Today there was snow on the ground in 49 states. 

Blaming God for the earthquake in Haiti got Pat Robertson some major blowback.  (He didn’t really blame God, he blamed Satan, but work with me here.)  All manner of scorn was heaped upon him.  Fair enough.  Then how about this lesser-publicized remark regarding the earthquake?

When we see what we did at the climate summit in Copenhagen, this is the response, this is what happens, you know what I’m sayin’?

(Emphasis mine.  Well, actually it’s Tim Blair’s, to whom the hat tip goes.)  See it’s OK for actor Danny Glover to blame a planet for these problems.  Heck, Al Gore’s made a living doing that.  But talk about what Blair calls “a less-fashionable deity” and all hell breaks loose.

That’s a phrase that Brit Hume used to describe his mentioning of that same deity.  Sounds like his contention that someone else wouldn’t have faced the same firestorm if they had said the same thing he did about Tiger Woods but suggested a New Age guru, is sounding more and more correct.

Want to nail Robertson for his comment?  Have at it.  But you you should give the same treatment to Glover.  The media and the liberal elite don’t, which suggests which side their on (or, more specifically, against).

Information gleaned from Wikipedia should always be taken with a grain of salt.  As much as open-sourcing a knowledge base has certainly given the site a well-deserved reputation for being a first-stop in doing research, this situation points out (again) that bias can creep in, even with multiple hands contributing.

Lawrence Solomon at the National Post writes about a topic that WUWT readers have known about for a long time: How Wikipedia’s green doctor rewrote 5,428 climate articles.

We’ve known for some time that Wikipedia can’t be trusted to provide unbiased climate information. Solomon starts off by talking about Climategate emails.

The emails also describe how the band plotted to rewrite history as well as science, particularly by eliminating the Medieval Warm Period, a 400 year period that began around 1000 AD.

The Climategate Emails reveal something else, too: the enlistment of the most widely read source of information in the world — Wikipedia — in the wholesale rewriting of this history.

He then focuses on RealClimate.org co-founder William Connolley, who has “touched” 5,428 Wikipedia articles with his unique brand of RC centric editing….

It just seems that almost all the time, especially for highly-political issues, the censorship winds up leaning to the left.  This goes against what the Left says they stand up for; truth, free-speech, the marketplace of ideas, blah blah blah.  It’s just that when many of them are given power over ideas they do precisely what they accuse of Right of doing; censoring, silencing dissent, and all that.  Textbook projection.

But at least the "many eyes" principle, of having many editors attempt to ensure fairness and full disclosure, is working.  Now, at least.  It’s too bad that it took a major Canadian newspaper to finally get some traction in this particular case, and that the editors at Wikipedia were blind to it, but at least we might get some pullback from the bias.  Now, at least.

Shire Network News #176 has been released. The feature interview is with Pastor Ameal Haddad of Ambassadors For Peace. His idea is that people around the world should have religious freedom. I know, crazy, right? Maybe it’s so crazy it might just work through. Click here for the show notes, links, and ways to listen to the show; directly from the web site, by downloading the mp3 file, or by subscribing with your podcatcher of choice.

Below is the text of my commentary.

Hi, this is Doug Payton for Shire Network News with a year-end edition of "Consider This!"

In January of this year, SNN contributors Meryl Yourish and I did a bit of prognostication about 2009, in which we spoke as though it were December.  Well, here we are in December and I’d like to take a look back at my predictions and find out how much of a satirical seer I was.

President Obama, while not having actually had any law enacted or treaty signed regarding global warming, managed to make this year cooler than last year.  Must have been sheer force of will.

Sure enough, some cold temperatures records were set in both Europe and America.  Indeed, it appears that, against all models, warming has stopped, and the "ClimateGate" scandal featured the head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, Kevin Trenberth, proclaiming that it’s a "travesty" that they can’t "account for the lack of warming at the moment".  Clearly, due to President Obama’s force of will.

My second prediction was a bit tongue-in-cheek.  Well, OK, they all were, but this predicted the creation of an Iraqi Olympic Shoe-Throwing Team.  While the team has yet to materialize, the Iraqi reporter that threw a shoe at President Bush was the target of someone apparently trying out for the team.  An exiled reporter, supportive of US policy in Iraq, decided to make his mark.  The IOC, however, judged that the throw was disqualified because it hit a wall, making proper distance measuring impossible, and because proper safety measure were not taken.

My third prediction was simply:

The world now loves us:  They really love us, ever since we elected a Democrat.  Iraq even allows US troops to be stationed there, thanks to the splendid outcome of "Obama’s Terrorist Intervention" in that country, which began on January 20th of this year.

Sure enough, the nations of the world have been saying such nice things about us this past year.  Well, except that they haven’t actually done anything differently.  And except for Poland who we left out of a missile shield system.  And, of course, except for everyone who hated us before; they still hate us now.  But other than that, the world loves us!

And finally…

Universal Agreement:  Both sides of the political aisle have finally come together to speak with one voice.  No longer is there any disagreement, harsh criticism or mean-spirited arguing.  The recently-passed bill, entitled "The Pelosi/Reid Equal Opportunity in Talk Radio and Radical Right-Wing Internet Commentary Act" (otherwise known as the PREOITRARRWICA), has gone a long way to make sure that the voice of the people is heard loud and clear.

No return of the Fairness Doctrine yet, but the government may yet interfere with radio station management in order to get the Fairness Doctrine in effect, if not in actual law. So, I guess I got this one wrong.  But now you see why I had to take such a happy tone in this alternate timeline; it’s not just a good idea, it was the law.

So overall, except for perhaps the first 20 days, this year has shown us that America’s best days are ahead of her, if we can just pass that new $2.5 trillion spending bill.  And I’m sure we will.

Hey, with TARP, bailouts, and a potential budget-busting health care bill, my numbers weren’t that far off.  Liberals are nothing if not predictable.  No Jean Dixon necessary.  Merry Christmas, and consider this.

Do you want to know the real reason behind all the meeting and agreements and doomsaying being done at the Copenhagen climate change confab?  Listen to the applause.

First, the warm-up act, so to speak, with hints of what was to come.

But before [Australian climate change minister Penny Wong] rose to speak the conference proceedings were interrupted by people with whistles and sirens chanting “stop green capitalism” – a sign of the anger in the developing world that the Danish host government is trying to wrest the process from the professional negotiators, who have failed to make any progress, and hand it to politicians, who might have some chance of achieving something before we all leave on Saturday.

And then the headlining act hit the stage.

Then President Chavez brought the house down.

When he said the process in Copenhagen was “not democratic, it is not inclusive, but isn’t that the reality of our world, the world is really and imperial dictatorship…down with imperial dictatorships” he got a rousing round of applause.

When he said there was a “silent and terrible ghost in the room” and that ghost was called capitalism, the applause was deafening.

But then he wound up to his grand conclusion – 20 minutes after his 5 minute speaking time was supposed to have ended and after quoting everyone from Karl Marx to Jesus Christ – “our revolution seeks to help all people…socialism, the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room, that’s the way to save the planet, capitalism is the road to hell….let’s fight against capitalism and make it obey us.”  He won a standing ovation.

Ladies and gentlemen, that is the primary purpose of the Copenhagen conference and those like it.  It’s the elites getting together to bring capitalism down and raise socialism up so that they can exert more power.  It’s a power grab, plain and simple and unashamed. 

You may have your reasons for wanting to see less carbon in the air, but those in politics and government clearly have their own agenda.  Is it yours?

No, I’m not going to list all 100 reasons in the Daily Express column, but I do want to hit some highlights.  (And no, all these reasons are, in and of themselves, reasons specifically why climate change is natural.  Some do, but most of them have to do with enumerating why it’s not man-made, and others are political/scientific reasons why we should not spend billions or trillions on fixing a problem that may not be a problem.)

2) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.

4) After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.

7) The 0.7C increase in the average global temperature over the last hundred years is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends.

11) Politicians and activiists (sic) claim rising sea levels are a direct cause of global warming but sea levels rates have been increasing steadily since the last ice age 10,000 ago

17) The science of what determines the earth’s temperature is in fact far from settled or understood.

23) It is myth that receding glaciers are proof of global warming as glaciers have been receding and growing cyclically for many centuries

26) The IPCC threat of climate change to the world’s species does not make sense as wild species are at least one million years old, which means they have all been through hundreds of climate cycles

33) Today’s CO2 concentration of around 385 ppm is very low compared to most of the earth’s history – we actually live in a carbon-deficient atmosphere

38) The world “warmed” by 0.07 +/- 0.07 degrees C from 1999 to 2008, not the 0.20 degrees C expected by the IPCC

42) The Met Office asserts we are in the hottest decade since records began but this is precisely what the world should expect if the climate is cyclical

52) Global temperatures are below the low end of IPCC predictions not at “at the top end of IPCC estimates”

64) Michael Mann of Penn State University has actually shown that the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age did in fact exist, which contrasts with his earlier work which produced the “hockey stick graph” which showed a constant temperature over the past thousand years or so followed by a recent dramatic upturn.

76) Dr Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, has indicated that out of the 21 climate models tracked by the IPCC the differences in warming exhibited by those models is mostly the result of different strengths of positive cloud feedback – and that increasing CO2 is insufficient to explain global-average warming in the last 50 to 100 years.

78) A proper analysis of ice core records from the past 650,000 years demonstrates that temperature increases have come before, and not resulted from, increases in CO2 by hundreds of years.

91) The accepted global average temperature statistics used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that no ground-based warming has occurred since 1998.

I’ve saved a boatload of links about the whole Climate Research Unit e-mail and document leak, but today I came across an article by the aptly-named author Christopher Booker that distills the issue down to 3 salient points.

There are three threads in particular in the leaked documents which have sent a shock wave through informed observers across the world. Perhaps the most obvious, as lucidly put together by Willis Eschenbach (see McIntyre’s blog Climate Audit and Anthony Watt’s blog Watts Up With That ), is the highly disturbing series of emails which show how Dr Jones and his colleagues have for years been discussing the devious tactics whereby they could avoid releasing their data to outsiders under freedom of information laws.

They have come up with every possible excuse for concealing the background data on which their findings and temperature records were based.

Read the rest of this entry

And it ain’t a happy day for the CRU.  True, this is a cybercrime, and the perpetrator(s) should be brought to justice.  But equally as big is the contents of the >1000 e-mails and >3800 documents.

The Hadley Climate Research Unit has confirmed the hack, so this is not a hoax, and global-warming-skeptic sites like “Watts Up With That” and Andrew Bolt of Australia’s Herald-Sun newspaper are sifting through the data, finding some rather compromising evidence.  Some include details on how temperature data was manipulated, to frustration that the climate models didn’t predict the current global temp decline, to attempts to obfuscate data released via a Freedom of Information request.  Bolt has been updating his post frequently and has a dozen examples so far.

As the Wall St. Journal says, “Well, this should get interesting.”

True, this could all be a major hoax, but with Hadley confirming the breach, and with 61 megabytes of data having been dumped (i.e. a vast amount), this is sounding very real.  Stay tuned.

No, not as in golfing.  I’m going to be quite busy this week, so blog posts this week will consist mostly of a collection of links that I happen across.

John Mark Reynolds, writing at the Evangel blog, wonders about that prediction that Christians would become a fringe political force if they stuck with their position on same-sex marriage.  This after Maine, of all places, upheld traditional marriage.  Not mentioned is that the House of Representatives barely squeaked out a health care bill (passing it with only 2 votes to spare) only after a provision was added that prevented abortion from being covered by it.  Wasn’t that supposed to be a losing issue, too?

October, 2009 was the 3rd coldest October recorded in the US.  Can we officially chuck those computer climate models and just admit we don’t really know what’s going on with climate, and thus should refrain from making pronouncements on what is or isn’t changing it?

Racist graffiti, and Al Sharpton isn’t all over CNN denouncing it?  Oh, wait, it’s anti-white graffiti.  Well then, nothing to see here.

Attorney General Eric Holder is endorsing extending provisions of the Patriot Act including roving wiretaps.  It’s one thing to talk it down when you’re not in the hot seat.  It’s another thing entirely when it’s your responsibility, eh?

The European Union, as a whole, could sink underneath the waves of debt very soon, having total debt equaling 100% of its annual gross domestic product.  A special commission "discovered" that a major reason is the socialist pensions and healthcare that the government guarantees.  And we want to follow them into this whirlpool?

And finally, the legacy of Major Nidal Malik Hasan, and a musing about whether or not political correctness will allow a candid and honest public discussion, or if more people will die at the PC altar.

So asks the BBC:

This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.

But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

So what on Earth is going on?

The article continues on, referring to to Sun output and ocean cycles, and how the climate models didn’t predict this, even though the guys who program the models say they took all this into consideration.

My point is not to debate what is or isn’t heating or cooling the planet, but rather to point out that there is so much that governments around the world want to legislate based on these climate models, while these models are failing in their near-term predictions.  But that doesn’t stop Al Gore from his itinerant preaching, nor the climate scientists from insisting that, never mind the past decade, now it’s going to get warmer, nor governments from trying to save us with new taxes based on models that aren’t predicting properly.

No, instead we’re pushing all our chips in based on buggy climate software.