Der Spiegel: Copenhagen a Club for Losers
posted at 2:55 pm on December 21, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Der Spiegel blasts the Copenhagen conference as “a Club for Losers” after it utterly failed to produce a consensus even on Barack Obama’s facesaving non-binding resolution. They excoriate everyone from China to Obama and even the UN, but retain their most pungent shots for European diplomats who bungled both expectations and diplomacy. And Der Speigel now says the best hope for progress won’t come from Turtle Bay, but from a process set in motion by a man whom AGW hysterics used to regard as the devil incarnate:
After days of negotiations, debate, political drama and pages of will-they or won’t-they headlines, the Copenhagen climate conference is over. And there is no conclusive agreement on any important issues. So did the situation produce any winners — or has the whole world become a club for environmental losers?
Even if the world’s leading climate scientists are only partially correct, then without a fairly ambitious climate agreement there will be dramatic consequences for our planet. And the climate conference in Copenhagen neither delivered such an agreement nor did it show any concievable way of reaching one. Countless scientific studies leave us in no doubt that the whole of humanity — and in particular future generations — will lose out. Because, at best, we can only guess the exact nature of the consequences of global warming and the extent of negative change in our natural environment.
Well, perhaps we should wait to see if the world’s leading climate scientists are “even partially correct” before using AGW as a means for a massive redistribution of wealth. This admission alone seems rather startling from Der Spiegel. It shows just how much damage Climategate has done to the AGW hysteric movement as a whole. They’re the biggest losers, and the draining of their credibility means it will be very difficult to stage another Copenhagen without a fully transparent and complete data set that actually determines whether AGW hysterics are correct at all.
But this is even more amusing for its irony:
The United Nations has always maintained that climate protection can only be effective if it’s administered globally — and that the issue cannot be solved by smaller groups like the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate. It was actually former US President George W. Bush who initiated this kind of forum but at the time many observers were skeptical that it was Bush’s way of circumventing a broader, more global consensus on climate change. This most recent effort, featuring 16 major economies, was launched by President Obama in April of this year and was meant to augment the UN talks in Copenhagen.
And although UN chief Ban Ki-moon seemed almost euphoric during his concluding statements in Copenhagen and at a press conference, it seemed that almost the opposite emotion would have been more appropriate.
The chaotic Copenhagen summit showed up the UN’s shortcomings more clearly than ever — non-governmental organizations felt that they were shut out, small nations believed they were overlooked and some of the larger nations — and the Chinese in particular — showed exactly how unwilling they were to compromise.
And it was Bush who actually outperformed Europe and its cap-and-trade system on carbon emissions, too. While being demonized by AGW hysterics, Bush tried reaching economic agreements with China and India that didn’t involve massive wealth redistribution, maintained economic growth, and lowered actual CO2 emissions. Why? Europe’s system essentially turned into a corruption market instead of a method to reduce carbon emissions.
George W. Bush has gone from environmental demon to AGW hysteria’s final hope. Don’t expect Hope and Change posters by Shepherd Fairey to start popping up all over the EU, of course.
Meanwhile, the UK blames China for crushing Hopenhagen:
China is to blame for the poor progress made during the Copenhagen climate change talks, Ed Miliband said today.
In the most direct attack on the country to date, the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change accused China of hijacking the summit.
He claimed that Beijing “vetoed” moves to give legal force to the accord and blocked an agreement on global reductions in greenhouse emissions.
Its delegates even blocked attempts by advanced industrial countries to set a target of an 80 per cent reduction by 2050 for themselves, even though China is classified as a developing country.
Perhaps that’s because (a) China also took note of the corruption endemic in Europe’s system, and (b) figured that they would not be classified as “developing” for very much longer. China is the world’s largest carbon emitter, and its industrialization has become so significant that the International Olympic Committee had to start considering contingencies last year when smog smothered Beijing just before the start of the games. Any international effort to limit emissions has to address China, or it will completely lack credibility with other developing nations.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Bush league. Whatever happened to not no, but HELL no?
Fletch54 on December 21, 2009 at 2:59 PM
I for one miss the daylights out of President Bush! I am so sorry we have this bho for pres. now.
L
letget on December 21, 2009 at 2:59 PM
DITTO!!
cmsinaz on December 21, 2009 at 3:00 PM
LOVE IT!
I like the pic too.
upinak on December 21, 2009 at 3:00 PM
Of course, the irony of ironies is that the pro-labor Democrats and union lobby have worked to secure minimum wage increases and pro-labor legislation that has forced manufacturing out of the United States. That manufacturing power base now resides mostly in China, building it into one of the most robust, and authoritarian, economies out there.
Nethicus on December 21, 2009 at 3:02 PM
Neoconservafascist Ed Morrissey spews his hatred of everything by daring to say that capitalism is better for the environment than socialism!
THE NERVE.
MadisonConservative on December 21, 2009 at 3:02 PM
Not to worry!
According to John F Kerry, Conquest, War, Famine, and Death are in agreement.
MNHawk on December 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM
The global warming alarmists and their ilk always make me laugh.
Sorry suckers, the rest of the world has figured out that anthropogenic global warming is a total sham!
Watching the collapse of the enviro-communists is almost as delicious as watching Obama fail.
JaqobJackson on December 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM
Never minding the big move in the “goal posts” from “settled science”, that is about the most inane statement I have ever read.
Partially? That could mean most anything. 50% correct? 1% correct.
If these idiots were doctors or airline pilots we would all be dead.
MB4 on December 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM
Careful. Little Green Retard will be proposing to you, after that one!
MNHawk on December 21, 2009 at 3:05 PM
Bush’s grades:
Foreign policy: A
Domestic policy: D
pseudonominus on December 21, 2009 at 3:06 PM
Are you kidding? Mad has been banned twice by the greenie in conservative rag.
upinak on December 21, 2009 at 3:06 PM
OT:
Ben Nelson is live on KKAR. Catch the streaming here.
OmahaConservative on December 21, 2009 at 3:07 PM
Just seeing the picture of that nice man made me feel better.
Cindy Munford on December 21, 2009 at 3:08 PM
Wasn’t it Bush that discounted and scoffed at his own science advisors concerning their assertion that AGW was a serious issue that needed attention? Do I remember this correctly?
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 3:08 PM
If these idiots were doctors or airline pilots we would all be dead.
MB4 on December 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM
They could not hold down a job at a fast food joint…I am serious!
winston on December 21, 2009 at 3:09 PM
What’s the sham in the following from NOAA?
• Global land and ocean annual surface temperatures through October are the fifth warmest on record, at 0.56 °C (1.01 °F) above the long-term average.
• NOAA scientists project 2009 will be one of the 10 warmest years of the global surface temperature record, and likely finish as the fourth, fifth or sixth warmest year on record.
• The 2000-2009 decade will be the warmest on record, with its average global surface temperature about 0.54 °C (0.96 °F) above the 20th Century average. This will easily surpass the 1990s value of 0.36 °C (0.65 °F).
• Ocean surface temperatures (through October) were the sixth warmest on record, at 0.47 °C (0.85 °F) above the 20th century average.
• Land surface temperatures through October were the fifth warmest on record, at 0.80 °C (1.44 °F) above the 20th century average.
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 3:10 PM
Speaking of losers. More so than ACORN
When Summers, Obama’s sock puppet fav economist was at Harvard, he cost harvard over a billion dollars in trading speculation. Almost bankrupted harvard.
Summers bought int rate swaps and they cost over a billion losses.
seven on December 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Averages out to a solid B-plus, oh wait, not Obama.
farright on December 21, 2009 at 3:13 PM
With their maybe partially correct, they are such idiots that even if they only held that job for a few hours they would give us all food poisoning before they set fire to the place and burned half the town down.
MB4 on December 21, 2009 at 3:14 PM
Okay, those describe Osama Obama…but who are the other three supposed to be?
I find it interesting that the Spiegel “analysis” dovetails neatly with the American left’s reaction to the steaming pile of health-care dung currently stinking up congress. It’s another “doesn’t go far enough” situation to them.
MrScribbler on December 21, 2009 at 3:15 PM
Wait… Neo? Ed is Jewish?! Isnt that what that means? I get so confused by reactionary leftist jargon.
/sarcasm
//Jewish myself
Irritable Pundit on December 21, 2009 at 3:15 PM
And this shows AGW because…?????
Andy in Agoura Hills on December 21, 2009 at 3:16 PM
That ‘miss me yet’ pic is priceless.
Midas on December 21, 2009 at 3:17 PM
It has long been considered that the US was the target of this massive redistribution of wealth, but for a moment, consider the case that over time the biggest “target” of this scheme turned out to be China … and China wanted no part of it.
The irony of communist China being against “wealth redistribution” is just so far out there.
J_Crater on December 21, 2009 at 3:17 PM
What? They can’t even get a consensus now?
Vashta.Nerada on December 21, 2009 at 3:18 PM
Very much!
American Elephant on December 21, 2009 at 3:20 PM
Stimulus.
Cap and Trade.
Healthcare.
I know his approval numbers are falling, but… doesn’t look like Obama ‘failing’ from here.
I’d say he and his cohorts are pretty well succeeding in destroying this country.
Midas on December 21, 2009 at 3:21 PM
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 3:21 PM
I am waiting for a link.
upinak on December 21, 2009 at 3:21 PM
Kerry was using the Four Horsemen (from, you know, the biblical armegeddon) to describe Obama and his cohorts.
I thought it was funny, in an Obamateurism of the Week sort of way.
MNHawk on December 21, 2009 at 3:22 PM
Ummm, check to see who N.O.A.A. recieves their money from.
upinak on December 21, 2009 at 3:22 PM
Does Obama have any idea what’s going on around him or do his handlers simply load him up, then squeeze out the stupidity that flows from his mouth.
rplat on December 21, 2009 at 3:23 PM
I was missing him on Nov. 5th, 2008
BetseyRoss on December 21, 2009 at 3:25 PM
I for one certainly miss Georgy Porgy!!! I remember back in the day when I slept pretty darn good at night.. I remember not having to worry about the terrorists because George and Dick were on the case. I remember that while I did not always agree with him on some issues, I did not have to give up a portion of my day just to keep up with the nonsense going on today.
shar61 on December 21, 2009 at 3:26 PM
Epic overreach you raving lefties.
GREAT PIC
John the Libertarian on December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Oakland, honey! NOAA predicted that 2008 was supposed to be a record year for hurricanes. How many actually hit shore this past year? Actual hurricanes that is…ZERO.
Driefromseattle on December 21, 2009 at 3:33 PM
I don’t think they predicted anywhere close to a record year for hurricanes. Do you have a reference?
In any case, how does this comment of yours relate to the summary I posted from NOAA?
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 3:35 PM
What would W do?
OT-but has anyone noticed little Charlie over at LGF is foaming at the butt today about something Michelle posted and then took down, but he read it. What has happen to that site? 24/7 paying the Kevin Bacon game with everyone from the right all while ignoring the left as they circle the toilet bowl?
That site is a shell of itself now!!! Wow!!!
Brian on December 21, 2009 at 3:37 PM
Obama isn’t even a good socialist, he is so bad he can’t even do a good job at that.
Bush will be regarded as a top 10 President in ten years.
lavell12 on December 21, 2009 at 3:39 PM
No. Yes.
R D on December 21, 2009 at 3:41 PM
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=200912171847dowjonesdjonline000636&title=us-court-orders-records-unsealed-in-cap-and-trade-fraud-case
2 Republicans are trying to shed sunlight onto problems with cap and tax trading scheme.
journeyintothewhirlwind on December 21, 2009 at 3:42 PM
You got yourself a true believer there! Becareful.
Here are some chest waders.. you may hit a deep patch on the other blog. Please rinse before replying here.
upinak on December 21, 2009 at 3:43 PM
So what is the point of your post?
Andy in Agoura Hills on December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM
AGW is a club for losers. Copenhagen was a circle-jerk for a circle of jerks.
mr.blacksheep on December 21, 2009 at 3:54 PM
Fixed it for ‘ya, Adolf…
Seven Percent Solution on December 21, 2009 at 3:55 PM
*caption*
“Miss Me Yet?”
Yes, Mr President. Very Much.
5u93rm4n on December 21, 2009 at 3:56 PM
Watch this presentation. It’s four parts but about 30 minutes in length. Very interesting and informative.
darwin on December 21, 2009 at 3:59 PM
The point of the original post was to make a response to a comment concerning his/her assertion that the concept of AGW is a sham to the world. I wondered how such a comment could be made when there is abundant evidence, from at least one scientific organization, of a world-wide warming trend. Absent any counter-evidence, I am thinking that AGW is possibly real and needs a close look, in case such a phenomenon has potential adverse effects on civilization. I am, however, still awaiting data or other evidence that refutes that provided by NOAA.
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 3:59 PM
I miss Bush. The media was so busy trashing the man that they did not really talk about a lot of things he did, like trading technology for cleaner fuel with Asian countries. I remember reading an article about this in some Tech publication a few years ago.
Terrye on December 21, 2009 at 4:06 PM
Since I’m Jewish, I’ll address this issue. My concern is why is was linked in the first place? Everyone knows what that website is, doesn’t Malkin??? She is net savvy, is she not? How about linking to stormfront or other neo-nazi sites? Wouldn’t that be obviously wrong? That said, I sincerely doubt there is any conspiracy involved here by the vast rightwing. The little green turd seems to be implying that Malkin is an anti-semite, but I seriously doubt that she is. In fact, I have never publicly heard her say anthing anti-Jewish or anti-Israel. So Chuckles has his nutsack in a twist for no good reason.
Andy in Agoura Hills on December 21, 2009 at 4:08 PM
This page is based on a brief synopsis of the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), as well as NCDC’s own data resources. It was prepared by David Easterling and Tom Karl, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, N.C. 28801.
Carbon Dioxide Fraud
upinak on December 21, 2009 at 4:08 PM
I just posted two things concerning N.O.A.A.
one is the noaa website, funded by Us, the american taxpayer. The other is a PDF concernign the man who is the head of NOAA.
Why post these, maybe you can read them… you already believe that there is AGW, for whatever reason other then you “believe”. I think it odd though that NASA is in the middle of the AGW scam. Why?
There is no such thing as AGW… please stop and think about that.
upinak on December 21, 2009 at 4:12 PM
Miss himin the sense that I miss going overthe cliff slowerthan we are now?
Okay yes!
Bush 43 was a disaster………it gave us Barry.
Who Daddy Bush and Miss Laura really like apparently.
AmericArabia……. Lord Barack’s Caliphate!!!
PappyD61 on December 21, 2009 at 4:12 PM
Bullsh!t. You can’t possibly know how to use a computer and not have read about Climategate. Quit playing stupid and go do some reading.
R D on December 21, 2009 at 4:13 PM
So in response to a claim that AGW is a hoax, you replied with data that shows global warming, but yet no proof that said warming is cause by man’s activities. That is an absurd way of proving your point.
As for data that refutes NOAA, its not necessary. I will stipulate that those facts are valid evidence of warming. Now, will you stipulate to the fact that the Earth was several degrees warmer during the Mideval Warming Period? Will you also stipulate to the fact that since 10000 years ago the Earth has been warming? Finally, if you acknowledge those two facts, you must also agree that man’s output of CO2 had nothing to do with those climate facts. If you disagree, then you are not interested in fact, just propaganda.
Andy in Agoura Hills on December 21, 2009 at 4:17 PM
Me too. Now all we see is Obama either looking smug or threatening.
ThePrez on December 21, 2009 at 4:17 PM
On what do you base this assertion of yours? I couldn’t access the second link you posted.
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM
I really do miss Bush. :-/
nickj116 on December 21, 2009 at 4:20 PM
Only the ones who were paying attention. And that excludes lots of people who reported from Copenhagen. To the masses, the hockey stick is still fact, earth has never been warmer, and it’s all our fault.
Never mind that grapes grew in England, or that Greenland was green. Forget that one volcano will emit more pollution than all of mankind’s production. Or that termites produce more emissions than mankind. Or that trees thrive on CO2, Or that warmer temperatures save lives. Or that there are simple solutions to warming, if warming were considered a problem.
None of these simple facts make it into the story the masses are being told.
hawksruleva on December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM
Cheap laugh alert!
if you say the letters B-H-O with a spanish accent (as in a miami cuban learning english) and run them together you get what sounds like the spanish word for bug or creature- “bicho” pronounced “bee-cho (long o sound at the end).
beselfish on December 21, 2009 at 4:22 PM
Comforting to know that Bush was a more efficient retard on global
scammingwarmingclimate change than the Eloi retards in Europe.BL@KBIRD on December 21, 2009 at 4:22 PM
I have not tried to prove a point; you are in error. I am trying to get another perspective that might possibly refute the NOAA data.
As for the “Midevel Warming Period”, what are the data on that? Was this “warming” a global phenomenon or a local one? Were they collecting global data back then? Or, are there proxy data that suggests a world-wide warming then? If there was indeed a global warming trend for the time period, are there data which negate any correlation between carbon dioxide and the global higher temperature trends?
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 4:24 PM
How about this:
Come to Alaska. I will show you first hand AGW doesn’t exsist and then introduce you to a nice Polar Bear named Binky.
upinak on December 21, 2009 at 4:26 PM
This weekend’s blizzard brought to you by….
global warming!!!</strong>
Akzed on December 21, 2009 at 4:27 PM
Man cannot control the weather. Debate is over!
beselfish on December 21, 2009 at 4:27 PM
oakland, and everyone else – it’s “Medieval”, please.
The warmists have tried to suppress the MWP for years, then their fallback position is that it was only local but that seems to be nonsense too.
I’ve seen no real world evidence that ever shows any causative relationship between CO2 levels and temperature; the proxy data consistently shows temperature change leading CO2 increase by several hundred years.
JEM on December 21, 2009 at 4:28 PM
“A wolf is coming! I swear!! Wolf wolf wolf!!! Help! Wolf!”
Akzed on December 21, 2009 at 4:30 PM
We are dooooomed!
But we can’t tell you why or how.
gwelf on December 21, 2009 at 4:30 PM
Greatest AGW debunker evah.
Akzed on December 21, 2009 at 4:31 PM
{{{More error 404?!}}}
If you haven’t been here yet go to http://www.ClimateDepot.com.
Akzed on December 21, 2009 at 4:37 PM
oakland,
The science is irrelevant. Nothing proposed by the Copenhagen ecopocalypse types would do a damn thing to arrest global warming.
Mike Honcho on December 21, 2009 at 4:41 PM
This
darwin on December 21, 2009 at 4:43 PM
No. You tried to disprove someone else’s point.
Yeah, during the Mideval Period, thousands of weather stations world wide were set-up to record global temperatures. Then that data was analyzed using primative computers such as the Turing Machines. Also, unknown to most global warming alarmists, NASA has sent time travelers back to the 15th century to record weather patterns. We are just now analyzing this important data. You. Are. A. Schmuck.
You need to do your homework and get back to me. Right now you are too ignorant to have an intelligent conversation about “global warming”.
Andy in Agoura Hills on December 21, 2009 at 5:01 PM
Do you have a reference for this “nonsense”?
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 5:04 PM
haven’t they predicted that every year since Katrina/Rita?
RonK on December 21, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Why are you so threatened by questions?
I’m doing my “homework” by asking you questions. Do you have any answers?
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 5:06 PM
Yeah … look at Michael Mann’s “Hockey Stick”. He deleted it and the Little Ice Age.
darwin on December 21, 2009 at 5:11 PM
Thanks, Darwin, for the link. As far as I can tell, this data is based on the localized temperature readings from Greenland. I am not sure how this might apply globally. The NOAA data I posted above reflects global averages. What is your perspective on this?
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 5:20 PM
The last graph is Vostok, Antarctica.
I’m not sure how you have a “local” weather pattern that lasts hundreds of years … especially over an area as large as Greenland.
Is the NOAA data you’re using raw? or is it “adjusted”?
With a little research you’ll find they’re comparing today’s temperature … to historical temperatures that have been “adjusted”.
darwin on December 21, 2009 at 5:27 PM
You might like this.
mr.blacksheep on December 21, 2009 at 5:31 PM
Thats all good right?
Most of the species of plants and animals are found in the warmer regions of the planet. Crops grow more abundantly in warmer temps..warmer temps cause more rainfall..thats good for life. Populated areas that require heat in the long winters would need less fuel per season..thats good for the environment. slightly longer growing seasons mean better harvests..that will help curb world hunger. Warmer temps are a win win imo.
But the question you asked has to do with A-GW. How does the NOAA claims prove that?
If man actually has a roll in the warmer temps, lets find out what it is that we’re doing and get on the stick and do more of it.
Itchee Dryback on December 21, 2009 at 5:40 PM
There’s ZERO evidence for AGW. It’s at the point where I doubt there was any warming. The temperature records have been so distorted and manipulated it’s hard to tell. What really kills me is 50% of the US is covered with snow and these people are still screaming global warming.
darwin on December 21, 2009 at 5:45 PM
I agree.
There is zero doubt..evidenced by the CRU emails and connections linked by them..that the data was tampered with, and if science is to survive regarding climate, then its back to square one. Doesn’t matter how much money or time has been put into it, its garbage in/garbage out. Sorry…thats the truth.
Science is not a “thing”, its simply a method. If the data is corrupted, one cannot claim that the results are based in science. Sorry. Thats just the truth.
Itchee Dryback on December 21, 2009 at 6:04 PM
If warmer temperatures result in a more locally or globally unpredictable climate, how might this affect our food production? Are you sure that warmer temperatures are always better? Are you sure that warmer temperatures will not lead to more extremes in weather, which can be adverse?
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 6:06 PM
Are you disputing the data from NOAA? If not, then what would explain the warming trends? If you have an explanation, do you have reference(s)?
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 6:08 PM
Wow.. dense aren’t you.
If you temps go up.. guess what you farm in different areas. Which means I can farm MORE where I live. I can actually farm much more and different vegtables! Why? Because I live in a cold climate in which I can Farm TOMATOES without using a greenhouse. Who would have thunk that!
upinak on December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM
What warming trends? A region is not the WHOLE WORLD and just because one little region is warm, doesn’t mean it is the rest of the world.
And if it is warm I call it the SUN. You know, Solar Energy! What a freaking concept. You are a moron.
upinak on December 21, 2009 at 6:11 PM
Why are you so threatened by my questions?
I am referring to the global warming trends cited in the NOAA data I posted previously.
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 6:13 PM
You mean those exaggerated, fudged warming trends?
mr.blacksheep on December 21, 2009 at 6:16 PM
Exactly….isn’t that why I am asking questions?
So, if warmer temperatures are always better, shouldn’t we then be aiming to raise the global thermostat? If so, how might we do that? By your assertion, warmer would be better where I live also …no?
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 6:18 PM
Weird. That sounds more like you’re getting someone else to do your homework for you.
School must be a lot easier these days.
tom on December 21, 2009 at 6:18 PM
What, then, should the data, or averages, be? Do you have a reference?
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 6:19 PM
Because you are the true AGW moron.
If it is suppose to be warm… why do I freeze my ass off 5 months in Alaska? Aren’t I suppose to be WARMER!?!?!?
Tell me little one, as you hold the N.O.A.A. answers for Dummies handbook.
upinak on December 21, 2009 at 6:21 PM
You got me stumped on that one. Are you?
oakland on December 21, 2009 at 6:24 PM
How does your summary about NOAA in any way prove or tie into AGW?? Please stop asking people for clarification on THEIR responses when your response regarding NOAA did not in any way make a case for AGW whatsoever.
joejm65 on December 21, 2009 at 6:26 PM
NOAA hasn’t proven AGW. Do you have evidence of this? Does NOAA?
Are you being intentionally obtuse? To be blunt, NOAA is comparing their current “adjusted” temperatures … to historical “adjusted” temperatures to make the case the the earth is in some runaway, never experienced before climatic disaster. In other words, they’ve been compromised by AGW zealots.
Everything I know, is easily found by you. There are several excellent websites that do real science and don’t mind showing their work. These sites have destroyed AGW and that’s why they’re mentioned several times in the UEA CRU emails.
You can find these sites, you can read their work, you can read how the science has been compromised, how data has been distorted and omitted and they’ll show you … but you apparently don’t stray off the reservation from NOAA.
NOAA is compromised. NASA is compromised. The UN is compromised … UK papers today ran a story on the head UN climate change guy, Rajendra Pachauri, IPCC Chairman … and his considerable interests and investments that depend on the world buying into the AGW scam.
Find it, read it. Use the damn internet.
darwin on December 21, 2009 at 6:34 PM
You have N.O.A.A. how about you check it out.
upinak on December 21, 2009 at 6:36 PM
The corruption spreads far and wide.
How about this oakland. Some AGW guy was using Wikipedia to rewrite thousands of Wiki articles to boost AGW while deleting those that were skeptical.
darwin on December 21, 2009 at 6:45 PM
Exactly…only you have the cart of assumptions before the horse of facts.
What is the global temp supposed to be?
Whats the “right” temp?
Itchee Dryback on December 21, 2009 at 6:48 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »