Green Climate Fund; Weakens the US and Strengthens our Economic Competition

green-climate-fund

The US funding the climate change agenda is the equivalent of unilaterally disarming through giving the weapons to the enemy. We are not only weakening ourselves economically, we are funding the development and strengthening our economic competitors.

Where does the money go?

The fund has a portfolio of more than 40 projects, using $2.2 billion of its own money and $5 billion from development agencies and banks.

Approved Funding Proposals, as of October 2016

maps-Artboard_1_copy

Pledged Amounts:green-climate-fund_May22-UPDATE

H/T Watts Up With That

Please Like, Share, Subscribe and Comment

Advertisements

New Paper Uses Physics Laws To Disassemble Greenhouse Theory

Eight years ago, 2 physicists published a comprehensive 115-page scientific paper entitled “Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics” in the International Journal of Modern Physics…

Buttressed by a reference list of over 200 scientific publications, the authors addressed the merits of commonly held greenhouse “conjectures” as they relate to the laws of physics.

“By showing that (a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet, (c) the frequently mentioned difference of 33°C is a meaningless number calculated wrongly, (d) the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately, (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical, (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified.”

From pages 35 to 44, Gerlich and Tscheuschner critiqued 14 different “fictitious” manifestations of the greenhouse effect theory as they have appeared over the course of the last several decades.

Read More: 3 Chemists Conclude CO2 Greenhouse Effect Is ‘Unreal’, Violates Laws Of Physics, Thermodynamics

H/T No Tricks Zone

Please Like, Share, Subscribe and Comment

Make America Great Again!!! President Trump Exits Paris Accord

President Trump did exactly what we have been promoting on this blog. He totally avoided the science and made the compelling economic arguments. Keep it simple, the benefits of fighting climate change simply aren’t worth the costs. Nothing more needs to be said.

Related Posts:

Climate Debate Should Focus on Public Policy and Priorities, Not Science

TRILLIONS of PUBLIC Dollars Spent on Conclusions Reached Based Upon “Made Up Data.”

A fool’s errand: Al Gore’s $15 trillion carbon tax

Meet the Man that has Michael Mann Horrified

Watermelon Environmentalist Economics; More Waste, Inefficiency, and Incompetence than Conservation

Just How Much Does 1 Degree C Cost?

Please like, share, subscribe and comment.

Facebook Censorship; Congress Should Investigate Anti-Conservative Bias

CensorshipFB

Yet another one of my posts exposing the Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Disruption/Coming Ice Age Hoax has been censored on Facebook. Personally, I wear their censorship like a badge of honor, but as a foundational “media” organization, their blatant, biased and Un-Democratic policies should not be tolerated in a free society. I encourage all readers to forward this post to their representatives.  This Blog and its many posts are a great example of the overt discrimination against conservatives that is condoned, rewarded, encoded in algorithms and codified in policies and procedures. I was audited by the IRS 3 times under President Obama, as was a friend of mine involved is similar activities. It is time someone starts to punch back. No one in America should live in fear of retribution or censorship for simply engaging in honest, open, and intellectual conversations. The right to free speech, assembly and the press are not limited to the political left.

Here is the headline and link to the post most recently censored:

Sea Level Sophistry; Junk Science Masquerading as the Basis for UnSound Public Policy

This introductory comment may have been the trigger:

The more scientifically illiterate you are, the more convincing the Climate Alarmists’ arguments become. Climate Alarmists know that and that is why they usually only provide half the story at best, and as we all know, “half the truth is often twice the lie.” No matter if it is Coral Reefs, Sea Ice, Global Temperatures or other claims, the Alarmists’ arguments simply don’t hold up under even the most simple of analysis.

That comment is tame compared to the Anti-Cop, Anti-Trump, Anti-White Privilege, Anti-Male, Anti-Christian, Anti-Conservative, Anti-Catholic, Anti-Science “Denier,” and Anti-Republican posts that dominate Facebook and other social media. This bias would be extremely easy for Congress to prove. Simply compare the above quote to the vulgar comments made recently by the new DNC Chair Tom Perez. Facebook allows his comments to be posted.

DNC chair Perez criticized for frequent swearing

Mockery if the Left’s Preferred Form of Discourse:

Mockery is a form of “hate speech,” Mockery is a form of “Bullying,” Mockery is a form of “Micro-Aggression,” Mockery is a form of “Divisive Language.” Mockery isn’t “Inclusive,” Mockery is “Discriminatory,” Mockery is “Mean.” Just watch shows like Bill Maher’s Real Time, Saturday Night Live, Stephen Colbert’s “Late-Night,” MSNBC’s “News,” all are welcome on Facebook, and all are far more abusive to Conservatives than any of my posts could ever hope to be to any member of the Cult of Global Warming. There are no “safe spaces” for Conservatives on Facebook, in fact, they “blame the victim” and punish them with censorship. Conservatives are routinely virtually “assaulted” and “violated” on Facebook, and nothing is done to the perpetrators.

Left-wing Democracy; One Man, One Vote, One Time

One only needs to look at the carnage liberals have inflicted on our educational system, media, judicial and regulatory institutions to understand America can’t continue down this path. A path that has destroyed countless other societies throughout history. Our Bill-of-Rights was intended to prevent the very events that are unfolding today.

Recently the New York Times wrote an article promoting the idea of filing anti-Trust laws against Facebook, Google and not only breaking them up, but also regulating them as public utilities. Conservatives should support that idea. Users of Facebook should be allowed to “self” identity as conservative, liberal, male, female, gay, straight, Muslim, Christian, black, white, Hispanic, etc etc etc. The accounts of these self-identified people would then be packaged and sold off as stand-alone companies. The different Facebook companies would still be able to communicate, but each one would be under their own form of self-rule, and no longer would conservatives need to fear censorship by liberals intent on forcing their homogenized, sterile, Marxist view of the world down everyone’s throats.

Force Mark Zuckerberg to answer for his discrimination against Conservatives before Congress. Expose him as the Communist sympathizer that he is, as evidenced by his totalitarian eagerness and willingness to violate the civil rights of Conservatives, and support for Marxist ideas like guaranteed incomes.

Extend the definition of “protected class” to include political affiliation. Laws that promote minority and woman ownership of media outlets, should be opened to Conservatives. Universities that demonstrate a political bias in their staffing should be barred from any Federal Funding.

Apply consumer protection laws to the media. The media is selling a political ideology, based on certain factual ingredients. Fake news should be labeled a “deceptive” marketing practice, intended to defraud the public. The spirit of the 1st Amendment was to protect the media watchdogs from Government retribution. It was never envisioned as protecting a media acting as a propaganda tool for the Government. We need Separation of Media and State laws put in place.

Bottom line, if Facebook can freely censor people like me, they can censor anyone. That isn’t good for America, Freedom and/or Democracy. If Facebook censors me, those same standards need to be applied to voices from the left. Facebook either has to embrace “diversity” of opinion and “equality” of access and opportunity, or they should face the wrath of a majority Republican/Conservative Congress and Executive Branch that suffers from this bias as much as I do. The firsts Amendment doesn’t only apply to the political left, it applies to all Americans. Congress shouldn’t allow social media undermine our Constitution, Freedom, Rights and Democracy. Congress needs to remind Silicon Valley this is America, not Russia, not Cuba, not China, and not Cuba. They had better assimilate the Bill of Rights and the American Values it defined into their algorithms, or risk being censored themselves. Censorship isn’t American, and America shouldn’t tolerate corporations violating individual’s civil rights. Facebook didn’t build the Internet, the US Taxpayers did, and they didn’t build it to be a tool of oppression.

Please like, share, subscribe and comment. Also, please post as many of my posts as possible on Facebook and please send me comments if they get blocked. I would like to gather evidence for them to use in a congressional inquiry.

Sea Level Sophistry; Junk Science Masquerading as the Basis for UnSound Public Policy

sheeple2

The more scientifically illiterate you are, the more convincing the Climate Alarmists’ arguments become. Climate Alarmists know that and that is why they usually only provide half the story at best, and as we all know, “half the truth is often twice the lie.” No matter if it is Coral Reefs, Sea Ice, Global Temperatures or other claims, the Alarmists’ arguments simply don’t hold up under even the most simple of analysis.

Evidence of an accelerating sea level rate of increase is crucial to the man-made CO2  climate change theory. It is a smoking gun piece of evidence and would be extremely important in bolstering the case of the Alarmists. The theory goes man-made CO2 is increasing at an increasing rate, Atmospheric CO2 has reached levels not seen over the entire ice core record spanning 800k years, the rapidly increasing CO2 had been absorbing outgoing IR radiation at an increasing rate, this increasing rate of absorbing outgoing IR Radiation has CAUSED global temperatures to increase at an increasing rate, global temperatures increasing at an increasing rate would CAUSE glaciers to melt at an increasing rate, the increasing glacier melt rate would CAUSE the sea levels to increase at an increasing rate. The “increasing rate” is critical to proving the man-made CO2 driven warming theory. Warming isn’t enough, what is needed is an “increasing rate,” for calculus fans, this is a second derivative model.

Sea-Level-Rise-Rates-1700-2017-CO2-Emissions

The problem for the Climate Alarmists is that the rate of change in the sea-level hasn’t  been increasing. In fact, just the opposite has happened. The rate of change in the sea-level has been DECREASING.

The models are predicated on the assumption that anthropogenic CO2 emissions, which have risen explosively since about 1950, are the drivers of modern sea level rise…Tide gauges indicate there has been a substantial overall reduction in the rate of sea level rise since about 1950 rather than the expected substantial acceleration.

If a rapidly increasing sea-level is something to be feared, then increasing CO2 may be the way to prevent it. Data shows that CO2 and the rate of change in sea-level are INVERSELY correlated, the exact opposite of what the climate alarmists claim. Having the data prove just the opposite of what the hypothesis predicts is usually game over in most real sciences, but climate “science” isn’t a real science.

Sea-Level-Rise-Rates-TSI-Correlation1700-2013.jpg

How does climate “science” deal with such a devastating blow? Do they admit defeat? Do they reformulate the hypothesis? Do they look for other explanations like maybe solar irradiance? Nope, they go looking for that needle in a haystack data set, the outlier that will prove their point. Climate alarmists have found the perfect data set to make their case down in Perth Australia. They have found a tidal gauge showing a rate of increase of 20cm over the past 100 years.

mean-sea-level-fremantle

Global sea-level increase is around 2mm/yr, so 20 cm over 100 years is the expected increase. How do the Climate Alarmists present this data? Just what do the climate computer models predict? A full 2 m increase in sea level by 2100, or 22 mm/yr. That is 11x the current actual rate.

mean-sea-level-fremantle-projected-med

I’m not sure how a real science would predict an 11x increase in sea-level given the data showing the CO2 and sea-level are inversely correlated, but I can guess how Climate “Science” does it. Freemantle/Perth’s sea-level is increasing at 2mm/yr, but Sidney on the other side of Australia has a sea-level that is only increasing at 6.5 cm per 100 years, or only 0.65mm/year, less than 1/3 that of Perth’s. Most importantly, Perth is sinking, not due to CO2, but due to water usage. Much, if not all of the sea-level increase in Perth is in fact due to man, but not man-made CO2. So much like the Climate Alarmists exploiting the Urban Heat Island Effect to unjustly and unscientifically incriminate man-made CO2, they do the same with water usage. Simply put, man-made CO2 doesn’t cause the Urban Heat Island Effect, nor does it deplete water tables, nor does it melt glaciers from below, nor does it expose coral reefs to the bleaching sun, ect etc etc. What people need to ask is “do we really want to spend astronomical fortunes on computer models based on junk science and made up/corrupted data when there are infinitely better uses for that money?

the tide gauge is sinking 2 – 4mm each year (20 -40cm a century).
PARTS of Perth are sinking because too much water is being extracted from the Perth Basin, making those areas more vulnerable to sea level rises.

Professor Will Featherstone said the gauge was sinking at about 2-4mm a year due to groundwater being extracted at a faster rate than it can be replenished, causing the land to subside.

h/t to JoNova and No Trick Zone for the inspiration and graphics

Please like, share, subscribe and comment.

Friday Night at the Movies: The Great Global Warming Swindle

Please like, share, subscribe and comment.

Journalistic Malpractice; Claiming Glaciers are Melting due to CO2 when there is no Warming Trend

,Screen-Shot-2017-05-24-at-8.46.20-AM

Evidence of a glacier disappearing isn’t evidence that man is causing it, it isn’t evidence that CO2 is the cause or even evidence that it has been warming. Glaciers disappear for all sorts of reasons. The Mt Kilimanjaro glacier is disappearing and it has nothing to to with CO2 or warming, and everything to do with atmospheric humidity and wind currents. The Mt Kilimanjaro glacier it at  19,340 ft, well above the freeze line, and it never gets above freezing, and yet the glacier is disappearing. The reason being is that ice can disappear due to multiple causes other than CO2 and warming. The Mt Kilimanjaro glacier is disappearing due to “sublimation.” Blow dry air over ice and ice will “evaporate,” this is the solid-to-gas process that results in shrinking of ice cubes in your freezer.  If the Mt Kilimanjaro Glacier was truly melting, Dr. Thompson would be standing in mud, not bone dry dust, and there would be puddles and steams of water. There aren’t.070601_thompson1_vmed_1p-grid-4x21

Some Icelandic and Antarctic glaciers are melting because they are sitting on giant volcanos as discussed in a previous posting. Sea Ice in the Arctic region disappears due to wind currents blowing it out of the Arctic Ocean and into the warmer Northern Atlantic, also discussed in a previous posting. Increases in daytime temperatures and surface warming are due to incoming visible radiation and have nothing to do with CO2, so even if there is warming in Glacier National Park, it doesn’t mean CO2 is the cause. The Urban Heat Island Effect can melt a glacier and has nothing to do with CO2. Unfortunately, the “science” experts at the New York Times are conditioned to only see CO2 as the cause, and they never ask the relevant questions. The first questions these “experts” should have asked was “has it been warming over the time period of the glacier melt?”

Unfortunately, the “science” experts at the New York Times are conditioned to only see CO2 as the cause, and they never ask the relevant questions. They wrote an entire article titled “Mapping 50 Years of Melting Ice in Glacier National Park” without ever asking the most basic question of  “has it been warming in Glacier National Park over the past 50 years?” Had the “experts” at the New York Times ask that basic question they would have discovered that even though CO2 has increased from around 320 ppm to 405 ppm over the past 50 years, there has been no warming in Glacier National Park, none, regardless of what the unnamed “scientists” claim.

After the end of the Little Ice Age, glaciers across the Western United States, Canada and Europe lost ice as temperatures rebounded. But scientists have attributed more recent melting to human-caused global warming.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

The New York Times, Bill Maher, and other Climate Alarmists may find these “fake news” articles convincing, where only one side of the story is presented, and critical evidence is excluded, but thinking people and politicians shouldn’t. It is a crime to without relevant information in a legal trial, corporations would be sued if they failed to provide relevant information to the consumer about their product’s safety, food processors would be sued if they failed to list all the contents of their product, and yet the New York Times can publish an article intended to promote a political agenda that is costing the American Tax-Payer trillions of dollars, and they never even mention the temperature trend if the region, other than the deliberately misleading quote highlighted above.

If this was a trial, that would be considered “tampering with the evidence,” “failure to disclose relevant evidence,” “misleading the jury,” and outright “fraud, deceit, and deception.” The New York Times abuses their 1st Amendment Protections, and had a Trump supporting corporation behaved is a similar unethical manner, the New York Times would be running front page articles demanding prosecution. The hypocrisy displayed by the New York Times is just one reason they are failing to convince the thinking general public that Climate Change is an important public policy worthy of their support. The New York Times and their deceitful practices make them no different from the Tobacco Companies they attacked decades ago. Maybe the New York Times should be forced to carry a consumer warning “Warning: The New York Times contains Fake News and has been proven to be hazardous to your Intelligence and Wallet.”

Related Topic:

Journalists Drink Too Much, Are Dumber Than Average, Study Finds

20170519_media

h/t to The Junk Science Blog for the inspiration and graphics

Please like, share, subscribe and comment.