). So first he writes three papers. Then, wearing his journal editor hat, he decides that all three of them are worthy of publication in the very same edition of a peer-reviewed journal. Then, wearing his IPCC lead author hat, he arranges for two of his own works to be cited in the IPCC’s Chapter 7.”

  92. http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/03/31/the-ipccs-latest-report-deliberately-excludes-and-misrepresents-important-climate-science/2/

    “NIPCC: “Terrestrial ecosystems have thrived throughout the world as a result of warming temperatures and rising levels of atmospheric CO2. Empirical data pertaining to numerous animal species, including amphibians, birds, butterflies, other insects, reptiles, and mammals, indicate global warming and its myriad ecological effects tend to foster the expansion and proliferation of animal habitats, ranges, and populations, or otherwise have no observable impacts one way or the other. Multiple lines of evidence indicate animal species are adapting, and in some cases evolving, to cope with climate change of the modern era.”

    “NIPCC: “A modest warming of the planet will result in a net reduction of human mortality from temperature-related events. More lives are saved by global warming via the amelioration of cold-related deaths than those lost under excessive heat. Global warming will have a negligible influence on human morbidity and the spread of infectious diseases, a phenomenon observed in virtually all parts of the world.”

    Many climate scientists say they “believe in man-made global warming” even though their own research contradicts key points in the arguments advanced in support of that hypothesis. They say this because they believe the IPCC is telling the truth about findings outside their areas of expertise. Ditto influential science journals such as Nature and Science, which claim to speak on behalf of “climate science.”

    How credible are the NIPCC reports? Endorsements by prominent scientists, reviews, and citations in peer-reviewed journals appear at the Web site mentioned above. NIPCC reports are produced by scores of scientists from around the world (some 20 countries so far), cite thousands of peer-reviewed studies, and are themselves peer-reviewed.”

  93. This encapsulates the problem with any debate with Liberals.

    If you take a non-Liberal-sanctioned point of view, they are unable to calmly and reasonably discuss the pros and cons of each side. They immediately demonize their opponents and come up with catchy slogans and names like “deniers.”

    Every time. Every issue.

    Watch any media outlet, read any newspaper. If you call your opponent racist or foolish, you wriggle out of debating the issues.

  94. Perhaps, Kim Jong Un…. will be outside, when an unanticipated ‘Lightening Storm’ arrives…… ;-D

  95. Karen S wrote “If you take a non-Liberal-sanctioned point of view, they are unable to calmly and reasonably discuss the pros and cons of each side”

    This is only half correct.

    Liberals use insults such as racist, Islamophobe, and homophobe, with the last word being used with the most venom. However, conservatives use insults such as un-American, un-patriotic, Marxist, commie, and socialist. I have been called all of these terms depending upon the argument. And I assure you, both sides use generic insults much worse than “foolish.”

    You do not see this because you are fairly consistently conservative, but for those of us who have views in the middle, we see hate from all sides.

  96. A couple of days ago on another topic thread I attempted to post a youtube visual presentation of the number of climate change scientist deniers vs the general scientific body. It was compelling in a humorous way. I assume it never posted due to the use of the mother of all banned words. Too bad. If you’re interested in watching, it was on HBOs ‘Last Week Tonight with John Oliver’ but available on youtube.

  97. Paulette:

    If you lose a post just ask for help and Darren or Rafferty can fish it out for you.

    Having more than 2 links will get caught in the filter. But I cannot figure out what the other triggers are.

  98. Saucy, I agree w/ you that both liberals and conservatives have there boilerplate labels, but KarenS is not one of those people.

  99. Could someone tell me why the term “denier” is so hateful? It’s not nearly as insulting as calling liberals “cultists”. Or Shiite liberals.

  100. Climate change denyers are pathetic. Yes, there has been BS now and then like 20 years ago with the ‘ozone hole’ scare in Spring, while failing to point out that ozone requires the sun, absent in arctic winters. Give a damn about the planet; its probably the only one you can get a body on. And that’s from an NRA supporter…..

  101. Paulette,
    You are welcome. One of the reasons….no, the MAIN reason I stopped responding to trolls…. um. let me back up here. The onliest reason, is that the trolls are not here to have a discussion, debate or try to learn something new. No. They are here to disrupt the flow of ideas, and to keep repeating the same lame nonsense no matter how many times it is refuted directly. Then they misinterpret, dissemble and misrepresent differing views. Usually with sheer volume of comments that may be only marginally relevant, if relevant at all. Anecdotes from TV shows and uncle Jake when he is semi-sober are passed off as fully equal to a million dollar five year study with high tech Instrumentation. The Gish Gallop school of debate. Provocation and thinly veiled insults and bogus “challenges” are nothing more than mattress filler, with all the intellectual content of Styrofoam. And when they are responded to with ridicule or ignoring, their response is to gloat, lay on a few insults and declare victory.

    And as for the humor challenged, all I have to say is that at my age, I don’t really give a northbound rat”s south end what the APA thinks. Of course, if anyone’s fee-fees were hurt or you think you were in “fear for your life” like the officer who shot the puppy who growled, go ahead and file a complaint. Feel free. Dr. Kathy Nordal can be contacted directly. She was a classmate of mine and now the Executive Director of APA’s Professional Practice Directorate. Knowing Kathy, I have a feeling her response might not meet Dr. Turley’s standard for civility. She has a supply of Sharpies too.

    And Paulette, one lives to be of service. :mrgreen:

  102. Chuck – thanks for the delightful explanation of your inability to engage in thoughtful engages. And thanks for letting us know that the APA has its own supply of Sharpies. This could be the reason the are so unsuccessful treating the mentally ill who then go on murder sprees. Do you think if we took the Sharpies away you guys could actually successfully treat someone?

  103. “Climate change denyers are pathetic.” Weird. I can’t imagine why anyone would believe such phrases were a barrier to adult discussion. Even the term “denier” carries a Flat Earth connotation.

    I am neither a denier nor a believer in ACC. I cannot draw a conclusion when someone lost much of the original data, wrote a paper on the premise that testing stations were stationary when they were moved, and ignored massive regional fluctuations from global averages in order to smooth out his graph.

    I cannot draw a conclusion one way or the other until scientists put on their big boy pants and start afresh.

    What do you call it when True Believers completely ignore data in the IPCC’s own AR5 report that acknowledges they have no idea why there has been a 15 year hiatus in warming, and that the previous AR4’s claim that drought was caused by ACC was overstated? Because I do not call that rational, investigative thought.

  104. Karen – it is important that climate changers NOT be critical thinkers. There is a ‘group think’ that has to be adhered to. The academic fraud going on in climate change and the IPCC is enough that any decent AG should be able to convict.

  105. I am neither on one side nor the other on ACC. I have the problems listed above with how they arrived at their conclusions, and the AR5 report indicates they still do not understand, nor can their computer models predict, climate change. I assumed academia had to follow GLP (Good Laboratory Practice) and GDP (Good Documentation Practice), but apparently not. But if they went back to the drawing board, did things right, and created computer models that were actually accurate, then absolutely throw it on the pile of things to clean up.

    I have a problem with those who have selective reading glasses. They have nothing to say about lost data, or the problems even the AR5 report admitted, or the fact that climate has always changed, the conflicts of interest in the reports, or the fact that there was actually more biodiversity at higher temperatures. They ignore the fact that, since climate changed before the industrial revolution, before people, in fact, there seems to be no way for our species to force the climate to suddenly become fixed at today’s values. They do not provide a reason why today’s climate is suddenly the “right one.”

    If the climate is not already changing, it will in the future, because it always has. Removing carbon emissions (while we continue to pump heavy metals etc) does not remove the need for humankind to be adaptable to a changing world. The climate would change if humans left the Earth. Because it always has.

    Cap and Trade does not reduce carbon emissions; it just taxes industries that by definition emit more carbon.

    What is frustrating to me is that valid pollutants with less cache, like mercury and arsenic, get little attention or funding while Anthropomorphic Climate Change gets the political clout. It even survived a makeover from Global Warming.

    If we focused our efforts on eliminated the clear and present dangers, such as pollutants, deforestation, and that floating island of trash and plastic in the Pacific, we could do real good that improves health today. If we pollute the ocean enough to threaten our dominant phytoplankton and marine algae, that’s affecting our oxygen factory. And many efforts that reduce tailpipe emissions and improve clean energy would also reduce carbon emissions, so win-win.

  106. So, basically no one here will address my valid concerns about the IPCC. But they will call deniers “pathetic.”

    Got it.

    Typical Liberal “debate.” Demonize your opponent and then do anything but actually discuss the pertinent issues.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s