Just a little heads-up for my readers that I’ve written a guest post for Climate Crocks. The following is a snippet from the beginning of the guest post: One of the things I do is to keep an ear out to what the so-called sceptics are saying in their corner on the internet. I do this on for example Twitter…
Yet again two great videos from Peter Sinclair (Greenman3610) on the subject of climate change. This time he tackles the weather extremes we’ve seen the past few years. And gives scientists a chance to explain what is causing this, how it relates to global warming (and where not) and what this might mean for the future.
This extraordinary mild winter in north america, followed by an unprecedentedly warm march, has shocked a lot of people who formerly dismissed the reality of climate change.
In addition, several years of violent tornado seasons have many asking if we are entering a “new Normal” in regard to our seasons.
For this two part series, I interviewed a number of climate scientists and experts from around the country, and found some surprising answers.
A while back Monckton sort of responded tot he videos Peter Hadfield (Potholer54) made about his misrepresentations and errors on the science of climate change. This eventually did leed to Monckton responding to the videos made about him. And the actual offer for a debate on Watts Up With That.
That article is well worth a read, especially the response Peter made to the claims.
But then silence from Monckton, and he doesn’t delivers on his promise to continue the debate. For which Peter has now called him out on:
Continue reading Potholer’s Open Letter To Christopher Monckton
Watch this video on YouTube
Peter Sinclair has released another excellent video about climate change science, this time about the simplistic view some have that all global warming science has its foundation on the hockey stick. Watch this video on YouTube There’s a persistent delusion out there, that you hear a lot from people who should know better – that global warming boils down to…
I almost didn’t catch it in this compilation, but Greg Gutfeld from Fox News actually says the following:
Isn’t green jobs the biggest hoax since the moon landing? [@1:38]
Seriously? How can you even have a normal discussion with these folks at Fox News? It’s blindfolds on, push your own agenda and shout the most inane claims and nonsense to further it.
When will we finally leave behind the strange claims of the so-called sceptics that melting isn’t as bad in the arctic or is even recovering? Watch this video on YouTube
I was already aware that current tactics of climate change deniers are very similar to what the pro tobacco lobby used during their campaign of obfuscation. But just how similar I didn’t realize till I saw the following on ClimateCrocks: I was going to wait on this, but it’s too important. The point has often been made that the climate denial industry…
Using less energy, and generating with renewables, is easier, cheaper, and more effective than a lot of opponents would like you to think. Greenman3610 has released another excellent video on the subject: Watch this video on YouTube
I already talked about the day of prayer governor Rick Perry took part in. And my amazement at the type of people that were attracted to the event and he associated himself with. The hint for me came that something wasn’t quite right about this association was when Vonette Bright said she wants to see the 10 Commandments and prayer in school.
So when at the Politics and Eggs breakfast in Bedford, NH, Jim Rubens noted that the National Academy of Sciences, which has advised presidents since its founding by Abraham Lincoln, has concluded that global warming is caused primarily by fossil fuels. And he subsequently asked “If observed scientific data and the National Academy of Sciences are both wrong on an issue involving thousands of scientists, and an issue as prominent as global warming, doesn’t this call into question the entire science discovery process that forms the foundation of a hundred years of America’s technological preeminence?”
The answer from Perry stunned me:
