Investment and other financial matters

Archive for September, 2012

Well said, Dr Spencer

The Al Gore Show: 24 Hours of Denying Reality
Aug. 29, 2011 | Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.

Maybe the best way to summarize the main message of this post is this:

There have been no weather events observed to date – including Hurricane
Irene – which can be reasonably claimed to be outside the realm of
natural climate variability.

Now, you can believe – as Al Gore claims – that the present warm period
we are experiencing has caused more hurricanes, more tornadoes, too much
rain, too little rain, too much snow, too little snow, etc., but those
are matters of faith, not of observable scientific reality.

Until a month or so ago, we were near record lows in global tropical
cyclone activity, after a precipitous 6-year drop following the most
recent 2005 peak in activity (click for full size version):

From what I can tell at Ryan Maue’s website, it sounds like global
activity is now back up and running about normal.

Also, we have not had a Cat 3 or stronger hurricane make landfall in the
U.S. in almost 6 years now, which is the longest ‘drought’ for U.S.
landfalling major hurricanes on record.

There is even published evidence that the 1970s and 1980s might have
experienced the lowest levels of hurricane activity in 270 years (Nyberg
et al. 2007 Nature 447: 698-702), and that the 20th Century (a period of
warming) experienced less hurricane activity than in previous centuries
(Chenoweth and Divine 2008 Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems).

Claims that warming "should" or "will" cause more hurricanes are based
upon theory, that’s all. What I have listed are based upon historical
events, which suggest (if anything) periods of warmth might also be
periods of fewer hurricanes, not more.

24 Hours of Denying Reality

On September 14, Al Gore will host a "global" event called 24 Hours of
Reality, which is part of his Climate Reality Project. As the website
states:

"24 Hours of Reality will focus the world’s attention on the full truth,
scope, scale and impact of the climate crisis. To remove the doubt.
Reveal the deniers. And catalyze urgency around an issue that affects
every one of us."

From what I have been hearing, Mr. Gore will be emphasizing record
weather events as proof of anthropogenic global warming. What most
people don’t realize is that you can have a 100 year weather record
event every year, if they are in different places.

Besides, as a meteorologist I must question the whole idea of 100-year
event. Since even the longest weather station datasets only go back
about 100 years, it is questionable whether we can even say what
constitutes a 100-year event.

I especially dislike Gore’s and others’ use of the pejorative "denier".
Even some climate scientists who should know better have started using
the term.

What exactly does Mr. Gore think we "deny"? Do we deny climate? No, we
were studying climate since before he could spell the word.

Do we deny global warming? No, we believe it has indeed warmed in the
last few hundred years, just like it did before the Medieval Warm Period
around 1000 AD:

So what do we deny, if anything? Well, what *I* deny is that we can say
with any level of certainty how much of our recent warmth is due to
humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions versus natural climate variability.

No one pays me to say this. It’s the most obvious scientific conclusion
based upon the evidence. When the IPCC talks about the high
 "probability" that warming in the last 50 years is mostly manmade, they
are talking about their level of faith. Statistical probabilities do not
apply to one-of-a-kind, theoretically-expected events.

I could have done better in my career if I played along with the IPCC
global warming talking points, which would have led to more funded
contracts and more publications.

It is much easier to get published if you include phrases like, ".this
suggests anthropogenic global warming could be worse than previously
thought" in your study.

In contrast, Mr. Gore has made hundreds of millions of dollars by
preaching his message of a "climate crisis".

I would say that it is Mr. Gore who is the "climate denier", since he
denies the role of nature in climate variability. He instead chooses to
use theory as his "reality".

What I worry about is what will happen if we get another Hurricane
Andrew (1992) which hit Miami as a Cat 5, or Camille in 1969, also a Cat
5. The reporters will probably have heart attacks.

.
posted by admin in Uncategorized and have No Comments

A balanced view on climate change

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoXJpUa6CCw&NR=1

The BEST Rational Discussion EVER on Climate Change Reality

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have No Comments

Clean Energy "Investments" Just A Tiny $243 BILLION In 2010

Clean Energy "Investments" Just A Tiny $243 BILLION In 2010

Have you ever thought about how lucky we are that only kind-hearted helpful
souls are involved in the erstwhile cottage industry known as "renewable
energy"?

Imagine if a less-than-scrupulous agent got into these green-fields of
money, and frolicked in the vast acreage of subsidies, schemes, and easy
loans?

Where would we be?

The public would think the people and the industry were here to save us, the
industry could prod levers of government to encourage more subsidies and
pro-renewable energy legislation.

The "cottage" industry could also pay for and help write reports that the
government then used in order to convince the people to put more of their
goods and chattels in the public-trough.

In variations on the circular theme, the industry could apply for grants
from the government to help pay for the reports it wrote for the government
to help it earn even more subsidies, or to cripple it’s competitors.

e.g.

http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2011/6/16/ideological-money-la…

Thus deadly positive feedback would spiral out of control.

Then imagine it wasn’t just less-then-scrupulous renewable energy fans, but
if money-hungry-profiteers from large well financed houses were set loose in
a global trough?

Ponder that it doesn’t take a less-than-scrupulous operator to fund an army
of full time emissaries-of-green as PR agents and lobbyists.

Any honest businessman would do it, and no one would fault that. It’s just
advertising and networking.

Even a small percentage of $243 billion worldwide buys quite a lot of
lobbying.

It’s time the world woke up and realized that renewables are no longer a
small time struggling industry.

They might not produce more than a tiny percentage of the goods and
services, but they’re a large multinational conglomerate force.

http://joannenova.com.au/2011/06/clean-energy-investments-just-a-tiny…

Warmest Regards

B0nz0

"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."

Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

"A major problem has been the co-option of climate science by politics,
ambition, greed, and what seems to be a hereditary human need for a
righteous cause."

"What better cause than "saving" the planet, especially if one can get
ample, secure funding at the same time?"

William Happer, Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics, Princeton
University.

"Today’s debate about global warming is essentially a debate about freedom.
The environmentalists would like to mastermind each and every possible (and
impossible) aspect of our lives."

Vaclav Klaus, Blue Planet in Green Shackles

"If climate has not "tipped" in over 4 billion years it’s not going to tip
now due to mankind. The planet has a natural thermostat"

Richard S. Lindzen, Atmospheric Physicist, Professor of Meteorology MIT,
Former IPCC Lead Author

"It does not matter who you are, or how smart you are, or what title you
have, or how many of you there are, and certainly not how many papers your
side has published, if your prediction is wrong then your hypothesis is
wrong. Period."

Professor Richard Feynman, Nobel Laureate in Physics

"A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming."

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is to
show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result"

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a back-up plan by the
environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm: another try
at condemning fossil fuels!"

http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/threat-ocean-acidification-great…

Before attacking hypothetical problems, let us first solve the real problems
that threaten humanity. One single water pump at an equivalent cost of a
couple of solar panels can indeed spare hundreds of Sahel women the daily
journey to the spring and spare many infections and lives.

Martin De Vlieghere, philosopher

"The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that
it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of
mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible."

Bertrand Russell

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have No Comments

BREAKING NEWS: A Climate Model Finally Produces Meaningful Results

BREAKING NEWS: A Climate Model Finally Produces Meaningful Results

In a shock result, a new climate model produced results that make sense.

The new CCFAFM* model shows that future projected temperatures are closely
tied to financial and political forcings.

Unlike other climate models, the awkwardly titled CCFAFM was not coupled
with oceanic or terrestrial carbon cycle simulations, but with money and
politics.

The model studied the flow of finance and found a quasi-linear relationship
with Climate-Fear.

The NCT team concludes:

".the unbalanced outward radiation of taxpayer money, will very likely cause
dangerous cooling of family finances."

"We homogenized, adjusted and used liberally unprincipled component
method**, too sophisticated for non-climate scientists to understand, and
produced a new set of hockey sticks, giving a very robust prediction (>90%
likelihood) that we are all being totally screwed."

A solution to the climate-financial cycle is apparent from the model

Currently information flow is unidirectional from the UN and governments to
the population, so if the flow in information is reversed,  potentially, tax
funds will return to the people.

Similarly, funds paid to climate skeptics may reverse the financial outgoing
longwave radiation.

A large uncontrolled, non-crossover, unhomogenized study is currently
underway across the Western World.

If you’d like to take part in the study, please email a politician, or
bureaucrat.

Or donate to your favorite skeptic!

.

*ClimateChangeFinanceAndFearModel

**For further information, contact Michael C at NCT. In his words: "Anyone
wanting my raw data..ha ha – only when CRU releases theirs."

Warmest Regards

B0nz0

"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."

Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

"A major problem has been the co-option of climate science by politics,
ambition, greed, and what seems to be a hereditary human need for a
righteous cause."

"What better cause than "saving" the planet, especially if one can get
ample, secure funding at the same time?"

William Happer, Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics, Princeton
University.

"Today’s debate about global warming is essentially a debate about freedom.
The environmentalists would like to mastermind each and every possible (and
impossible) aspect of our lives."

Vaclav Klaus, Blue Planet in Green Shackles

"If climate has not "tipped" in over 4 billion years it’s not going to tip
now due to mankind. The planet has a natural thermostat"

Richard S. Lindzen, Atmospheric Physicist, Professor of Meteorology MIT,
Former IPCC Lead Author

"It does not matter who you are, or how smart you are, or what title you
have, or how many of you there are, and certainly not how many papers your
side has published, if your prediction is wrong then your hypothesis is
wrong. Period."

Professor Richard Feynman, Nobel Laureate in Physics

"A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming."

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is to
show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result"

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a back-up plan by the
environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm: another try
at condemning fossil fuels!"

http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/threat-ocean-acidification-great…

Before attacking hypothetical problems, let us first solve the real problems
that threaten humanity. One single water pump at an equivalent cost of a
couple of solar panels can indeed spare hundreds of Sahel women the daily
journey to the spring and spare many infections and lives.

Martin De Vlieghere, philosopher

"The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that
it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of
mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible."

Bertrand Russell

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have No Comments

Juliar Liehard's Carbon Tax Will Make Us Happier!!!!

Juliar Liehard’s Carbon Tax Will Make Us Happier!!!!

Oh really?

If You Believe This, I Have A Slightly Used Bridge To Sell You .

Aug 29 2011

Do people still believe this stuff?

"If we don’t start tackling climate change, Australians will be increasingly
depressed, anxious or stressed…. and more prone to substance abuse, a new
report says. "

"The report, A Climate of Suffering: The Real Cost of Living with Inaction
on Climate Change, draws on the work of mental health experts, community
practitioners and survivors of natural disasters. "

"It argues that in the wake of extreme weather, such as cyclones and
droughts, there is an increase in depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress
and substance abuse. "

"Up to one in five people were likely to suffer emotional injury, stress and
despair…. "

"The report, commissioned by The Climate Institute and launched at the Brain
and Mind Institute by Professor Ian Hickie on Monday, argues that if we don’t
start reversing pollution levels, extreme weather events are likely to
increase in frequency and or intensity."

One fact isn’t included in this study:

by how much will depression levels by cut by Julia Gillard’s carbon dioxide
tax?

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/climate-will-make-us-de…

Warmest Regards

B0nz0

"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."

Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

"A major problem has been the co-option of climate science by politics,
ambition, greed, and what seems to be a hereditary human need for a
righteous cause."

"What better cause than "saving" the planet, especially if one can get
ample, secure funding at the same time?"

William Happer, Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics, Princeton
University.

"Today’s debate about global warming is essentially a debate about freedom.
The environmentalists would like to mastermind each and every possible (and
impossible) aspect of our lives."

Vaclav Klaus, Blue Planet in Green Shackles

"If climate has not "tipped" in over 4 billion years it’s not going to tip
now due to mankind. The planet has a natural thermostat"

Richard S. Lindzen, Atmospheric Physicist, Professor of Meteorology MIT,
Former IPCC Lead Author

"It does not matter who you are, or how smart you are, or what title you
have, or how many of you there are, and certainly not how many papers your
side has published, if your prediction is wrong then your hypothesis is
wrong. Period."

Professor Richard Feynman, Nobel Laureate in Physics

"A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming."

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is to
show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result"

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a back-up plan by the
environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm: another try
at condemning fossil fuels!"

http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/threat-ocean-acidification-great…

Before attacking hypothetical problems, let us first solve the real problems
that threaten humanity. One single water pump at an equivalent cost of a
couple of solar panels can indeed spare hundreds of Sahel women the daily
journey to the spring and spare many infections and lives.

Martin De Vlieghere, philosopher

"The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that
it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of
mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible."

Bertrand Russell

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (3)

An Honest Climate Scientist (For a Change) Answers Your Questions

An Honest Climate Scientist Answers Your Questions

As in:

- is warming actually bad for us?

- are we sure we actually caused it?

- is it worth trying to "stop" it?

- what difference to the temperature will the Government’s carbon dioxide
tax make?

Aug 29 2011

Professor Bob Carter answers the questions the Government won’t.

————————————

Agreed Facts

Let us start with the three key facts on which nearly all scientists agree:

1.A gentle warming of up to about 0.5 C occurred between 1979 and 1998; but
since 1998 global temperature has now been static or cooling gently for ten
years, despite continuing increases in CO2 emissions;

2.The late 20th century warming of 0.5 C, and the current pause or cooling,
fall well within the bounds of previous natural temperature change; they are
therefore not necessarily alarming, nor necessarily of human causation.

3.Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, i.e., putting extra into the
atmosphere will cause some warming.

————————————

Three other questions of importance have indeterminate answers

1.How much of the warming of the 20th century (~0.8 C) was natural and how
much human-caused?

No accurate answer is known, but almost certainly more than half the warming
was natural, i.e. only a few tenths of a degree might have had human
causation.

2.Will the 20th century warming resume or not?

Again, no-one knows for sure. Currently the planet is cooling, and we have a
quiet sun – which indicates that more cooling is likely.

3.Would more warming, if it occurs, be beneficial or harmful?

Both, depending upon geography, but overall the net benefits may well exceed
the harm. For it is no accident that text-books call a warmer period that
occurred about 8,000 years ago the "Holocene climatic OPTIMUM".

————————————

The two key policy questions

Against this background of both certain and uncertain science, there are two
key policy questions that need to be asked, and together they comprise a
cost-benefit analysis. Such an analysis is simple in principle; and it does
not require complex Treasury or CSIRO computer models to calculate.

The intended carbon dioxide tax is based upon two assumptions.

First, that the dangerous global warming hypothesis is true; and,

second, that cutting human emissions will result in significantly less
warming in the future.

Let’s see, then:

What is the cost?

At the intended rate of $23/tonne of carbon dioxide emitted, >$100 billion
of extra costs will be imposed by 2020, and these costs will be passed down
to every citizen of Australia at a rate of about $500/person (or
$2,000/family of four) per year.

What is the benefit?

If (and it’s a very big if) implementing the new tax actually does result in
a cut of 5% in Australian emissions, which is the government’s target, then
the theoretical amount of global warming averted would be much less than
one-thousandth of a degree; even cutting Australia’s emissions altogether
would avert warming of only 0.02 C (two one-hundredths of a degree).

So the question is "How many people here today are prepared to pay extra
costs of $500/person/year in return for a notional warming averted of less
than one-thousandth of a degree?"

http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2011/08/carter-in-canb…

Warmest Regards

B0nz0

"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."

Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

"A major problem has been the co-option of climate science by politics,
ambition, greed, and what seems to be a hereditary human need for a
righteous cause."

"What better cause than "saving" the planet, especially if one can get
ample, secure funding at the same time?"

William Happer, Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics, Princeton
University.

"Today’s debate about global warming is essentially a debate about freedom.
The environmentalists would like to mastermind each and every possible (and
impossible) aspect of our lives."

Vaclav Klaus, Blue Planet in Green Shackles

"If climate has not "tipped" in over 4 billion years it’s not going to tip
now due to mankind. The planet has a natural thermostat"

Richard S. Lindzen, Atmospheric Physicist, Professor of Meteorology MIT,
Former IPCC Lead Author

"It does not matter who you are, or how smart you are, or what title you
have, or how many of you there are, and certainly not how many papers your
side has published, if your prediction is wrong then your hypothesis is
wrong. Period."

Professor Richard Feynman, Nobel Laureate in Physics

"A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming."

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is to
show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result"

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips

"Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a back-up plan by the
environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm: another try
at condemning fossil fuels!"

http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/threat-ocean-acidification-great…

Before attacking hypothetical problems, let us first solve the real problems
that threaten humanity. One single water pump at an equivalent cost of a
couple of solar panels can indeed spare hundreds of Sahel women the daily
journey to the spring and spare many infections and lives.

Martin De Vlieghere, philosopher

"The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that
it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of
mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible."

Bertrand Russell

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (5)

Good idea: Nats pledge to decentralise federal departments

"I was fascinated to go through the ERC process (Expenditure Review
Committee) to find out that the Plague Locust Commission is in Fyshwick,
(Canberra).

I’ve never had much problem with plague locusts in Fyshwick".
http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/content/201108/s3304481.htm

Hey, that should thin out the public service – how many couch potatoes
would relocate to Wagga Wagga?

Brilliant!

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (2)

New Report on Global Warming Contradicts U.N.'s IPCC

New Report on Global Warming Contradicts U.N.’s IPCC
August 29th 2011

The United Nations’ IPCC,
already under severe criticism for violating the requirements of
academic peer review and relying on secondary sources, comes under
attack again in a new report co-produced by three nonprofit research
organizations.

According to the new report, "natural causes are very likely to be [the]
dominant" cause of climate change that took place in the twentieth and
at the start of the twenty-first centuries. "We are not saying
anthropogenic greenhouse gases (GHG) cannot produce some warming or have
not in the past. Our conclusion is that the evidence shows they are not
playing a substantial role."

The authors of the new report go on to say "the net effect of continued
warming and rising carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere is
most likely to be beneficial to humans, plants, and wildlife."

Both conclusions contradict the findings of the widely cited reports of
the IPCC.

more here  http://tinyurl.com/yg6qbeu

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comment (1)

Is the Airborne Fraction of Anthropogenic Carbon Dioxide Increasing?

Science News
Is the Airborne Fraction of Anthropogenic Carbon Dioxide Increasing?
ScienceDaily (Dec. 31, 2009) – Most of the carbon dioxide emitted by
human activity does not remain in the atmosphere, but is instead
absorbed by the oceans and terrestrial ecosystems. In fact, only about
45 percent of emitted carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere.

However, some studies have suggested that the ability of oceans and
plants to absorb carbon dioxide recently may have begun to decline and
that the airborne fraction of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions is
therefore beginning to increase.
Many climate models also assume that the airborne fraction will
increase. Because understanding of the airborne fraction of carbon
dioxide is important for predicting future climate change, it is
essential to have accurate knowledge of whether that fraction is
changing or will change as emissions increase.

To assess whether the airborne fraction is indeed increasing, Wolfgang
Knorr of the Department of Earth Sciences at the University of Bristol
reanalyzed available atmospheric carbon dioxide and emissions data since
1850 and considers the uncertainties in the data.

In contradiction to some recent studies, he finds that the airborne
fraction of carbon dioxide has not increased either during the past 150
years or during the most recent five decades.

The research is published in Geophysical Research Letters

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091230184221.htm

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have No Comments

video debunks the global warming scam finally and for all time

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7KsnVtaDCg

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have No Comments