Who were the perpetrators of this fraud? From the lowliest, arrogant “scientist” at Penn State, right up to the White House, and the denizens of mansions in BelAire.

Metaphorically speaking, heads will roll.

Al Gore and his minions have jetted around the world, plotting how to destroy our economy and way of life, all the while demanding that we peons ride the bus or subway, and turn our thermostats down to 60.

Their “let them eat cake” attitudes are eerily similar to previous elites. The communist elites enjoyed the same privileges and mouthed the same type of platitudes. Where are they now?

No Consensus–No Warming (NOC-NOW)–Stop the Scam–Halt the IPCC

We have a quickly growing Yahoo Group (CO2 is Plant Food), and a petition (NOC-NOW) that simply spells out a Declaration of Climate Independence.
We also have a Facebook Group: No Consensus–No Warming (NOC-NOW)–Stop the AGW Scam.

The petition will be provided to the US Congress, the White House, the UN, the IPCC, the EU Commission, and other representative bodies involved in “Climate Change” policy deliberations.

We will be heard.

Please join the group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/co2isplantfood

And sign the petition: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/NOC_NOW/

Join Facebook group: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=191580771509

We can stop this scam, together.

Kent Clizbe
NOC-NOW
Stop the Scam—Halt the IPCC
No Consensus—No Warming

I don’t see any real debate. The discussion going on isn’t in anyway related to the realities of climate change. Let me list the things that are not being discussed.

There is a natural greenhouse effect. Without it the surface temperature would be roughly 33 C colder.

Trace gases are an important part of this natural greenhouse effect.

Humans have made a sizeable increase in the concentration of several of these important trace gases such as C02, methane, CFCs and more.

This human increase has and will increase the greenhouse effect, and thus warm the surface.

A little bit warmer will have both gains and losses. Warmer will be mostly bad. Warm enough will be very bad.

No magic that is going to save us. No magic iris, for if there was, how could there have been ice ages? No magic energy technology is likely to pop out of a hat.

So where does this leave us? It is technically possible for a mixture of known non-carbon energy sources (nuclear, solar, wind, geothermal) to replace most of the fossil fuel energy. This will be require eventually as the supply of fossil fuels is limited. Right now, this is politically impossible. Care to talk about why?

So where is the real debate? I don’t see any.

Oh, still no link to that Nature editorial, Keith?

In the main post, it doesn’t occur to her that there might be a difference between the British and American FOI laws, noting that section II.42 of the British one provides an “absolute” exemption for confidential communications.  But heck, if I, a mere non-blogging non-journalist, could find that out, why not the “world’s tallest female econoblogger [who] delivers her opinions on economics, business, and other moral hazards”?  (Er, ou est le science?)

The rest of her stuff is similarly crap, as is the rest of your post, Keith.  The photocopier “thinking” you exhibited here is exactly the sort that was responsible for the journalistic failure that led up to the Iraq War.  Fortunately much of the rest of the herd has had the sense to avoid it, at least so far.