New Ice Age Prediction -- Repeat After Me, "We Really Don't Know Enough About What We Are Doing To Risk Destroying It All!"

An expert from the National Autonomous University of Mexico predicted that in about ten years the Earth will enter a "little ice age" which will last from 60 to 80 years and may be caused by the decrease in solar activity.

Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the UNAM, as argued earlier during a conference that teaches at the Center for Applied Sciences and Technological Development.
...
Velasco Herrera described as erroneous predictions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), pursuant to which the planet is experiencing a gradual increase in temperature, the so-called global warming.

The models and forecasts of the IPCC "is incorrect because only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity," said the specialist also in image processing and signs and prevention of natural disasters.

The phenomenon of climate change, he added, should include other kinds of factors, both internal, such as volcanoes and the very human activity, and external, such as solar activity.

DKK
Milenio (translation)

Knowing And Acknowledging What We Don't Know About Planetary Climate

And here's the mystery. Even allowing for the greenhouse effect Venus is hotter then it should be.

And if our current theories can't even explain what happened to our sister planet, how can we possibly be sure about the future of earth!

Janet Sumner,
Earth Scientist, Open University of England
Science Channel -- Venus Unveiled

Wow, I thought we were told we had that greenhouse global warming thing all locked up -- you know, the debate is over and all that stuff!
DKK

When Mathematicians Actually Check The Numbers The Global Warming Evidence Proves Flimsy -- Wonder Why No One Bothered To Look Before, Oh Yea, The Debate Is Over Already!

“…I was well convinced, as were most technically trained people, that the IPCC’s case for Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is very tight. However, upon taking the time to get into the details of the science, I was appalled at how flimsy the case really is.”

Watts up with that has the whole post, it's worth reading!

You can a reaction to this gentleman to be proportional to Gore's Law!
DKK
Watts Up With That -- APS Fellow supports Monckton's position

Gove Schwarzenegger Vetoes Global Warming Indoctination!

California public students will stick to reading, writing and arithmetic, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger decided as he vetoed a bill late Friday that would have required climate change be added to schools’ curriculum.The measure, sponsored by state Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, also would have required future science textbooks to include climate change as a subject.In January, the state Senate approved the bill, SB 908, by a 26-13 vote.

Only two Republicans supported the proposal.In his veto statement, Schwarzenegger said he supported education that spotlights the dangers of climate change. However, the Republican governor said he was opposed to educational mandates from Sacramento.”I continue to believe that the state should refrain from being overly prescriptive in specific school curriculum, beyond establishing rigorous academic standards,” he said.

Schwarzenegger added that the state’s Integrated Waste Management Board’s Office of Education and Environment, along with California’s Environmental Protection Agency, are creating an environmental curriculum for K-12 students that includes climate change issues.Simitian had said his bill wouldn’t dictate what to teach; rather, it would require the state Board of Education and state Department of Education to decide how the topic would be covered and which grades would study it.

While global warming is included in high school classes as it pertains to weather, the subject is not required to be covered in all textbooks, according to the California Science Teachers Association.

Watts Up With That

70% Of 20th Century Warming Caused By Ocean Southern Oscillation -- NASA Scientists

Well, well. Congress learned something shattering today, which will have the Church of Al Gore/IPCC running in fear of their lost credibility. It has been scientifically demonstrated that 70% of the Global Warming in the last century (and cooling in the last decade) is due to the Pacific Ocean Oscillations, not CO2:

...
On this issue, it can be shown with a simple climate model that small cloud fluctuations assumed to occur with two modes of natural climate variability — the El Nino/La Nina phenomenon (Southern Oscillation), and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation — can explain 70% of the warming trend since 1900, as well as the nature of that trend: warming until the 1940s, no warming until the 1970s, and resumed warming since then.

The gentlemen making this claim is the lead investigator one of NASA’s flagship Earth Observing Observatories (H/T Ice Cap). I have the honor of working on this mission on the periphery (Aqua), it is operated out of the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, MD.

Expect the hyperventilation to begin following Gore's Law.
DKK
The Strata-Sphere -- NASA Discovers 70% Of Global Climate Due To Pacific Ocean Oscillations - Not CO2

Gore's Law -- As The Facts Prove More 'Inconvenient' The Extremist Hype Will Grow

When it comes to global warming, extreme scare stories abound. Al Gore, for example, famously claimed that a whopping six meters (20 feet) of sea-level rise would flood major cities around the world.

Gore’s scientific advisor, Jim Hansen from NASA, has even topped his protégé. Hansen suggests that there will eventually be sea-level rises of 24 meters (80 feet), with a six-meter rise happening just this century. Little wonder that fellow environmentalist Bill McKibben states that “we are engaging in a reckless drive-by drowning of much of the rest of the planet and much of the rest of creation.”

Given all the warnings, here is a slightly inconvenient truth: over the past two years, the global sea level hasn’t increased. It has slightly decreased . Since 1992, satellites orbiting the planet have measured the global sea level every 10 days with an amazing degree of accuracy – 3-4 millimeters (0.2 inches). For two years, sea levels have declined. (All of the data are available at sealevel.colorado.edu.)

(...)

Increasingly, alarmists claim that we should not be allowed to hear such facts. In June, Hansen proclaimed that people who spread “disinformation” about global warming – CEOs, politicians, in fact anyone who doesn’t follow Hansen’s narrow definition of the “truth” – should literally be tried for crimes against humanity.

It is depressing to see a scientist – even a highly politicized one – calling for a latter-day Inquisition. Such a blatant attempt to curtail scientific inquiry and stifle free speech seems inexcusable. But it is perhaps also a symptom of a broader problem. It is hard to keep up the climate panic as reality diverges from the alarmist predictions more than ever before.

I call the phenomenon of growing hype in the face of 'Inconvenient' Truths Gore's Law!  (As opposed to the Gore Effect where the temperature drops in anticipation of visits by Gore and global warming protester events)
DKK
Watts Up With That -- The Green Inquisition

On the positive side --
From Scott Rasmussen: “Only 33% of American voters believe Al Gore’s proposal to switch all of the nation’s electricity production to wind, solar and other carbon-free sources in 10 years is realistic.”
DKK

Global Warming Fallacy -- The Hilarity Continues

Shifting of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation from its warm mode to cool mode assures global cooling for the next three decades.

Don J. Easterbrook, Dept. of Geology, Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA

And

Arctic sea ice extent on July 16 stood at 8.91 million square kilometers (3.44 million square miles). While extent was below the 1979 to 2000 average of 9.91 square kilometers (3.83 million square miles), it was 1.05 million square kilometers (0.41 million square miles) above the value for July 16, 2007. (NSIDC)

And

Nutty Story of the Day: “Global Warming” is Killing the Penguins in Antarctica -- At the very least, let’s check the temperature in Antarctica, It’s winter there. Hmmm. Warmest temperature is -6° C

Eventually the facts will catch up with the likes of the Goracle, even the media can't stop it.  They will simply flip as if they knew it all along.
DKK

Why The Debate Matters -- Global Warming The Multi Trillion Dollar Religion

I DEVOTED six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia's compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector.

FullCAM models carbon flows in plants, mulch, debris, soils and agricultural products, using inputs such as climate data, plant physiology and satellite data. I've been following the global warming debate closely for years.

When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the old ice core data, no other suspects.

The evidence was not conclusive, but why wait until we were certain when it appeared we needed to act quickly? Soon government and the scientific community were working together and lots of science research jobs were created. We scientists had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet.

But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming. As Lord Keynes famously said, "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"

There has not been a public debate about the causes of global warming and most of the public and our decision makers are not aware of the most basic salient facts.  

Here is what he means by facts:

1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it.

Each possible cause of global warming has a different pattern of where in the planet the warming occurs first and the most. The signature of an increased greenhouse effect is a hot spot about 10km up in the atmosphere over the tropics. We have been measuring the atmosphere for decades using radiosondes: weather balloons with thermometers that radio back the temperature as the balloon ascends through the atmosphere. They show no hot spot. Whatsoever.

If there is no hot spot then an increased greenhouse effect is not the cause of global warming. So we know for sure that carbon emissions are not a significant cause of the global warming. ...

2. There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None. ...

3. The satellites that measure the world's temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year (to the temperature of 1980). ...

4. The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect. ...

The last point was known and past dispute by 2003, yet Al Gore made his movie in 2005 and presented the ice cores as the sole reason for believing that carbon emissions cause global warming. In any other political context our cynical and experienced press corps would surely have called this dishonest and widely questioned the politician's assertion. ..

What is going to happen over the next decade as global temperatures continue not to rise? The Labor Government is about to deliberately wreck the economy in order to reduce carbon emissions. If the reasons later turn out to be bogus, the electorate is not going to re-elect a Labor government for a long time. When it comes to light that the carbon scare was known to be bogus in 2008, the ALP is going to be regarded as criminally negligent or ideologically stupid for not having seen through it.

 DKK
Via Ace and Powerline

How The Debate Is Silenced!

Earlier this week I posted about an article reporting on the flaws in the mathematical assumptions of the IPCC as demonstrated by The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, former science adviser to Margaret Thatcher, in the APS newsletter Physics and Society.

When the press picked up the news of this article the stuff hit the fan and the pressure to remember that 'the debate is over' kicked into high gear.  Lord Monckton's article it seemed was no longer acceptable and was prefaced in red with the following comment:

"The following article has not undergone any scientific peer review. Its conclusions are in disagreement with the overwhelming opinion of the world scientific community. The Council of the American Physical Society disagrees with this article's conclusions."

Unfortunately for the APS Lord Monckton's article was subjected to extensive peer review and rewrite prior to publication and Lord Monckton is demanding an apology as well as the removal of the preface.

The religion of the eco-wacko's is just as touchy about any debate of its basic tenants as any religion past or present.  They will do anything to cut off any debate or doubt.  Scientology could learn a few things from them!

Both Watts Up With That and  The American Thinker has the whole story including the full letter Lord Monckton sent to the APS stating his case.

I am again reminded of Eisenhower's farewell speech, which I have quoted often, that warned:

“The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present — and is gravely to be regarded.

"Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.” (emphasis added) 

DKK

The Debate Goes On Despite The Debate Being Over

First, David Evans, formerly of the Australian Greenhouse Office has become a skeptic.
...
Second, the American Physical Society has acknowledged that there is "considerable presence within the scientific community" of anthropogenic global warming skeptics.

DKK
Ace of Spades HQ

Mathematical Proof There Is No Global Warming Crisis -- IPCC Assumptions, Sorta Made Up Crap

Mathematical proof that there is no “climate crisis” appears today in a major, peer-reviewed paper in Physics and Society, a learned journal of the 10,000-strong American Physical Society, SPPI reports.

Christopher Monckton, who once advised Margaret Thatcher, demonstrates via 30 equations that computer models used by the UN’s climate panel (IPCC) were pre-programmed with overstated values for the three variables whose product is “climate sensitivity” (temperature increase in response to greenhouse-gas increase), resulting in a 500-2000% overstatement of CO2’s effect on temperature in the IPCC’s latest climate assessment report, published in 2007.

Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered [http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200807/index.cfm] demonstrates that later this century a doubling of the concentration of CO2 compared with pre-industrial levels will increase global mean surface temperature not by the 6 °F predicted by the IPCC but, harmlessly, by little more than 1 °F. Lord Monckton concludes – (...)

• “… Perhaps real-world climate sensitivity is very much below the IPCC’s estimates. Perhaps, therefore, there is no ‘climate crisis’ at all. … The correct policy approach to a non-problem is to have the courage to do nothing.”
• The IPCC’s 2007 climate summary overstated CO2’s impact on temperature by 500-2000%;
• CO2 enrichment will add little more than 1 °F (0.6 °C) to global mean surface temperature by 2100;
• Not one of the three key variables whose product is climate sensitivity can be measured directly;
• The IPCC’s values for these key variables are taken from only four published papers, not 2,500;
• The IPCC’s values for each of the three variables, and hence for climate sensitivity, are overstated;
• “Global warming” halted ten years ago, and surface temperature has been falling for seven years;
• Not one of the computer models relied upon by the IPCC predicted so long and rapid a cooling;
• The IPCC inserted a table into the scientists’ draft, overstating the effect of ice-melt by 1000%;
• It was proved 50 years ago that predicting climate more than two weeks ahead is impossible;
• Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth warmed;
• In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 year

I have said it repeatedly, we really don't know what we are doing and this only shows that all of our assumptions are suspect.  The debate cannot be over when the input is not real.
DKK
Science and Public Policy Institute
Via Say Anything Blog

Ooow, Al (Gore), Sorry -- Wrong Again! -- Update -- Report: Biofuels Caused Food Crisis

Courtesy: RedLasso

A 17 year study indicates that it would take 1000's of years for the melting of Greenland's Ice Caps to affect sea levels. In addition in some spots melting has slowed or even stopped.

Special Report, Grapevine -- July 4, 2008

As I have said repeatedly, we really don't know enough about what's happening to formulate effective solutions that don't end up being worse then the perceived problem.
DKK

Update -- Case in point, biofuels did lead to world hunger!

Biofuels have forced global food prices up by 75% - far more than previously estimated - according to a confidential World Bank report obtained by the Guardian.

The damning unpublished assessment is based on the most detailed analysis of the crisis so far, carried out by an internationally-respected economist at global financial body.

The figure emphatically contradicts the US government's claims that plant-derived fuels contribute less than 3% to food-price rises. It will add to pressure on governments in Washington and across Europe, which have turned to plant-derived fuels to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and reduce their dependence on imported oil. ...

"Political leaders seem intent on suppressing and ignoring the strong evidence that biofuels are a major factor in recent food price rises," said Robert Bailey, policy adviser at Oxfam.

Guardian UK -- Secret report: biofuel caused food crisis
DKK

CO2 Rises, Temperatures Remain The Same

The American Thinker has two posts today on Carbon: the New Chemical Villain, and Your 2007 Carbon Footprint that do a great job of educating readers of some of the facts relating to CO2.

Another interesting post this weekend was by Anthony Watts on his blog, Watts Up With That, where he does the math on the numbers from the last 11 years and finds that despite continuing increases in CO2 levels (which are still only 385 parts per MILLION) the earths temperature has remained virtually the same.

Yet, as if in a panicked response, James Hanson of NASA is set to testify this week before congress and is expected to:

(C)all for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.

Is it a wonder that most Britons, who get more of a daily dose of eco-wacko alarmist media then we do:

The majority of the British public is still not convinced that climate change is caused by humans - and many others believe scientists are exaggerating the problem, according to an exclusive poll for The Observer.

The results have shocked campaigners who hoped that doubts would have been silenced by a report last year by more than 2,500 scientists for the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which found a 90 per cent chance that humans were the main cause of climate change and warned that drastic action was needed to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

In our solar system planets with atmospheres start with the crushingly thick air on Venus, Mercury having lost any it may have started with as it was burned off by the nearby sun. As you progress out past Earth to Mars the atmosphere gets thinner and thinner. Could it be the sun has something to do with that?

The Earth has had far higher levels of CO2 in the past but it currently has only 0.038%. Venus has 96.5% CO2 and Mars has 95.3% CO2.
DKK

Increased CO2 Leads To Greening Of The World

Planet Earth is on a roll! GPP is way up. NPP is way up. To the surprise of those who have been bearish on the planet, the data shows global production has been steadily climbing to record levels, ones not seen since these measurements began.

GPP is Gross Primary Production, a measure of the daily output of the global biosphere –the amount of new plant matter on land. NPP is Net Primary Production, an annual tally of the globe’s production. Biomass is booming. The planet is the greenest it’s been in decades, perhaps in centuries.

(...)
They found that over a period of almost two decades, the Earth as a whole became more bountiful by a whopping 6.2%. About 25% of the Earth’s vegetated landmass — almost 110 million square kilometres — enjoyed significant increases and only 7% showed significant declines.

(...)
Plants take the carbon from CO2 to bulk themselves up — carbon is the building block of life — and release the oxygen, which along with the plants, then sustain animal life. As summarized in a report last month, released along with a petition signed by 32,000 U. S. scientists who vouched for the benefits of CO2: “Higher CO2 enables plants to grow faster and larger and to live in drier climates. Plants provide food for animals, which are thereby also enhanced. The extent and diversity of plant and animal life have both increased substantially during the past half-century.”

From the 2004 abstract: Our results indicate that global changes in climate have eased several critical climatic constraints to plant growth, such that net primary production increased 6% (3.4 petagrams of carbon over 18 years) globally. The largest increase was in tropical ecosystems. Amazon rain forests accounted for 42% of the global increase in net primary production, owing mainly to decreased cloud cover and the resulting increase in solar radiation.

(...)
Doubling the jeopardy for Earth is man. Unlike the many scientists who welcome CO2 for its benefits, many other scientists and most governments believe carbon dioxide to be a dangerous pollutant that must be removed from the atmosphere at all costs. Governments around the world are now enacting massive programs in an effort to remove as much as 80% of the carbon dioxide emissions from the atmosphere.(...)
If these governments are right, they will have done us all a service. If they are wrong, the service could be all ill, with food production dropping world wide, and the countless ecological niches on which living creatures depend stressed.

Amazingly, although the risks of action are arguably at least as real as the risks of inaction, Canada and other countries are rushing into Earth-altering carbon schemes with nary a doubt. Environmentalists, who ordinarily would demand a full-fledged environmental assessment before a highway or a power plant can be built, are silent on the need to question proponents or examine alternatives.

Earth is on a roll. Governments are too. We will know soon enough if we’re rolled off a cliff.

Both Michelle Malkin Blog and Watts Up With That? linked to an article by Lawrence Solomon at the Financial Times. Watts Up included a link to a fascinating set of NASA images showing that increase in growth.

Let me reiterate what I have said before;

We really don't yet know what we are doing and we run the risk of destroying the basic structure of our civilization with many related deaths. If we can't manage to destroy a bacteria effectively how do we think we can destroy something as complex as the ecosystem.

DKK

Gore's Top Advisor's NASA Numbers Don't Add Up -- Are The Facts Twisted To Fit A Very Costly Theory?

Investigate Hansen and NASA: Agency Is Doctoring Temperatures In an Effort to Vindicate Global Warming Theories

Let me explain -- no, there is no time. Let me sum up: NASA's temperature records are growing farther and farther away from everyone else's as NASA routinely-- and without offering any explanations why -- "adjusts" old temperature readings downward and new temperature readings upward, all in an effort to show rising temperatures where satellite readings show none.

Actually, it's worst than that; if a few continens or large landmasses like Africa or all of Canada aren't playing nice and in fact are getting colder, NASA ignores them altogether.

Must read. Long, but convincing.

DKK

Ace of Spades HQ

Update:

Video of NASA's, "adjustments," to the US temperature readings -- Note, the flat trend (which corresponds to some other readings) becomes a warming trend:

As The Earth Cools Eco-Wacko's Heads Explode

Confirming what many of us have already noted from the anecdotal evidence coming in of a much cooler than normal May, such as late spring snows as far south as Arizona, extended skiing in Colorado, and delays in snow cover melting in many parts of the northern hemisphere, the University of Alabama, Huntsville (UAH) published their satellite derived Advanced Microwave Sounder Unit data set of the Lower Troposphere for May 2008.

It is significantly colder globally, colder even than the significant drop to -0.046°C seen in January 2008.

The global ∆T from April to May 2008 was -.195°C

UAH
2008 1 -0.046
2008 2 0.020
2008 3 0.094
2008 4 0.015
2008 5 -0.180

Compared to the May 2007 value of 0.199°C we find a 12 month ∆T is -.379°C.

But even more impressive is the change since the last big peak in global temperature in January 2007 at 0.594°C, giving a 16 month ∆T of -0.774°C which is equal in magnitude to the generally agreed upon “global warming signal” of the last 100 years.

(Temperature Chart 1979 to current at link)

DKK

Watts Up With That -- UAH: Global Temperature Dives in May

Copenhagen Consensus 2008

I have talked about The Copenhagen Consensus since their last meeting in 2004. It has now released its 2008 Consensus report:

Eight leading economists, including five Nobelists, were asked to prioritize 30 different proposed solutions to ten of the world's biggest problems. The proposed solutions were developed by more than 50 specialist scholars over the past two years and were presented as reports to the panel over the past week. Since we live in a world of scarce resources, not all good projects can be funded. So the experts were constrained in their decision making by allocating a budget of an "extra" $75 billion among the solutions over four years.

The number one solution was:

Supplying the micronutrients vitamin A and zinc to 80 percent of the 140 million children who lack them in developing countries is ranked as the highest priority by the expert panel at the Copenhagen Consensus 2008 Conference. The cost is $60 million per year, yielding benefits in health and cognitive development of over $1 billion.

Second was expanding free trade.

Nancy Stokey explained,"Trade reform is not just for the long run, it would make people in developing countries better off right now. There are large benefits in the short run and the long run benefits are enormous."

Where was Anthropogenic Global Warming?

So what proposed solutions are at the bottom of the list? At number 30, the lowest priority is a proposal to mitigate man-made global warming by cutting the emissions of greenhouse gases. This ranking caused some consternation among the European journalists at the press conference. Nobelist and University of Maryland economist Thomas Schelling noted that part of the reason for the low ranking is that spending $75 billion on cutting greenhouses gases would achieve almost nothing. In fact, the climate change analysis presented to the panel found that spending $800 billion until 2100 would yield just $685 billion in climate change benefits.

DKK
Reason Magazine -- The Top Ten Solutions To The Worlds Biggest Problems

Garbage In -- Global Warming Out

In the web site of the New Zealand Centre for Political Research, Fred Singer offers an excellent summary of the skeptics' view of anthropogenic global warming. If you haven't followed the issue in detail and want to review the basics, it's a good place to start.

Singer makes one point that cannot be repeated too often: the AGW theory depends entirely on computer models, but we know for sure that those computer models are wrong. They do not accurately explain either the Earth's climate history, or the present distribution of global temperatures. This simple diagram shows how the "fingerprint" predicted by AGW models fails to conform to observed atmospheric conditions; click to enlarge:

If you think about it, it is rather remarkable that Al Gore and his confederates have been able to stampede millions of voters, based on computer models that are indisputably contradicted by the facts.

I have repeated the entire post because there was really no way to clip it and still get the point and the image.
DKK
Powerline -- Global Warming: A Primer

Why Won't Al Gore Debate?

Czech President Vaclav Klaus said Tuesday he is ready to debate Al Gore about global warming, as he presented the English version of his latest book that argues environmentalism poses a threat to basic human freedoms.

'I many times tried to talk to have a public exchange of views with him, and he's not too much willing to make such a conversation,' Klaus said. 'So I'm ready to do it.'

Klaus was speaking a the National Press Building in Washington to present his new book, Blue Planet in Green Shackles - What Is Endangered: Climate or Freedom?, before meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney Wednesday.

'My answer is it is our freedom and, I might add, and our prosperity,' he said.
(...)

Klaus, an economist, said he opposed the 'climate alarmism' perpetuated by environmentalism trying to impose their ideals, comparing it to the decades of communist rule he experienced growing up in Soviet-dominated Czechoslovakia.

'Like their (communist) predecessors, they will be certain that they have the right to sacrifice man and his freedom to make their idea reality,' he said.

'In the past, it was in the name of the Marxists or of the proletariat - this time, in the name of the planet,' he added.

DKK
M&C Czech President Klaus ready to debate Gore on climate change

Global Warming -- First Earth, Then Mars, Now Jupiter!

Oh, you skeptics are going to rue the day you doubted global warming! Hot off of NASA’s website, we have undeniable proof of “large-scale global warming,” photographic evidence taken from space that shows the increased temperature generating new, violent storms. Deniers will have to eat some crow over this.

Of course, they’ll first have to talk about the right planet

:

New storms confirm global warming on Jupiter!

Here is a picture of the new storm spots:DKK
Hot Air -- Proof of global warming!