Observations Poke Finger Of Reality In The Eye Of Global Warming Protectionists

Pacific islands not drowning but growing against all AGW predictions. Image Credit: George Steinmetz/Corbis

Observations Poke Finger Of Reality In The Eye Of Global Warming Protectionists

This week, the United Nations concludes a two-week meeting in Bonn, Germany on environmental climate and Global Warming issues looking for a binding agreement on greenhouse gases.

Progress toward reaching a comprehensive global climate deal among industrial nations ... read this as a Cap & Trade money gathering scheme ... has been elusive to craft ever since information was revealed that statistical information upon which climate projections were based was tainted and fraudulently crafted by scientists working at the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia. This data was then used as the core data upon which the three other main sources used as proof the AGW exists thus placing all of their conclusions as tainted or based on fraud.

During the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change sponsored Bonn meetings which are being attended by delegates from 185 nations, the first full-fledged climate negotiations since the disappointing December summit in Copenhagen which came up only with a nonbinding political declaration ... additional information was published that helps to throw the whole "Oceans Rise", "the sky is falling" fear scenario, out of the window.

Maps of the Pacific from the South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission Image Credit: SOPAC

This excerpted and edited from the New Scientist -

Shape-shifting islands defy sea-level rise
By Wendy Zukerman, New Scientist/Environment - 02 June 2010

AGAINST all the odds, a number of shape-shifting islands in the middle of the Pacific Ocean are standing up to the effects of climate change.

For years, people have warned that the smallest nations on the planet - island states that barely rise out of the ocean - face being wiped off the map by rising sea levels. Now the first analysis of the data broadly suggests the opposite: most have remained stable over the last 60 years, while some have even grown.

Paul Kench at the University of Auckland in New Zealand and Arthur Webb at the South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission in Fiji used historical aerial photos and high-resolution satellite images to study changes in the land surface of 27 Pacific islands over the last 60 years. During that time, local sea levels have risen by 120 millimetres, or 2 millimetres per year on average.

Despite this, Kench and Webb found that just four islands have diminished in size since the 1950s. The area of the remaining 23 has either stayed the same or grown (Global and Planetary Change, DOI: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2010.05.003).
----
All this means the islands respond to changing weather and climate. For instance, when hurricane Bebe hit Tuvalu in 1972 it deposited 140 hectares of sedimentary debris onto the eastern reef, increasing the area of the main island by 10 per cent.
----
It's been thought that as the sea level goes up, islands will sit there and drown. But they won't
Reference Here>>

But, of course, we mustn't leave the recent ability of human analysis of the Earth's climate and the presumed effects the activities on this climate ... however fraudulently crafted, alone. The United Nations will not let the pesky observed truth in the processes of this planet or besmirched information from studies that the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change had paid for from the CRU over the last 15 years, get in the way of the advancement of progressive politics.

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change logo. Image Credit: UNFCCC

This excerpted and edited from Yahoo/AP -

New climate chief: 'no option' but to take action
By VERENA SCHMITT-ROSCHMANN, Associated Press Writer - Wed Jun 9, 2:47 pm ET

World nations have no choice but to join forces to stop global warming, but achieving a legally binding treaty this year should not be the only focus, the new U.N. climate chief said Wednesday.

Christiana Figueres [Costa Rica] said that "governments will meet this challenge, for the simple reason that humanity must meet this challenge."

"We just don't have another option," said Figueres, who replaces Yvo de Boer next month as head of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.
----
The Bonn meeting is to pave the way to the next U.N. climate summit in Cancun, Mexico, at the end of the year which some countries hope will provide a breakthrough.
----
Even if a treaty is agreed on, "I don't believe that we will ever have a final agreement on climate, certainly not in my lifetime."

Her predecessor de Boer, who had struck a pessimistic note on Monday saying in his final speech to Bonn delegates that he had given up on ambitious short-term climate goals, said he was hopeful for the long term.

"We are on a long journey to address climate change," de Boer said.
----
"I am confident that in Cancun you will not only try but succeed" in setting up a structure for the fight against climate change, he said.

Scientists [what scientists? ... the one's who are being paid to create studies to prove AGW no matter what?] say industrial countries need to cut their emissions by 25-40 percent as compared to 1990 levels by 2020 and by 80 percent by 2050. So far, pledges to cut greenhouse gases only add up to about 13-14 percent by 2020.
----
Alden Meyer, of the U.S.-based group Union of Concerned Scientists, said expectations of Figueres were high.
----
The upcoming Cancun summit will be the "time for delivery" on these promises, she said. "I am convinced that Cancun is going to be very productive, that it is going to be successful."
----
Experts were discussing a rough draft of a document that could become the core of the climate treaty. For now, it still leaves all of the major issues open — particularly questions about which countries should have to cut emissions and by what amount, and how to generate funds to help poor nations fight climate change.

"We are still looking for breakthroughs" before the talks end Friday, Boeve said.
Reference Here>>

We, at MAXINE, have always believed that this effort is not so much about helping to protect the Earth and live cleanly ... but it is all about controlling human activity in the name of the progressive political agenda of creating a central governance and punish groups of humans that believe in GOD granted personal freedoms. This type of agenda leads to mass slavery through taxation, and human activity control through Communism.

Fraudulent 'Nature Geoscience' study paper on Sea Levels is pulled

In a NASA "what-if" animation, light-blue areas in southern Florida and Louisiana indicate regions that may be underwater should sea levels rise by 9 meters (roughly 27 feet) -- which may not be as likely as scientists once thought. The study paper concluded that sea levels would rise by as much as 2.7 feet by the end of the twenty-first century. Image Credit: NASA

Fraudulent 'Nature Geoscience' study paper on Sea Levels is pulled

On what the authors cite as having a lack of confidence in the data they used to reach the conclusion that sea levels would rise by as much as 2.7 feet by the end of the twenty-first century, authors Mark Siddall, Thomas Stocker and Peter Clark pull a study paper published in the journal, Nature Geoscience.

All of this effort to correct the factual record is additional evidence that the Scientific Method was never a consideration as it relates to the agenda that changes in the Earth's climate are directly related to human activity as opposed to sun spots and other natural forces that effect the Earth's atmosphere.

The media loves to attribute all of this recent activity to correct the record on recently discovered "ERRORS" and "SLOPPY MISTAKES" associated with the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The truth of the matter is that the retraction of articles and study papers are two different activities designed to communicate for different purposes. Articles are ... well, stories whereas study papers are used as evidence of discovery and require a greater level of scrutiny before they are ever published.

This excerpted and edited from FOXNews -

Scientists Retract Paper on Rising Sea Levels Due to Errors
FOXNews.com - Updated February 22, 2010

Scientists have been forced to retract a paper that claimed sea level were rising thanks to the effects of global warming, after mistakes were discovered that undermined the results.

The paper also highlighted that it reinforced the conclusions of the U.N.'s controversial Fourth Assessment report, which warned of the dangerous of man-made climate change.

However, mistakes in time intervals and inaccurately applied statistics have forced the authors to retract their paper -- the first official retraction ever for the three-year-old journal, notes the Guardian. In an officially published retraction of their paper, the authors acknowledged these mistakes as factors that compromised the results.

"We no longer have confidence in our projections for the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, and for this reason the authors retract the results pertaining to sea-level rise after 1900," wrote authors Mark Siddall, Thomas Stocker and Peter Clark.

Since the leak of e-mails from the U.K.'s top global warming scientists in early December, many other errors and sloppy mistakes have been uncovered in leading report by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Flaws in weather stations have led some to question claims of rising temperatures, sloppy math led to holes in postulates that the Himalayas were rapidly melting and fears of a man-made food shortage in Africa seem unsubstantiated as well.

Announcing the formal retraction of the paper from the journal, Siddall told the Guardian,, "It's one of those things that happens. People make mistakes and mistakes happen in science." A formal retraction was required, rather than a correction, because the errors undermined the study's conclusion.

"Retraction is a regular part of the publication process," he said. "Science is a complicated game and there are set procedures in place that act as checks and balances."
Reference Here>>

If retractions of study papers were "a regular part of the publication process" as Mark Siddall, one of the authors of the study paper insists, then why is this the first official retraction ever for the three-year-old journal, Nature Geoscience.

Did Nature Geoscience ask about the validity of the conclusions of this study paper given the fact that weekend before last, Professor Phil Jones, former director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA), which was where the information the UN based its activity on AGW, in an interview with the BBC conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon?

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming?

A key figure of the Climategate scandal, Professor Jones further admitted in the BBC interview that there is no evidence the Earth has warmed recently ... and new research suggests existing records aren’t sufficient support for global warming claims. Just a couple of days later, the top U.N. climate change official Yvo de Boer told The Associated Press Thursday, February 18, 2010, that he was resigning after nearly four years.

One wonders what came first in this chicken and egg situation ... did the authors of the study paper that held the conclusion that sea levels would rise by as much as 2.7 feet by the end of the twenty-first century see their "ERROR" first ... or did the journal, Nature Geoscience?

A lie is a lie - no matter how long it takes to be discovered - AGW is a lie!

Worldwide fraud and hoax of AGW loses UN's De Boer

Science provides a distinctive view and way of thinking about the world. The study of science has led to an evolving body of knowledge organized as an interrelated set of models, theories, laws, systems, structures and interactions. It is through this body of knowledge that science provides explanations for a variety of phenomena and enables sense to be made of the biological, physical and technological world. An understanding of science and its social and cultural contexts provides a basis for future choices and ethical decisions about local and global applications and implications of science. Caption & Image Credit: University of New South Wales

Worldwide fraud and hoax of AGW loses UN's De Boer

As the Queen song, "Another One Bites The Dust" plays in the background, the effort to control human behavior and activity through the concept of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW)/Climate Change has lost another general. The top U.N. climate change official Yvo de Boer told The Associated Press Thursday that he was resigning after nearly four years.

Actually, he will not be leaving until July 1, but he will not be around to relentlessly pester and bully the nations of the world into thinking they have to sign an agreement to curb their plant food production (CO2 ... the gas plants use to create oxygen through osmosis) when they meet in Mexico (one of the nations with the worst air pollution but not one that is the target of any agreement) next November 2010.

Last November 2009 it was discovered that the information and conclusions that have created this sense of urgency to control changes in our Earth's climate were based on what the world media loves to report as ERRORS, was based on conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, destruction of embarrassing and un-supportive information, an organized resistance to disclosure in the peer review process, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more. Simply stated ... a hoax based upon a series of frauds over the last quarter century ... something less that the "Scientific Method".

Over the weekend, Professor Phil Jones, former director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA), which was where the information the UN based its activity on AGW, in an interview with the BBC conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

A key figure of the Climategate scandal, Professor Jones admitted that there is no evidence the Earth has warmed recently ... and new research suggests existing records aren’t sufficient support for global warming claims.

Yvo de Boer was said to be exhausted after the Copehagen summit. Image Credit: The Telegraph

This excerpted and edited from The Daily Caller -

Top UN climate official resigning
By ARTHUR MAX, The DC - 02/18/10 at 6:05 am

UNFCCC Executive Secretary Yvo de Boer is known to be deeply disappointed with outcome of the last summit in Copenhagen, which drew 120 world leaders but failed to reach more than a vague promise by several countries to limit carbon emissions — and even that deal fell short of consensus.

But he denied to the AP that his decision to quit was a result of frustration with Copenhagen.

“Copenhagen wasn’t what I had hoped it would be,” he acknowledged, but the summit nonetheless prompted governments to submit plans and targets for reining in the emissions primarily blamed for global warming. “I think that’s a pretty solid foundation for the global response that many are looking for,” he said.

De Boer told the AP he believes talks “are on track,” although it was uncertain that a full treaty could be finalized at the next high-level conference in November.

The partial agreement reached in Copenhagen, brokered by President Barack Obama, “was very significant,” he said. But he acknowledged frustration that the deal was merely “noted” rather than formally adopted by all countries.

“We were about an inch away from a formal agreement. It was basically in our grasp, but it didn’t happen,” he said. “So that was a pity.”

The media-savvy former Dutch civil servant and climate negotiator was widely credited with raising the profile of climate issues through his frequent press encounters and his backstage lobbying of world leaders.

But his constant travel and frenetic diplomacy failed to bridge the suspicions and distrust between developing and industrial countries that barred the way to a final agreement at the climate change summit in Copenhagen in December.
----
Deb Boer, 55, was appointed in 2006 to shepherd through an agreement to succeed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which required industrial countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions an average 5 percent.

He said the high point of his efforts was the agreement by developing countries, reached at the 2007 conference in Bali, Indonesia, to join in efforts to contain global warming in return for financial and technical help from the wealthy nations.
----
When he was hired, he said, he told U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, “If you want someone to sit in Bonn and keep his mouth shut then I’m not the right person for the job.”
----
De Boer said he will be a consultant on climate and sustainability issues for KPMG, a global accounting firm, and will be associated with several universities.
Reference Here>>

So the chief pursuer of the AGW HOAX based upon fraud at the United Nations will be paid by KPMG to continue his good work ... great. As it was to be suspicious of the activity of the United Nations, it is now time to be suspicious of the activities of KPMG.