Obama warns poor nations will put planet ‘under water’ by using fossil fuels
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/25/obama-warns-poor-nations-will-put-planet-under-wat/
By Valerie Richardson – The Washington Times
Saturday, June 25, 2016
The world’s richest nations have long been fueled by oil, coal and natural gas, but President Obama warned Friday that less affluent countries trying to take the same path will put the planet “under water.”
In an interview with Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, Mr. Obama said he hoped social-media “connectivity” will help convince developing nations to eschew fossil fuels, which contribute to rising carbon-dioxide levels in the atmosphere but are also less expensive and more reliable than green energy alternatives.
“In terms of the problems we have to solve, energy is a classic example, the issue of climate change,” Mr. Obama said at the three-day Global Entrepreneurship Summit at Stanford University.
“There are entire continents, sub-Saharan Africa or the Indian sub-continent, where people are developing rapidly. They’re getting connected,” he said. “They’re going to need electricity, they’re going to need energy, but if they duplicate the ways that we produce energy here, or have in the past, then the entire planet is under water.”
The seventh annual summit, which ended Friday, hosted 1,200 entrepreneurs and investors from 170 nations, including for the first time Cuba. The Obama administration announced in December 2014 that it would restore full diplomatic relations with Cuba and end a 54-year-old trade embargo with the communist island nation.…
Brexit Sparks Worry About Fate of Global Climate Action – ‘Will harm international efforts to halt global warming’
Britain’s surprising vote to leave the European Union in a national referendum on Thursday sent a shock through global financial markets, and there is similar concern that the move will have profound implications for climate policy as well.
Clean energy investments, carbon markets and the Paris climate agreement weren’t a major part of the calculus when Britons went to the polls, but now environmentalists fear Britain’s contribution to global climate action may be compromised, with negative ramifications for global warming.
“It leaves me shocked, disappointed and extremely concerned about the future of environmental protections in the UK,” James Thornton, the chief executive of ClientEarth, a non-profit environmental law organization with offices in London, Brussels and Warsaw, said in a statement. “Many of the laws which my organization uses to ensure that nature and health are protected in Britain were drawn up with the UK’s agreement in Brussels. Now as the UK prepares to go it alone, we have no idea which laws will be retained.”
The UK’s former energy and climate change secretary Edward Davey went further, quoting the Bible in a tweet.
“Father, forgive them for they do not know what they are doing”
Fmr. Canadian alderman outs himself! ‘I’m going to come out of the closet – no I’m not gay – but even more controversial – I’m a climate change skeptic!’
http://www.stalbertgazette.com/article/Denying-the-deniers-20160625
“It is therefore correct, indeed verging on compulsory in the scientific tradition, to be skeptical of those who express certainty.” – Patrick Draper, PhD (Ecology)
I’m going to come out of the closet – no I’m not gay but even more controversial – I’m a climate change skeptic! Worse yet, I guess I’m almost a climate change denier even though I try my best to keep an open mind on the subject.
Admittedly, I’ve never been totally comfortable with the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, especially with all the controversy around the statistical methods used by Michael Mann to come to the conclusions that he did. In particular was the influential ‘hockey stick’ graph which was characteristically skewed to support his conclusions. The original mandate of the IPCC from the United Nations spelled out that they were to focus on “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the atmosphere, and which is in addition to natural climate variability.” Given that criteria it was obvious what their conclusions had to be or there would be no reason for them to exist. The United Nations obviously had an agenda and told the IPCC what they were to find – full stop!
Deniers have been ostracized from day one based on the endorsement of the IPCC report by 90 per cent (or some such number) of the scientific community. But let us bear in mind that even IPCC states that it is ‘extremely likely’ that human emissions have been the cause of global warming. Their claim is that it is 95 per cent certain. Furthermore, the phrases, it is ‘likely’ and ’95 per cent certain’ don’t make it any more than a hypothesis. There is still room for question and it is the responsibility of the scientific community to debate the issue. For the climate alarmists to condemn the deniers is as wrong as to condemn believers in an absolute being. And now, the lack of a rise in temperature since the turn of the century places their research in some doubt.
Unfortunately as Bob Dylan says “Money doesn’t talk, it swears.” Money is another source of my concern. As Vivian Crouse has determined through her research most of the money which funds Canadian anti-oil organizations comes from U.S. sources such as the Rockefeller Foundation, Hewlett Foundation, Tides …
Warmist Eco-Author Spoke To AG About Global Warming Skeptics Before Exxon Reports
A noted environmental activist met with an attorney general conducting an inquisition against ExxonMobil long before reports surfaced alleging the company hid information related to global warming, a panel at the Democratic Progressive Caucus revealed Wednesday.
Eco-author Naomi Oreskes, who authored Merchant of Doubt, a book about the history of global warming skepticism, told the panel that she “was invited about a year or so ago to New York to speak to the staff” of New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, “mostly about the work we did in Merchant of Doubt – the history of misinformation and what our findings were.”
She is also a board member of the Climate Accountability Institute (CAI), a group responsible for manipulating data smearing Exxon. Oreskes told the panel she convened a few weeks ago “with some colleagues from the Union of Concerned Scientists, which also involved the staff of Attorney Generals offices from a number of states who came to listen to again factual presentations about climate science, history of climate disinformation and also a presentation by Sharon Eubanks who had led the US Department of justice prosecution of tobacco industry under the RICO statues.”
The climate science author was likely referring to the Attorneys General United for Clean Power, a group of about 17 attorneys general, as well as former Vice President Al Gore, committed to investigating Exxon and global warming skeptics for supposedly duping the public about climate change.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/23/famed-eco-author-spoke-to-ag-about-global-warming-skeptics-before-exxon-reports/#ixzz4CarLiSc3…
‘The sun goes blank again during the weakest solar cycle in more than a century’
By Meteorologist Paul Dorian – Vencore, Inc.
The latest solar image is completely spotless for the second time this month; image courtesy NASA
Overview
For the second time this month, the sun has gone completely blank. On June 4th, the sun went completely spotless for the first time since 2011 and that quiet spell lasted for about 4 days. Sunspot regions then reappeared for the next few weeks on a sporadic basis, but are once again completely missing from the surface of the sun. The blank sun is a sign that the next solar minimum is approaching and there will be an increasing number of spotless days over the next few years. At first, the blankness will stretch for just a few days at a time, then it’ll continue for weeks at a time, and finally it should last for months at a time when the sunspot cycle reaches its nadir. The next solar minimum phase is expected to take place around 2019 or 2020. The current solar cycle is the 24th since 1755 when extensive recording of solar sunspot activity began and is the weakest in more than a century with the fewest sunspots since cycle 14 peaked in February 1906.
Sunspot numbers for solar cycles 22, 23 and 24 which shows a clear weakening trend; courtesy Dr. David Hathaway, NASA/MSFC
Solar cycle 24
We are currently more than seven years into Solar Cycle 24 and it appears the solar maximum of this cycle was reached in April 2014 during a spike in activity (current location indicated by arrow). Going back to 1755, there have been only a few solar cycles in the previous 23 that have had a lower number of sunspots during its maximum phase. The peak of activity in April 2014 was actually a second peak in solar cycle 24 that surpassed the level of an earlier peak which occurred in March 2012. While many solar cycles are double-peaked, this is the first one in which the second peak in sunspot number was larger than the first peak. The sunspot number plot (above) shows a clear weakening trend in solar cycles since solar cycle 22 peaked around 1990.
While a weak solar cycle does suggest strong solar storms will occur less often than during stronger and more active cycles, it does not rule them out entirely. In fact, the famous “superstorm” known as the
Federal Energy Lab Forced To Close After ‘Disturbing’ Data Manipulation – ‘Tell me what you want and I will get it for you’
http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/23/federal-lab-forced-to-close-after-disturbing-data-manipulation/…
Brexit is also a repudiation of EU ‘global warming’ mandates – 69‰ saw ‘green movement’ as a ‘force for ill’
http://newbostonpost.com/2016/06/24/brexit-is-also-a-repudiation-of-eu-global-warming-mandates/
Brexit is also a repudiation of EU global warming mandates
BY MICHAEL BASTASCH | JUNE 24, 2016, 13:09 EDT
In this Friday, June 24, 2016 file photo, a remain supporter stops to talk to people as he walks around with his European flag across the street from the Houses of Parliament in London. (AP Photo/Matt Dunham, File)When British voters chose to leave the European Union Thursday night, they weren’t just voting against Brussels’ immigration policies, they were also voting against Europe’s growing list of green mandates.
The EU’s allowance of millions of refugees and open borders policy did play a large role in the “Brexit” vote, but it was also a repudiation of global warming policies Brussels has imposed on the U.K.
“The decision by the British people to leave the European Union will have significant and long-term implications for energy and climate policies,” Dr. Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Forum, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Conservative pollster Lord Michael Ashcroft surveyed 12,369 Brits voting in Thursday’s referendum and found 69 percent of those who voted to leave the EU saw the “green movement” as a “force for ill.”
“By large majorities, voters who saw multiculturalism, feminism, the Green movement, globalisation and immigration as forces for good voted to remain in the EU; those who saw them as a force for ill voted by even larger majorities to leave,” Ashcroft wrote.
Britons have been struggling under high energy prices for years, in part due to rules passed down from EU bureaucrats. Environmentalists opposed leaving the EU for precisely this reason. The Brexit vote signals the U.K. is lurching right, and will likely reject heavy-handed climate policies.
“It is highly unlikely that the party-political green consensus that has existed in Parliament for the last 10 years will survive the seismic changes that are now unfolding after Britain’s Independence Day,” Peiser said.
Prime Minister David Cameronannounced his resignation after the vote, since he supported the staying in the EU. Cameron was one of the main forces behind the so-called “green consensus” in Parliament, which supported green energy subsidies and energy taxes to pay for them.
“The British people have voted to leave the European Union and their will must be respected,” Cameron said Friday. “The will of the British people is an instruction that must be delivered.”
Cameron’s government did begin tocut back subsidies