Breaking News!
Climate-gate is upon us... See ''Climate-Gate''
Sequestering CO2 removes 2 oxygen atoms from the atmosphere for every 1 carbon of atom removed... See ''Sequestering Carbon Dioxide is Dangerous''
The exposure of misguided and falsified research is coming in thick & fast now..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1245695/UN-climate-change-panel-blunders-wrongly-linking-global-warming-rise-severe-floodings.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245161/Climate-change-chief-says-sorry-hot-air-claim-melting-glaciers.html http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18363-debate-heats-up-over-ipcc-melting-glaciers-claim.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1245695/UN-climate-change-panel-blunders-wrongly-linking-global-warming-rise-severe-floodings.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245161/Climate-change-chief-says-sorry-hot-air-claim-melting-glaciers.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18363-debate-heats-up-over-ipcc-melting-glaciers-claim.html
Even the BBC Radio4 series "A History Of The World In 100 Objects" (Jan 2010).. http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/ahow -- can't resist .. at the end of the 2010/01/25 podcast, http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/radio4/ahow/ahow_20100125-1000a.mp3 , Sir Bob Geldof chimes in and says: "There simply isn't enough food for the world at the moment. There are several factors, but the predominant one is climate change." ... ??? Obviously recorded in a bygone era when he felt so confident, he didn't feel the need to qualify his statement at all. Surely the predominant factor is just that there are far too many of us. Is there any "hard" evidence for climate change affecting the food supply except that there has been changes? There is the usual rounds of droughts and floods but the world has always had unpredictable weather. The only country I know of that is experiencing prolonged change is Australia which has had decade droughts.
And one last daft link... http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20100124/sc_livescience/lawnsmaycontributetoglobalwarming .. "lawns may contribute to global warming".. this article hopefully belongs to a soon-to-be-forgotten age of ludicrous claims. It's wrong because 1/ lawns represent an infinitesimally small percentage of land mass, 2/ it depends on what they are compared to, 3/ counter to their own condescending admission that lawns are CO2 sinks, lawns don't remove CO2 because cut grass is always burnt or allowed to rot which returns CO2 back.
Perhaps the daftest campaign I ever saw was telling us to use less tap water because it would somehow would save on CO2. It's still going (2010/01/26)... http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/actonco2/home/campaigns/save-water/why-save-water.html .. how much taxpayers money was wasted in this? Or is it really just encourage us to use less water because they sold off all the dams?