Saturday, July 09, 2011


Warmists prophesied that snow would steadily fade away

32 Inches Of Snow Falls In Driest Place On Earth!

One of the driest spots on earth has experienced its heaviest snowfall in almost two decades, according to the Chilean Directorate of Meteorology (DMC).

A cold front brought up to 80 centimetres (31.5 inches) of snow to the Atacama desert region of South America forcing emergency services to close local roads and rescue dozens of motorists from their vehicles. The temperature in the Chilean capital, Santiago, dropped below minus 8c on Wednesday. Neighbouring Argentina and Uruguay are also experiencing subzero temperatures.

Located in the north of Chile, the Atacama Desert records less than 50mm of rain on average each year. Some weather stations in the region record only 1-3mm of rain each year. The desert is, according to NASA, National Geographic and many other publications, the driest desert in the world, due to the rain shadow on the leeward side of the Chilean Coast Range, as well as a coastal inversion layer created by the cold offshore Humboldt Current.

According to the website, the current wintry conditions are unusual in the region: "In winter (June, July and August) the average daytime temperature is 22°C (72°F) and by night 4°C (39°F), descending to -2°C (28°F) in extreme cases. During summer (January, February and March) the temperature fluctuates between 27°C (81°F) and a minimum of 16°C (61°F) at night, reaching maximums of 32°C (90°F)".


Snow: Typical "L.A. Slimes" wisdom on display
"And we do know that Montana’s flooding was caused by record rainfall and by runoff from heavy snowfall. Though climate deniers (some of them funded by Exxon) love to point to freak snowstorms as “proof” that the planet isn’t warming, the opposite is often true: In some places, the warmer the air, the more water vapor accumulates in the atmosphere and the more moisture comes down in the form of rain or snow"

L.A. Times

So it's warming that caused the big snowfall? Big problem: There was no recent warming! In an amazing turn of events, more snow actually fell when it was colder! Who'd a thunk it?

Brilliant research on the part of the LA Times. The entire Pacific Northwest has been far below normal temperatures this year, and the last three months was the coldest April-June in over 50 years.


It's snowing heavily in Southern Australia too

Best Australian snow depth since 1990

As you can see from the pic which is from the Perisher snowcam today there is a lot of snow in the Australian snowfields at the moment.

Perisher Blue snowfields reports this morning that “The Spencer’s Creek snow depth reading is 158.9cm, the best it’s been since 1990 for this time of the season!”. What are the other resorts saying?

Thredbo says “Superb snow conditions from top to bottom. There is a mountain of light, dry snow, even a few little wind-blown stashes to rip into“.

Charlottes Pass says “More than 1 METRE of fresh snow has now fallen across the resort since Monday“.

Falls Creek says; “Incredible conditions at Falls Creek. Falls Creek is a winter wonderland today receiving 72cm snow in 3 days“.

Mt Hotham, Mt Buller, Mt Selwyn etc are all likewise experiencing excellent conditions. Tasmania also got a big dump of snow. If you think this is an anomaly then the forecast is as follows;

And there is a lot more snow in store. Froggies snowatch says; “The following week should see a high pressure system bring more stable conditions before a mositure band arrives around the 17th that should bring some intitial showeres before light snowfalls across the 18th-20th. There is a chance this could build into another large snow bearing system (should know more by Monday).

Looking further ahead there are more snow bearing systems to follow this with the great season of 2011 set to continue “.

As most of the farmers along the great divide are saying – we are returning to the climate of the 60s. This is to be expected as scientists tell us we are now in a cold wet pattern as part of a cold PDO for at least another two decades if not longer. Can someone please tell the green corporates in the global warming industry as they are still pushing a warming tax, you know the one to protect us from their belief that snow will be a thing of the past!


Harvest problems in India - the real world vs the alarmist dream world
The Earth will be 2.4 degree Celsius warmer by 2020 if the world continues with the business-as-usual approach to climate change and India would be one of the hardest hit countries witnessing upto 30 per cent reduction in crop yields, a new study has claimed.

The rising temperatures will adversely affect the world’s food production and India would be the hardest hit, according to the analysis by the Universal Ecological Fund (FEU-US), the US subsidiary of FEU founded in Argentina in 1990.

The report titled ‘The Food Gap -- The Impacts of Climate Change on Food Production: A 2020 Perspective’ predicted that crop yield in India, the second largest world producer of rice and wheat, would fall up to 30 per cent by the end of this decade.

While the global warming hoax establishment continues its scaremongering about the huge reductions of India´s crop yields, the situation in the real world of Indian agriculture is somewhat different - and sad (but not in the way the warmists maintain):
In a country where millions go hungry every day and where food prices are breaking the back of the common man, a bumper harvest is rotting in godowns [warehouses]. Headlines Today correspondents across the country found the shocking truth.

Instead of trying to solve the problem, the government plans to increase procurement and has also disallowed exports to meet the projected requirement of grain under the proposed Food Security Act.

Estimates are that foodgrain production including wheat, rice, pulses and coarse cereals will go up to a record 235.88 million tonnes this year compared to the earlier record of 234.47 million tonnes in 2008-09.

Hundreds of tonnes of wheat and rice are rotting in godowns across the nation - the reason being there is simply no space. So, while paddy sacks are dumped inside classrooms in Andhra Pradesh, wheat is left to rot on the roadside in Kurkshetra and sacks can be seen lining up parking lots of residential areas in the fertile wheat belt of Punjab and Haryana.

The current storage capacity is 62.8 million tonnes, which is proving inadequate. India had record rice and wheat stocks of 65.6 million tonnes in its godowns in early June. Officials say the problem will only get worse after the kharif harvest arrives by September-October.

Would it be too much to ask that a miniscule amount of the enormous EU "climate change" aid would be converted to support for building adequate storage facilities for bumper harvests in India!

I am afraid that is wishful thinking. The EU global warming believers live in their own dream world - all messages from the real world are immediately removed from their sight.


Obama Undermines Hope for Energy Independence

Deliberate sabotage of domestic power couldn’t be more successful

In an episode of “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” protagonist and “Seinfeld” co-creator Larry David is flustered when a homeless man declares he’s hungry and needs money but is picky enough to refuse leftovers. This comedic exchange is reminiscent of the not-so-humorous state of our nation’s economy, weighed down by $14 trillion in public debt while Washington refuses to take advantage of the fossil-fuel “free lunch” under our collective feet.

In May alone, Americans forked over $41 billion to import enough crude oil to meet growing energy demands here, just 37 percent of which was supplied domestically. The payments to close that “energy gap” ended up in the treasuries of foreign governments, many of which are hostile to U.S. interests, unstable politically or both.

In an ideal world, it would make economic sense to acquire fossil fuels from least-cost producers no matter where on the globe they are located. But this is not an ideal world. What makes no sense in such a climate is continuing to rely on unreliable foreign energy suppliers, especially when Congress‘ own research service estimates that the United States has more proven energy reserves—coal, oil and natural gas—than any other nation on the planet.

Rather than exploiting these abundant domestic resources, the Obama administration (1) all but shut down expansion of energy production in the Gulf of Mexico for more than a year, (2) failed to follow through on promises to open areas in Alaska and on the Eastern and Western seaboards for drilling permits and (3) plans to slow and possibly halt development of the nation’s hundred-year supply of natural gas, some of which has been discovered only recently in Pennsylvania and neighboring states.

Such policies have sacrificed billions of dollars in unrealized economic growth, unnecessary job losses and deficits larger than they would be otherwise in our international trade balance.

As a matter of fact, mesmerized by his vision of a “green” economy and apparently unfazed by losses of nearly $100 million in taxes paid to the federal government daily by the domestic oil and gas industry, President Obama wants to punish “Big Oil” even more.

The president and his congressional allies are pushing for $61 billion in new energy taxes, a proposal that if it passes will add to pain at the pump, raise utility bills and increase the cost of doing business nationwide. Such a counterproductive policy may enlarge federal revenue in the short run, but it surely will reduce it in the long run as a larger tax bite lessens the oil and gas industry’s incentives to invest in finding more energy deposits and delivering them to energy consumers.

Unlike the private sector, which lives or dies on the profitability of decisions to bet on new products or new markets, large public “investments” in politically correct projects, such as corn-derived ethanol, add to government spending but offer little or no return to taxpayers, now or in the future.

Although Congress recently and rightly voted to deny taxpayer-financed subsidies to corn farmers, President Obama has proposed regulations requiring automobile producers to double the fuel economies of new cars and trucks two decades hence.

If you are old enough to remember Jimmy Carter’s promise to develop a synthetic replacement for fossil fuels or Bill Clinton’s pledge of a public-private partnership to produce an automobile averaging 100 miles per gallon, you should be skeptical of the current administration’s energy policies.

Politicians score cheap electoral points by promising to reduce the federal debt and promote energy “independence.” Denying access to domestic resources while helping Brazil and other nations develop their own reserves is proof positive of the Obama administration’s anti-American mindset.

Actions speak louder than words.


Environmental Activism

Eco-activists claim they want to save the world, but their methods are manipulative, anti-business, and ultimately anti-democratic.

Despite all the talk about energy independence emanating from Washington DC, this government and its allies in the environmental movement do whatever they can to thwart this goal. Based on reliable discoveries in Utah, Arizona and Colorado there may be enough fossil fuel from shale and natural gas to avoid any reliance on foreign oil. Why then is nothing happening to mine these resources and bring them to market?

The answer very simply is that extremist elements in the environmental movement have supplied sufficient pressure to make any drilling and mining impossible in these areas.

Using an array of tactics to challenge companies and impose their agenda, the environmentalists have been quite successful in hindering and preventing oil drilling and exploration. No doubt groups like the Sierra Club and Greenpeace want to elect politicians sympathetic to their cause, but they are also adopting guerrilla tactics designed to stop corporations from making contributions to causes they oppose.

The green campaign against Koch Industries illustrates how environmentalists harass privately owned companies that are impervious to social pressure and unwilling to appease their foes. From television to magazine accounts the Koch brothers have been featured as “monsters” without regard for the environment. That these charges have little foundation is of no consequence to environmentalists playing to win.

In the wake of the Supreme Court Citizens United decision permitting unlimited corporate contributions, activists have heightened their efforts to undermine corporate interests. One of the overarching areas targeted for propaganda purpose is environmental matters. Pull the curtain from shareholder proxies and you find a network of environmental advocacy groups promoting their agenda of “alternative” and “renewable” energy.

The goal of environmental activism is clear: attempt to curtail political contributions to candidates who oppose the extremist agenda. Getting companies on their side is the tactic and remarkably when companies feel the heat, they often concede. Jeffrey Immelt, CEO of General Electric, is a prime example of a business leader who has been converted into an environmental activist. He now makes it appear he is on the side of the angels, even though his position militates against the development necessary to deal with foreign oil dependency.

Immelt, among others, contends that the nation should pursue electric cars and solar panels, innovations that cannot possibly eliminate the need for oil driven cars, home heating oil and other fossil products, despite rhetoric that suggests clean technology will solve our energy woes.

So deeply embedded is this propaganda that it defies the scientific knowledge well known to officials in the Energy Department. When grants are given for the so-called clean energy technologies, opposition voices are often silenced.

Activists realize that if you can get government agencies and corporate leaders on your side using propaganda and intimidation as tactics, an effective alliance for environmental positions can be created.

For those who are scientific realists, this propaganda effort is discouraging. Not only does it place the United States in a disadvantageous economic position, not only does it force our government to expend blood and treasure defending foreign oil fields, but it challenges scientific verities and destroys corporate integrity.


A big scare from a British Liberal

Global warming will threaten Britain's security by triggering wars, food shortages and mass migration, Energy Minister Chris Huhne warned today. Although the UK may escape the worst physical impacts of rising temperatures and sea levels, the UK will still be exposed to 'alarming and shocking' consequences of climate change elsewhere, he said.

The warning comes as Ministers are preparing a White Paper that will usher in a new wave of nuclear power stations and a massive expansion of wind farms to cut Britain's greenhouse gas emissions.

In a speech to the Royal United Services think tank, Mr Huhne warned that climate change was a 'systemic threat' 'With luck, the UK may well escape the worst physical impacts,' he said. 'But in a connected world, we will be exposed to the global consequences. And they are both alarming and shocking.'

Mr Huhne said global warming will undermine food, water and energy security, and affect health and political stability. He added: 'Political solutions will become harder to broker; conflicts more likely. A world where climate change goes unanswered will be more unstable, more unequal, and more violent.

'The knock-on effects will not stop at our borders. Climate change will affect our way of life – and the way we order our society. It threatens to rip out the foundations on which our security rests.'

He warned that the coming decades will bring higher temperatures, rising seas, droughts, heat waves, floods and variable rainfall unless carbon emissions are tackled by 2020.

The changing climate will add to the pressure on farming, which is already expected to face a 70 per cent rise in the demand for food by 2050 because of the rising population. "For developed economies, this will mean higher prices; for agrarian economies in the developing world, it could be catastrophic,' Mr Huhne said.
The world has already seen riots and revolts caused by soaring food prices, he said.

In 2008 the price of cereals hit a 30 year peak, trigging riots in Bangladesh and Egypt. Food inflation contributed to revolutions in North Africa earlier this year.

Climate change will also put pressure on scarce water supplies and have a direct effect on the health of people facing rising temperatures and more frequent, severe heat waves. The 2003 European heat wave caused 35, 000 excess deaths – including 2,000 deaths in Britain.

Etc. etc. ...

More here

PROBLEM: Mr Huhne's climate bill has been dropped anyway. The scare didn't work

Australian children are being terrified by climate change lessons

PRIMARY school children are being terrified by lessons claiming climate change will bring "death, injury and destruction" to the world unless they take action.

On the eve of Prime Minister Julia Gillard's carbon tax package announcement, psychologists and scientists said the lessons were alarmist, created unneeded anxiety among school children and endangered their mental health.

Climate change as a "Doomsday scenario" is being taught in classrooms across Australia. Resource material produced by the Gillard government for primary school teachers and students states climate change will cause "devastating disasters".

Australian National University's Centre for the Public Awareness of Science director Dr Sue Stocklmayer said climate change had been portrayed as "Doomsday scenarios with no way out".

Dr Stocklmayer said she was not a climate-change sceptic but worried that "too much time was spent presenting scary scenarios, especially to young people". "(Children) feel incredibly despondent and helpless in the face of all this negative information," she said. "To put all of this before our children ... is one of the most appalling things we can do to (them).

Child psychologist Kimberley O'Brien also said the language of climate change should be "toned down". "(Educators) should stick to the facts," she said. "They should be aware that kids do have nightmares."

Psychologist Michael Carr-Gregg called on educators to be "more circumspect and present both sides (of the climate-change debate)". "When you repeat things over and over to young people who don't have the cognitive maturity and emotional maturity to process this stuff, you end up creating unnecessary anxiety," he said.

Federal Schools Minister Peter Garrett said the government would not stop the teaching of climate science, despite moves in Britain for the subject to be withdrawn.

In a video on climate change funded by the state government, one teacher from a public school in Sydney's southwest explained: "Students are being bombarded from all sides about climate change ... it can be a very scary thing (for) a child."

The school activities are championed by the Federal Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency.



For more postings from me, see DISSECTING LEFTISM, TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL and EYE ON BRITAIN. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here. For readers in China or for times when is playing up, there are mirrors of this site here and here


No comments: