Laugh at Liberals

OIL PRICES ARE FALLING, THE EARTH IS COOLING AND I’M FEELING FINE

Oil prices are falling again. I’m constantly checking the web to see when the Democrats aand mainstream media are going to George Bush the credit. Wait a minute. They blamed him for the price of oil going up, doesn’t that mean he get’s the credit for the price going down too?

Yeah, right.

Still, to see oil prices fall the way they have is good news for me and you and good news for economy just don’t expect to see any flag waving in the media. Doom and Gloom is the message of the day until Obama gets elected.

GLOBAL WARMING
I watched the Senate hearings on Global Waming on CSPAN the other day. Dr. Roy Spence, a former NASA scientist during the Clinton Administration and a reknowned climate researcher basically laid the smack down on Sen. Barbara Boxer and the rest of the committee regarding global warming. Recent data shows that there has been no increase in global temperature FOR 7 YEARS. Furthermore, he has conducted extensive research that reveals fundamental flaws in the research that Gore, IPCC and others use to hype global warming (climate change now since there is no longer any warming.)

Here are some excerpts from his opening statement.

On the subject of the Administration’s involvement in policy-relevant scientific work performed by government employees in the EPA, NASA, and other agencies, I can provide some perspective based upon my previous experiences as a NASA employee. For example, during the Clinton-Gore Administration I was told what I could and could not say during congressional testimony. Since it was well known that I am skeptical of the view that mankind’s greenhouse gas emissions are mostly responsible for global warming, I assumed that this advice was to help protect Vice President Gore’s agenda on the subject.

Right there is where you pull off your left glove and smack the guy right in the face.

Regarding the currently popular theory that mankind is responsible for global warming, I am very pleased to deliver good news from the front lines of climate change research. Our latest research results, which I am about to describe, could have an enormous impact on policy decisions regarding greenhouse gas emissions.
Despite decades of persistent uncertainty over how sensitive the climate system is to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, we now have new satellite evidence which strongly suggests that the climate system is much less sensitive than is claimed by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC). Another way of saying this is that the real climate system appears to be dominated by “negative feedbacks” — instead of the “positive feedbacks” which are displayed by all twenty computerized climate models utilized by the IPCC. If true, an insensitive climate system would mean that we have little to worry about in the way of manmade global warming and associated climate change. And, as we will see, it would also mean that the warming we have experienced in the last 100 years is mostly natural. Of course, if climate change is mostly natural then it is largely out of our control, and is likely to end — if it has not ended already, since satellite-measured global temperatures have not warmed for at least seven years now.

You would think there would excitement on the part of Democrats to hear that global warming may not be a manmade problem after all…..and you would be wrong. Spencer went on to explain that the IPCC’s climate models didnt’ calculate cloud cover correctly and were set up to be biased towards predicting warming. His findings are published and are certainly under investigation by other researchers, but read this part.

Significantly, prior to its acceptance for publication, this paper was reviewed by two leading IPCC climate model experts - Piers Forster and Isaac Held– both of whom agreed that we have raised a legitimate issue. Piers Forster, an IPCC report lead author and a leading expert on the estimation of climate sensitivity, even admitted in his review of our paper that other climate modelers need to be made aware of this important issue.
To be fair, in a follow-up communication Piers Forster stated to me his belief that the net effect of the new understanding on climate sensitivity estimates would likely be small. But as we shall see, the latest evidence now suggests otherwise.

He goes on to explain that there is clear and undeniable evidence that the natural forces of El Nino and La Nina have cause the vast majority of global warming over that past few decades. But this fact is completely overlooked by Gore and IPCC researchers.

While this is not necessarily being presented as the only explanation for most of the warming in the last century, it does illustrate that there are potential explanations for recent warming other than just manmade greenhouse gas emissions. Significantly, this is an issue on which the IPCC has remained almost entirely silent. There has been virtually no published work on the possible role of internal climate variations in the warming of the last century.

Why no research into possible other cause of global warming other than man? There’s no money in it.
In his close Spencers brilliantly takes a swipe at Dr. Kevin Trenberth, Al Gore’s scientific guru and lays down the gauntlet for congress.

While it will take some time for the research community to digest this new information, it must be mentioned that new research contradicting the latest IPCC report is entirely consistent with the normal course of scientific progress. I predict that in the coming years, there will be a growing realization among the global warming research community that most of the climate change we have observed is natural, and that mankind’s role is relatively minor.
While other researchers need to further explore and validate my claims, I am heartened by the fact that my recent presentation of these results to an audience of approximately 40 weather and climate researchers at the University of Colorado in Boulder last week (on July 17, 2008) led to no substantial objections to either the data I presented, nor to my interpretation of those data.
And, curiously, despite its importance to climate modeling activities, no one from Dr. Kevin Trenberth’s facility, the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), bothered to drive four miles down the road to attend my seminar, even though it was advertised at NCAR.
I hope that the Committee realizes that, if true, these new results mean that humanity will be largely spared the negative consequences of human-induced climate change. This would be good news that should be celebrated — not attacked and maligned.
And given that virtually no research into possible natural explanations for global warming has been performed, it is time for scientific objectivity and integrity to be restored to the field of global warming research. This Committee could, at a minimum, make a statement that encourages that goal.

The best Barbara Boxer could offer in return is…Aren’t you Rush Limbaugh’s official climatologist? I kid you not. She really said that. It’s testimony like Spencer’s that gives me hope that real science will prevail in the debate on global warming.