Featured Story:
As most of us know, the theory of global warming, very simply, is that unprecedented levels of man made greenhouse gasses are responsible for trapping heat in the atmosphere of the earth, warming the planet to unprecedented levels. With that in mind, if you could place two headlines together, side by side, that would, at the very least, cause a modicum of doubt in the minds of scientists and politicians, wouldn't it be these two?
Climate Scientists Say 2008 Will be Coolest Year of the Decade
Greenhouse Gasses Hit Modern Day Highs
Of course, in the world of climate alarmism, there is no room for doubt, so when asked if this would be evidence that global warming is slowing, Dr. Peter Stott, the manager of understanding and attributing climate change at the Met Office's Hadley Centre, replied, "Absolutely not. If we are going to understand climate change we need to look at long-term trends."
If decreasing temperatures are not a sign that global warming is slowing, I have just one question for you, Dr. Stott. What is?
To a degree (no pun intended), Dr. Stott is correct. A single year does not an trend make. But before this year, a single year was plenty for the climate alarmists to latch on to as evidence of an irreversible trend. Repeatedly, they would evoke 1998 as the hottest year of the century (even though their science was wrong; 1934 was actually hotter), and after virtually every major storm in the last ten years, someone would claim this was a sign of things to come.
Is it too much to ask that the alarmists at least notice their own double standards?
More Headlines:
Early Snowfalls in Europe Hit Historic Levels
U.K. Greens' Uncivil Disobedience
Energy Goals a Moving Target for States
Most Egregious Claim of the Week:
Something's in the water in Australia. At a UN climate summit in Poland, Australian environmental scientist Tim Flannery warned.
Climate Opposition 'Suicidal': Flannery
Flannery expressed concern at Australia's seeming hesitance to fully embrace his end-of-the-world mantra, and then offered up this gem: "There is very little gain with going with the herd, if that results in a treaty that costs us the Great Barrier Reef and costs us most of our biodiversity."
Cost Australia the Great Barrier Reef? According to various sources, the Great Barrier Reef is five hundred thousand years old, with parts that go back as far as twenty million years. As the blog Australian Climate Madness puts it:
"The (Great Barrier Reef) has been in existence for hundreds of thousands of years, and has survived numbers of climate minima and maxima far worse than the conditions we are experiencing now, so why does everyone think that it's suddenly going to disappear?"
Also this week, Australian citizens were advised of a rather bizarre tactic for combating global warming:
Eat Camels to Protect Environment, Aussies Told
Just a few months earlier, Australians were also told to save the world by eating kangaroos.
The koalas must be nervous.
