Greens move to legislate euthanasia
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/people-in-politics/greens-move-to-legislate-euthanasia/story-fn5oatrf-1225926203755

See you at the Eco-Gulag (if you haven’t been euthanized that is)

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/20/new-zealands-ets-law-will-surely-fix-this/

and the ODT relays Reuters rubbish about 2010 being record hot year and walruses fleeing the ice melt (like they do every year).

Survey: Concern wanes over climate change

“19.3% said the climate change problem effectively didn’t exist – up from 17.5%.”

“45.8% agreed that climate change was happening and caused by humans – up from 44.2%”

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/survey-concern-wanes-over-climate-change-3787489

Farms, orchards bear brunt of storm

“The alarm went off at 8.30pm on Saturday and that’s the earliest in the evening we’ve had an alarm go off since 1969,” (just prior to the 70′s “Global Cooling” scare http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf)

http://www.odt.co.nz/regions/otago/127149/snow-hits-farms-orchards

Investigation into stadium collapse

“Stadium general manager Nigel Skelt said it was an unusually large dump of snow which caused the collapse, and dismissed Mr Shadbolt’s claims.

“I think they’re unfounded, in my professional opinion,” Mr Skelt told TV3.

Former Invercargill Licensing Trust chairman Ray Harper, who was involved with the building 10 years ago, said it was a “freak circumstance” and there was nothing wrong with its construction.

“Never in my life, in 80 years, have I seen Invercargill with so much snow,” the master builder told Radio New Zealand.

The stadium used the best engineers and architects, he said. ”

http://www.odt.co.nz/regions/southland/127122/investigation-stadium-collapse

Or perhaps the “best” engineers and architects believe what they read in newspapers.

Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html

Stories such as this proposal by the mad-science fringe to save the planet by……polluting the planet.

From WUWT http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/16/another-aerosol-injection-plan/

“Scientists at the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology have taken a new approach on examining a proposal to fix the warming planet. So-called geo-engineering ideas—large-scale projects to change the Earth’s climate—have included erecting giant mirrors in space to reflect solar radiation, injecting aerosols of sulfate into the stratosphere making a global sunshade,,,,,,,,,,,,,,”

Of course they use the CO2 distorted global climate models to justify their “experiment”:

“The Carnegie scientists ran five simulations using a global climate model with different sulfate aerosol concentrations depending on latitude. They then used the results from these simulations in an optimization model to determine what distribution of sulfates would come closest to achieving specified climate goals. They then tested these distributions in the global climate model to assess how well the climate goals were met”

Even Greenpeace opposes this approach. From Prison Planet:

“However, when you consider the fact that the global warming mantra is a thin veil for eugenics and population control, it’s unlikely that the world’s elite care about one third of the planet’s population being unable to eat, in fact they would probably see that as a bonus.

The known facts about what happens when the environment is loaded with sulphur dioxide are bad enough, since the compound is the main component of acid rain, which according to the EPA “Causes acidification of lakes and streams and contributes to the damage of trees at high elevations (for example, red spruce trees above 2,000 feet) and many sensitive forest soils. In addition, acid rain accelerates the decay of building materials and paints, including irreplaceable buildings, statues, and sculptures that are part of our nation’s cultural heritage.”

The health effects of bombarding the skies with sulphur dioxide alone are enough to mothball taxpayer funded research into the idea.

The following health effects are linked with exposure to sulphur.

- Neurological effects and behavioral changes
- Disturbance of blood circulation
- Heart damage
- Effects on eyes and eyesight
- Reproductive failure
- Damage to immune systems
- Stomach and gastrointestinal disorder
- Damage to liver and kidney functions
- Hearing defects
- Disturbance of the hormonal metabolism
- Dermatological effects
- Suffocation and lung embolism

According to the LennTech website, “Laboratory tests with test animals have indicated that sulfur can cause serious vascular damage in veins of the brains, the heart and the kidneys. These tests have also indicated that certain forms of sulfur can cause foetal damage and congenital effects. Mothers can even carry sulfur poisoning over to their children through mother milk. Finally, sulfur can damage the internal enzyme systems of animals.”

Fred Singer, president of the Science Environmental Policy Project and a skeptic of man-made global warming theories, warns that the consequences of tinkering with the planet’s delicate eco-system could have far-reaching dangers.

“If you do this on a continuous basis, you would depress the ozone layer and cause all kinds of other problems that people would rather avoid,” said Singer.

Even Greenpeace’s chief UK scientist – a staunch advocate of the man-made global warming explanation – Doug Parr – has slammed attempts to geo-engineer the planet as “outlandish” and “dangerous”..

http://www.prisonplanet.com/geo-engineering-killing-off-the-useless-eaters.html

The first comment at WUWT says it all (apart from the sinister eugenic connotations):

Andres Valencia says:
September 16, 2010 at 9:31 pm

Is this for real?
First, models substitute experiments, now models substitute common sense!
Precautions?
Please keep it virtual, yes?

And the model outputs are based on model input assumptions. Fourth WUWT comment:

Mike Ford says:
September 16, 2010 at 9:43 pm

I got lost in the 3rd paragraph. The output of model 1 is the input to model 2. The output of model 2 is the input to model 3. This is science??????

Except that the initial model 1 input assumptions do not replicate the climate drivers active over the last 200 years; they only assume that ACO2 is the major climate driver so they cannot even replicate the current observed condition. If they did incorporate the natural cycles – solar (not the Judith McLean version), 60 year, Milankovitch etc they might be able to take a stab at the next seasons weather (NiWA take note) and the Global Warming, sorry, “Global Climate Disruption” problem will have blown away in the last spring storm (Nick Smith take note).

So, where does the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology get their funding?

Answer, the Carnegie Endowment
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/about/index.cfm?fa=funding

The Rockefeller Brothers contribute via Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Rockefeller Financial Services and The Rockefeller Foundation.

And what does David Rockefeller believe?

“The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.” (New Zealand take note).

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/16/white-house-global-warming-global-climate-disruption/

Holdren wants to de-develop USA.

White House Science Czar Says He Would Use ‘Free Market’ to ‘De-Develop the United States’
http://climatechangedispatch.com/enviro-extremists/7687-white-house-science-czar-says-he-would-use-free-market-to-de-develop-the-united-states

Also at the same site http://climatechangedispatch.com/ :-

Global warming is dead. Long live, er, ‘Global climate disruption’! by James Delingpole

WH Science Czar ‘Global Warming’ is ‘Dangerous Misnomer’ by James Lewis

Eco-Fascists Call For Tyranny To Enforce Draconian Agenda by Paul Joseph Watson

The modelers combine natural and anthropogenic CO2 concentrations to arrive at the anthropogenic forcing. The Mauna Loa uptick in the combined dataset provides the magnifier that is assumed to be a result of increased human emissions and assumed to be the reason for post 1958 warming!

RT, this is relevant to the despicable graph in your “Don’t lie to me Nick Smith — 1″ post
http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/07/dont-lie-to-me-nick-smith-%E2%80%94-1/ What you see is just the Mauna Loa portion.

Graphs that tell a different story can be found on the homepage of Global Warming Science (a link is incorrect on the left side graph and I have asked the site owner, Alan Cheetham, for links to the full-size graphs – might be useful for “Don’t lie to me Nick Smith — 2″ ?)
http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/

And The Hockey Schtick homepage
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/

From another un-verifiable source:-
This graph (A) illustrates that there is in fact no correlation between the spliced Law Dome icecore-Mauna Loa CO2 concentrations dataset of IPCC AGW theory and the Hadcrut3 temperature series. Even the revised warming model on the graph is doubtful IMO given the current PDO situation
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/5721/newhadcrut3warming.png

This graph (B) illustrates the divergence between the IPCC AGW models and actual RSS satellite observations
http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/8838/rsslogwarming.png

Note the difference between the multipliers in the un-realistic extrapolations in (A) and the RSS trendline in (B).

4.7 and 2.33 in (A) vs 1.05 in (B)

I have since discovered that 19 simulations from 5 models were submitted to ar4. The simulations were unable to account for 1930′s warming and post 1970′s warming. The problem being that the as yet un-ascribed 60 year climate cycle is not incorporated in the natural forcings.

So a natural forcings only simulation run by NIWA HPCF UM will be meaningless (as will any other run) until the model can replicate the 60 year cycle.

The situation is explained comprehensively here:
http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/SixtyYearCycle.htm