I haven't taken the time to put together a round up of the Enviro-nitwit Supreme and all the other fun, so now seems like a good time.

I do want to note one thing though, and that is the I am retiring the phrase "eco-nazi" from the blog, except in rare occasions.

I decided that the term "Eco-Nanny" instead.  It seems to fit the "we know what's best for you" mentality that so many of these idiots seem to favor.

With that in mind, let's see what's going on.

First up is the Mighty Alarmists Supreme, the Grand Goracle, the mighty Al Gore, the biggest nanny of them all.

Al has taken on a new target for his science-less propaganda:  Bloggers.

Gore pushes environment with activist bloggers

Former Vice President Al Gore made a surprise appearance Saturday at the Netroots Nation conference, a gathering of nearly 2,000 left-leaning bloggers and political organizers. He urged the activists to mobilize for global climate protection by amplifying his call to generate all the nation's electricity from renewable sources like wind, solar and geothermal in 10 years.

...

Gore, who joined Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi during her session at the convention, praised the bloggers as being at the forefront of reclaiming American democracy.

"Thank you for the movement that you have created," Gore said. "I can't tell you how important I think it is that you continue what you are doing."

Of course the movement the nutroots have created is mindless extremism, but ok.

Gore said the seriousness of the climate problem is related to the economic and security crises of U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

Recent Republican calls to battle rising oil prices with more drilling are "absurd" and a bit like curing a hangover with another drink, he said.

 Of course his stupid remarks went a little further:

Gore compares offshore drilling to invasion of Iraq

Ever since Al Gore's lie-fest misrepresented this it has continued to grow until the face of the cute majestic polar bear has become the face of the Eco Alarmists.

Every day I see Tv commercials bemoaning the plight of the mighty creatures, sad music plays while a momma bear leaves her cubs on the melting ice and swims off into the sea.

What they don't tell you is that is normal behavior, and has nothing to do with climate change at all.

While Al Gore scares you into believing the bears lead a doomed existence, the reality is the populatoin of the bears is about 4 times what it was 60 years ago.

Rather than being threatened, the bears are flourishing.

So what prompted the US to declare them threatened?  A fraud by the Eco Warriors.  Nothign more.

As Michelle Malking notes:

It’s been in the works for quite some time, but now the decision is official. Polar bears have been listed by the Bush Interior Department as a “threatened” species. This is the first listing attributed to global warming.

What’s really going on here?

Kenneth Green at AEI exposes the politics behind the eco-radicals’ polar bear campaign and the consequences:

Listing the polar bear as a threatened species would have significant public policy consequences. It would set a new precedent, representing the first linkage of species endangerment with global warming. Such a listing would basically wall off the entire Arctic region to exploration, resource extraction, and development–at least by U.S. companies–and a threatened species listing would give environmental groups the ability to sue future U.S. governments to force them to reverse climate change by whatever means necessary.

There is little doubt that such lawsuits would be filed quickly. According to the NRDC:

Listing the polar bear guarantees federal agencies will be obligated to ensure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out will not jeopardize the polar bears’ continued existence or adversely modify their critical habitat, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will be required to prepare a recovery plan for the polar bear, specifying measures necessary for its protection.
…

Here lately, the governments of many cities, counties, states and even countries. have taken a lot of steps to do "their part" to combat Global Warming.

The problem is that they are attacking the problem from a feel good emotional nature, and like so many other responses, they often have unexpected consequences.

Take a minor example:

A glitch in the compost ditch

Hold the foam for that latte: Newer packaging may not end up recycled

There's a potential glitch in Seattle politicians' plan to ban foam in favor of eco-friendly, compostable or recyclable food packaging:

As it stands now, Seattleites cannot put the boxes and cups that would carry their to-go orders home in city yard and food-waste bins.

Such alternative packages -- such as corn- and sugar cane-based products -- are not currently allowed along with other compostables in Seattle yard-waste bins, according to the city's contractor, Cedar Grove Composting Inc.

Whoops.

But the consequences have much more serious effects.  Take for example the demand to cease the use of petroleum fuel in favor of corn based bio diesel:

 Global warming rage lets global hunger grow

We drive, they starve. The mass diversion of the North American grain harvest into ethanol plants for fuel is reaching its political and moral limits.

...

The UN says it takes 232kg of corn to fill a 50-litre car tank with ethanol. That is enough to feed a child for a year. Last week, the UN predicted "massacres" unless the biofuel policy is halted.

And:

Fuel Choices, Food Crises and Finger-Pointing

The idea of turning farms into fuel plants seemed, for a time, like one of the answers to high global oil prices and supply worries. That strategy seemed to reach a high point last year when Congress mandated a fivefold increase in the use of biofuels.

More Global Warming truth that the media finds inconvenient:

Earth a little more resilient than computer models

The Australian reports a few inconvenient truths regarding global climate change that have yet to receive much attention from a media sold on global warming. Not only has the Earth cooled since its peak year in 1998, not only are oceans cooler than predicted, but new NASA data shows that the computer models that predicted runaway global warming were based on a fundamental error. Rather than having clouds and water vapor amplifying the warming effect of carbon in the atmosphere, it turns out that they compensate for it (via Memeorandum):

Last Monday - on ABC Radio National, of all places - there was a tipping point of a different kind in the debate on climate change. It was a remarkable interview involving the co-host of Counterpoint, Michael Duffy and Jennifer Marohasy, a biologist and senior fellow of Melbourne-based think tank the Institute of Public Affairs. Anyone in public life who takes a position on the greenhouse gas hypothesis will ignore it at their peril.

Duffy asked Marohasy: “Is the Earth stillwarming?”

She replied: “No, actually, there has been cooling, if you take 1998 as your point of reference. If you take 2002 as your point of reference, then temperatures have plateaued. This is certainly not what you’d expect if carbon dioxide is driving temperature because carbon dioxide levels have been increasing but temperatures have actually been coming down over the last 10 years.”

Duffy: “Is this a matter of any controversy?”

Marohasy: “Actually, no. The head of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has actually acknowledged it. He talks about the apparent plateau in temperatures so far this century. So he recognises that in this century, over the past eight years, temperatures have plateaued … This is not what you’d expect, as I said, because if carbon dioxide is driving temperature then you’d expect that, given carbon dioxide levels have been continuing to increase, temperatures should be going up … So (it’s) very unexpected, not something that’s being discussed. It should be being discussed, though, because it’s very significant.” …

They have a great setup designed to measure the increases in ocean temperature.

The only problem is that the temperature is down since 2003.  Via Hot Air:

Evidence that global warming isn’t happening? Not necessarily, although it certainly hasn’t been happening over the past year. Evidence that the predictive modeling in this area isn’t nearly as nuanced as it needs be? Pretty much, yeah.

Some 3,000 scientific robots that are plying the ocean have sent home a puzzling message. These diving instruments suggest that the oceans have not warmed up at all over the past four or five years. That could mean global warming has taken a breather. Or it could mean scientists aren’t quite understanding what their robots are telling them.

This is puzzling in part because here on the surface of the Earth, the years since 2003 have been some of the hottest on record. But Josh Willis at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory says the oceans are what really matter when it comes to global warming…

In recent years, heat has actually been flowing out of the ocean and into the air. This is a feature of the weather phenomenon known as El Nino. So it is indeed possible the air has warmed but the ocean has not. But it’s also possible that something more mysterious is going on.

That becomes clear when you consider what’s happening to global sea level. Sea level rises when the oceans get warm because warmer water expands. This accounts for about half of global sea level rise. So with the oceans not warming, you would expect to see less sea level rise. Instead, sea level has risen about half an inch in the past four years. That’s a lot…

It’s … possible that some of the heat has gone even deeper into the ocean, he says. Or it’s possible that scientists need to correct for some other feature of the planet they don’t know about. It’s an exciting time, though, with all this new data about global sea temperature, sea level and other features of climate.

As the fight between Global Warming Realists and Alarmists continues, it is worth pointing out how easy it is to have bad or nonexistent science turn into a global call for action.  Once the gauntlet is thrown, it is difficult to reign it in with truth, and the longer the myths propagate the harder it becomes. 

A case in point would be the vendetta to ban plastic grocery bags.  It seems innocuous, right?  I mean everyone knows they kill millions of animals a year don't they?

In fact, they do not, and there has never been an actual study to show they have.  Despite that, do a Google search for 'ban plastic bags' and see what you get.

And then read this:

Series of blunders turned the plastic bag into global villain

Scientists and environmentalists have attacked a global campaign to ban plastic bags which they say is based on flawed science and exaggerated claims.

The widely stated accusation that the bags kill 100,000 animals and a million seabirds every year are false, experts have told The Times. They pose only a minimal threat to most marine species, including seals, whales, dolphins and seabirds.

Gordon Brown announced last month that he would force supermarkets to charge for the bags, saying that they were “one of the most visible symbols of environmental waste”. Retailers and some pressure groups, including the Campaign to Protect Rural England, threw their support behind him.

But scientists, politicians and marine experts attacked the Government for joining a “bandwagon” based on poor science.

Lord Taverne, the chairman of Sense about Science, said: “The Government is irresponsible to jump on a bandwagon that has no base in scientific evidence. This is one of many examples where you get bad science leading to bad decisions which are counter-productive. Attacking plastic bags makes people feel good but it doesn’t achieve anything.”

So, here is the false representation:

What a load of crap.  The eco nuts are pissing and moaning that American Airlines flew a 777 airliner from the US to London, despite only having 5 people on it.

Plane flies five passengers from US to London

A major airline is under fire from environmentalists for flying an aircraft across the Atlantic with only five passengers on board.

The flight from Chicago to London meant that the plane, a Boeing 777, used 22,000 gallons of fuel.

The latest "eco- scandal" flight took place on February 9 after American was forced to cancel one of its four daily services from Chicago to London.

While it was able to find places for nearly all the passengers on the fully-booked flight, five still had to be accommodated. Those who did fly were upgraded to the business class cabin.

So, to be fair, those five should have been left stranded....

"With such a small passenger load we did consider whether we could cancel the flight and re-accommodate the five remaining passengers on other flights.

"However, this would have left a plane load of west-bound passengers stranded in London Heathrow who were due to fly back to the US on the same aircraft.

And who cares about those people, let them be stranded too.

Look, flying empty like that cost American a hefty price, but bottom line, so what? 

They have a responsibility to their customers and sometimes this happens.  Get over it.

Exit question:  Do the rich liberals in their private jets always fill the empty seats?

Nope, they just buy carbon credits and make Al Gore richer...

What idiots.

 Trackposted to The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary's Thoughts, Right Truth, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, Pursuing Holiness, Adeline and Hazel, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, DragonLady's World, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Celebrity Smack, Dumb Ox Daily News, , Stageleft, Right Voices, A Blog For All, 123beta, Cao's Blog, Big Dog's Weblog, Conservative Cat, Nuke Gingrich, Wake Up America, McCain Blogs, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, Wolf Pangloss, CORSARI D'ITALIA, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Been a while since my last Global warming update, so here we go:

Western Greenland Ice Growing; Still Global Warming

The lynchpin in the anthropogenic global warming theory is the shrinking Arctic ice, but now that some of that ice is actually increasing, scientists claim, without a trace of irony, it is normal for temperatures and ice sheets to fluctuate.

Greenland's Sermitsiak reported, “The ice between Canada and southwestern Greenland has reached its highest level in 15 years.” Denmark's Meteorological Institute used satellite images to track the southward expansion of the ice and when the paper asked how these findings “fit in with” continual reports of Arctic ice “melting at a record rate due to increasing temperatures,” global warming was, of course, affirmed....:

If it's up to meteorologists from Denmark's Meteorological Institute, there is not anything inherently contradictory that extreme cold is replaced by higher temperatures than average. Or that melting sea ice occasionally is replaced by expanding ice sheets.

'Weather is a phenomenon which changes from year to year and right now the atmosphere has changed so we have cold weather. That will certainly mean that melting ice in the North Pole will be less this year, but next year the situation can look completely different,' according to [no first name given] Henriksen.

To sum things up, global warming hasn't been called off. In  the meanwhile, western Greenlander's will have to accept that the cold weather continues for some time. At least until next Tuesday when milder weather could be on the way, according to Polarfronten online.

Well, isn't that what some  “skeptics” have been saying about the recent temperature spikes? That climate changes over time, and it has been warming since the Little Ice Age?

Pretty much, yes.

But that will not stop California from driving the myth as required curriculum.

Global Warming to be Taught in Public Schools?

Be afraid,  America!! Be very afraid!

Ok, not hell, but it is regularly described as being hotter than hell...From Sister Toldjah:

Via Reuters:

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Snow fell on Baghdad on Friday for the first time in memory, and delighted residents declared it an omen of peace.

“It is the first time we’ve seen snow in Baghdad,” said 60-year-old Hassan Zahar. “We’ve seen sleet before, but never snow. I looked at the faces of all the people, they were astonished,” he said.

“A few minutes ago, I was covered with snowflakes. In my hair, on my shoulders. I invite all the people to enjoy peace, because the snow means peace,” he said.

Traffic policeman Murtadha Fadhil, huddling under a balcony to keep dry, declared the snow “a new sign of the new Iraq.”

“It’s a sign of hope. We hope Iraqis will purify their hearts and politicians will work for the prosperity of all Iraqis.”

The streets of the capital were largely empty as big, thick, wet flakes fell on Friday morning, a weekend day in Iraq. The temperature hovered around freezing and the snow mostly melted into grey puddles when it hit the ground.

Wonder what it looked like through the eyes of this child:

Think about what that means:  They just missed a white Christmas in the Middle East.  Lots to think about there.... 

 Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Rosemary's Thoughts, 123beta, Right Truth, Adam's Blog, Shadowscope, The Amboy Times, Cao's Blog, Big Dog's Weblog, Conservative Cat, Adeline and Hazel, Pursuing Holiness, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Allie is Wired, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, Stix, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate's Cove, Celebrity Smack, The Pink Flamingo, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

So much Co2, so little time.   Last year was a whilrlwind of global warming stories.   I don't think I blogged more stories on any other topic.

Well, it is a new year and all new madness awaiting us.

So I couldn't let 2008 come without a quick summary of how 2007 ended in the global warming wars, and how 2008 is shaping up.

We start with a story from congress you likely won't hear on the TV:

Senate Report: Over 400 Scientists Dispute Manmade Global Warming

So, the debate is over, right? The science is settled?

Well, according to a report just published at the United States Senate Committee on Environment & Public works website, over 400 prominent scientists from all over the world have "voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called ‘consensus' on man-made global warming."

As it appears a metaphysical certitude green media will totally boycott these revelations, NewsBusters is presenting some of the findings:

Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called "consensus" on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.

The new report issued by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee's office of the GOP Ranking Member details the views of the scientists, the overwhelming majority of whom spoke out in 2007.

Even some in the establishment media now appear to be taking notice of the growing number of skeptical scientists. In October, the Washington Post Staff Writer Juliet Eilperin conceded the obvious, writing that climate skeptics "appear to be expanding rather than shrinking."

 This is interesting though....

Many scientists from around the world have dubbed 2007 as the year man-made global warming fears "bite the dust." (LINK) In addition, many scientists who are also progressive environmentalists believe climate fear promotion has "co-opted" the green movement. (LINK)