get the greenies to teach you how to make a carbon cap...first get ya tin foil...and make ya hat...[if the cap fits]

Leaked Copenhagen Document: World Bank To Control Climate Change Slush Fund
http://www.prisonplanet.com/copenhagen-climate-summit-in-disarray-after-danish-text-leak.html
The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank.



The climate change conference in Copenhagen is barely under way and
already a leaked draft agreement.... is pitting developing nations against their wealthier counterparts.

If the documents are accurate, the proposal would see more power in the hands of rich nations,
the UN's negotiating role sidelined ...and the Kyoto Protocol abandoned.

Developing nations are furious and say they will not sign on to an inequitable deal
that they argue would limit ...their economic growth.

Al Jazeera's Alan Fisher explains

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-39PIr-PGg

Copenhagen Con Men Launch Global Carbon Tax Heist
http://www.prisonplanet.com/copenhagen-con-men-launch-global-carbon-tax-heist.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/capping-emissions-trading-on-the-future.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/doomsday-global-warming-fearmongering-accompanies-copenhagen.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/the-meaning-of-climategate.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/epas-endangerment-finding-allows-big-government-to-regulate-carbon-emissions.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/woman-who-invented-credit-default-swaps-is-one-of-the-key-architects-of-carbon-derivatives-which-would-be-at-the-very-center-of-cap-and-trade.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/pelosi-endorses-%e2%80%98global%e2%80%99-tax-on-stocks-bonds-and-other-financial-transactions.html
Guru Of Science Czar Holdren Called For Doubling CO2 Emissions
http://www.prisonplanet.com/guru-of-science-czar-holdren-called-for-doubling-co2-emissions.html

The guru of President Barack Obama’s science advisor, John P. Holdren, who in his 1977 book Ecoscience called for draconian population control measures including sterilizing the water supply and introducing forced abortions, wrote that large amounts of carbon dioxide should be pumped into the atmosphere in order to aid plant growth and solve the food crisis.

Past Decade Warmest on Record, Says Group Involved With Climategate “Hide The Decline” Scandal
http://www.prisonplanet.com/past-decade-warmest-on-record-says-group-involved-with-climategate-hide-the-decline-scandal.html

Is this before or after they agreed to “hide the decline” in global warming?

EPA Says Breathing Is Deadly, But Radioactive Drinking Water Is Good For Us
http://www.prisonplanet.com/epa-says-breathing-is-deadly-but-radioactive-drinking-water-is-good-for-us.html

While the EPA declares the gas that we exhale to be a deadly poison, as protesters at Copenhagen decry the suffering of polar bears as their population figures increase to record levels, and as delegates in the Danish capital warn of the dastardly peril of cows farting, a New York Times report confirming that U.S. drinking water contains dangerous levels of arsenic, uranium and other radioactive substances barely gets noticed.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/skeptics-challenge-copenhagen-global-warming-summit.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/inhofe-markey-square-off-on-climategate-cnn.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/flashback-humans-depicted-as-virus-in-award-winning-cartoon.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/copenhagen-the-agw-druids-at-copenhagen-know-they-are-on-a-losing-wicket-and-it-shows.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/climategate-barack-obamas-rule-by-epa-decree-is-a-coup-detat-against-congress-made-in-britain.html

1)A lot of claims are being made about climate catastrophe(s). In fact it seems as with little boys, climate change involves all things nasty and puppy dogs tails. However this piece from Ziggy Switkowski offers a different perspective: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/we-are-already-adapting-to-warming/story-e6frg6zo-1225797967898

Note:
“To reveal a trend in insurance loss claims requires detailed adjustment of historical data to allow for population growth, inflation, increasing affluence and social trends towards living closer to the coast. Analyses of these data, reported in the ANZ Institute of Insurance and Finance Journal, produce surprising conclusions :
… there is no evidence in the time series of insured losses in recent decades of any effect of climate change.
There is no indication that tropical cyclones, the single largest category accounting for 32 per cent of all losses, are becoming more frequent or more dangerous….
Changes in sea levels have not translated into observable changes in insurance claims associated with coastal and riverine flooding.
To be sure, annual aggregate insurance costs continue to rise sharply but so far these are caused by societal factors and not anthropogenic climate change’

2) And perhaps here we have an example of how climate damage exaggerations arise :
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/thepast-decade--warmest-since-records-began-in-1850-20091208-khqv.html

It makes these claims:
---“This year has been the third-hottest on record in Australia, and is ranked as the fifth-warmest globally”
---“it highlights extreme weather conditions around the globe this year, including three 'exceptional heatwaves’ in Australia… in January and February, August and November…”
---''Maximum temperatures were well above normal across the entire continent, reaching 6 to 7 degrees above normal in some parts. …”

It’s virtually a carbon copy on many reports on many other parts of the world ( only the figures have been changed to conform with the IPCC storyline)
Most times one has little experience of those other places, so one can only swallow what is said.
However ( South East) Australia is home to many of us .
I find it hard, very hard, to reconcile my own first hand experience with the claims made in this report –does anyone else feel the same way?

OUG

The ‘deny-n-delay’ brigade continually trot out this guff;

<< Is this before or after they agreed to “hide the decline” in global warming? >>

They (and you) obviously don’t understand anything about what this refers to, or they (and you) are intentionally trying to distort and misrepresent the science.

The “Hide the Decline” refers to a WMO statement made in 1999. You can see it at ‘On the Status of Global Climate in 1999’. It has a diagram showing the three paleo-records described in a “hacked” UEA email.

However, if you have the capacity to read the paper by Keith Briffa where the ‘decline’ is present, it is explained and discussed why this spurious decline is removed from the model. This is the “divergence anomaly” of which you evidently know nothing about, but are so willing to distort.

A ‘temperature record’ is obtained by combining the current instrument record with proxy records from the past. There’s nothing underhand about removing a spurious decline — it’s explained in the papers, it has been extensively studied, and that’s why that particular record can’t be extended into the latter half of the twentieth century.

The speed at which the ‘Bolts’ of the world picked out this email and trumpeted it all over the net without any apparent effort to figure out what was being discussed is despicable. It’s not a hoax or a deception – it’s a simple repeat of what is already completely open and clear in the scientific literature, and exposes (yet again) the so-called “sceptics” as just the opposite - ideologues that jump on any possible hint of a problem and tout it as a grand conspiracy or chant the 'socialism by stealth" mantra.

It’s people like you that misrepresent and distort what the science is actually saying and whether you do this out of blind ignorance or with malicious intent, the effect is the same - dumb down the masses.

_____

Col

I would love to retire, I am being encouraged not to.

I think that Climategate says it all.We have 42 scientists of the innner circle at the Hadley Centre peer reviewing each others work ,victimising and ostracising anyone who disagrees with their conclusions,falsifying data,and colluding as a group to reach common outcomes.

This is the group that the IPCC bases all it's findings on!
It is an international scandal and people need to be held accountable.

The debate is not over climate change or heating but over the contribution of CO2 as a global warming gas.

Hasbeen -

as well as the graph pointed to by rstuart, try this:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ice_Age_Temperature.png
The stable period I'm talking about is the bit right at the end with the 1-2 degree variations, compared with the 10-15 degree variations through the ice ages, and the prospective 4-6 degrees or more of current warming. We've been lucky to inhabit the most stable bit of the entire 450,000 year record, and now we're messing it up.

As rstuart implies, science is about more than anecdotes and local experience. It's about sleuthing what has been really going on. For example, the freezing Thames story. Turns out there were weirs on the Thames that made parts of it quite shallow, so it froze more readily. Since the weirs were removed it hasn't frozen. If you'd followed my link to the "full record" of the emails you'd have seen this story:
http://solveclimate.com/blog/20091207/what-those-hacked-climate-e-mails-really-say?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+solveclimate%2Fblog+%28Solve+Climate%3A+Daily+Climate+News+and+Analysis%29
Or are you just into knee-jerk sneering and questioning people's motives.

Arjay -

The IPCC does not base its findings just on the Hadley results. There are several other main groups that also estimate global temperatures, and many other scientists who contribute and check. This is well known and frequently stated.

Q&A. In your post on 9 Dec at 5:53:12 I think that you misunderstand the significance of the divergence between the decline in the temperature indicated in the tree ring series and the temperature series itself.

Surely the real point is that if, during the period when we have instrumental support for temperature, there is no correlation between the tree ring proxy and the temperature series (which is obviously the case), then how can we be confident that, miraculously, the tree ring proxy is a good proxy for temperature going back 1000 years?

Perhaps you can explain where I am incorrect on this.