What We've All Been Waiting For: Al Gore in 24-Hour Broadcast to Convert 'Climate Skeptics'

Is there a prize for anyone who stays awake for the entire screed? A lifetime supply of Sominex? This dude puts me to sleep in two minutes. How on earth in the balance can someone handle 24 hours of this colossal bore?

Former President Al Gore will renew his 30-year campaign to convince skeptics of the link between climate change and extreme weather events this week in a 24-hour global multi-media event.

"24 Hours of Reality" will broadcast a presentation by Al Gore every hour for 24 hours across 24 different time zones from Wednesday to Thursday, with the aim of convincing climate change deniers and driving action against global warming among households, schools and businesses.

The campaign also asks people to hand over control of their social networking accounts on Facebook and Twitter to it for 24 hours to deliver Gore's message.

Hand over control of Twitter and Facebook accounts? Gee, what could go wrong with that risky scheme?

"There will be 200 new slides arguing the connection between more extreme weather and climate change," Trewin Restorick, chief executive of the event's UK partner Global Action Plan, told Reuters on Monday.

"There will be a full-on assault on climate skeptics, exploring where they get their funding from."

Hmm, a full-on assault? Sounds pretty violent. Won't this scare the children or something?

The Goracle claims for 24 hours, we will all live in reality. Unlike the rest of the year when Gore lives in his massive oceanfront mansion laying down a carbon footprint that dwarfs mere mortals.

Here's an idiotic video clip through their link.



In Gore's typical cowardly fashion, you can't comment on it. That sure is a means of stifling those evil deniers! So much for an honest debate.

Climate Hoaxer to Face 'Independent' Inquiry

Somehow I doubt anything will come of this, but it appears the unusually hairy climate hoaxer and Al Gore pal Rajendra Pachauri will be facing an inquiry into his junk science.

Environment and Climate ministers meeting in closed session in Bali last night insisted that an independent review should be carried out following the publicising of mistakes in its last report, and a row surrounding Dr Pachauri's robust response to his critics. If his management is found to be at fault his position could become untenable.

Participants in the unprecedented meeting – held at the annual assembly of the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme's (UNEP) Governing Council in Bali – were sworn to secrecy over the decision and it is only expected to be announced after its detaled scope and composition have been worked out by UNEP and the World Meteorological Organisation, the two UN agencies that oversee the IPCC's work.

How nice of these climate hoaxers to fly to Bali while the rest of the planet is freezing their asses off.

Amazingly, this scammer thought he could get to decide who performed the inquiry. Man, he's got bigger stones than Algore.

The ministers – led by Hillary Benn, the Environment Secretary,and his counterparts from Germany,. Norway, Algeria and Antigua and Barbuda – refused to allow Dr Pachauri to decide who would carry out the review, insisting it must be completely and demonstrably independent of the IPCC.

The two agencies are expected first to approach national academies of sciences and to ensure that it examines the management of the organisation as well as its scientific procedures.

The review is to report by August to allow time for its conclusions - and Dr Pachauri's position – to be assessed before the IPCC meets for its own annual assembly in Korea in October.

Any objective inquiry can result in only one thing: Pachauri's dismissal. A criminal prosecution and being stripped of the Nobel Prize would also be nice.

'I Don’t Think We Should Be Taking Much Notice of What’s on Blogs'

I'm sure his partner in crime, Al Gore, feels the same way. Who knew Gore's "invention" would come back to haunt him like this?

"The IPCC [report] is an assessment, it's not a review," he says, "so the authors have to know something about the subject to assess which are the important papers to bring in to the particular chapter." In doing so, authors naturally would exclude papers that are scientifically weak or irrelevant, argues Jones.

But he fears that the aftermath of the climategate affair is undermining the integrity of the scientific review process. "I don't think we should be taking much notice of what's on blogs because they seem to be hijacking the peer-review process," says Jones.

It is now essential for climate researchers to stand up for their science, he says. "[I'd] like to see the climate science community supporting the climate science more. Lots of them are trying but they're being drowned out."

Aww, they're being drowned out. Well for the past couple of decades we "deniers" have been shouted down and inundated with propaganda every day, our governments are held hostage by environmental extremists, children are terrorized in the classrooms and told the polar bears are dying off and yet poor Phil Jones is being "drowned out."

Heartbreaking, isn't it?

H/T Tim Blair.

Update: See Ed Morrissey's item this morning: Did Nature misreport fraud issue with Jones?

Given that Keenan’s work has been peer reviewed and freely available, it seems at least curious that Nature apparently never attempted to contact Keenan about the allegations he has made in those papers. The description of Keenan as an “amateur” also seems somewhat misleading, given that he has written at least one peer-reviewed paper directly on the subject of misuse of data in climate-change research. Had Nature actually done a little research themselves, they would have known that Jones has not been accused of doing sloppy work, but of deliberately and knowingly using faulty (or at least unsupported) data to support his theories.

Is there any end to the fraud?

Forget What We Said About CO2

Okay, okay, I know for at least two decades now the environmentalists have been screaming about how bad CO2 was and what a big contributor to global warming/climate change it was. Forget that. The real enemy has been identified: Methane.

Scientists have uncovered what appears to be a further dramatic increase in the leakage of methane gas that is seeping from the Arctic seabed.

Methane is about 20 times more potent than CO2 in trapping solar heat.

Since all their arguments concerning climate change and the effect CO2 may have on it have been so thoroughly debunked, they have moved on to a new enemy. Expect all of the arguments from the Al Gore acolytes to reflect this new gospel.

Remember when the hole in the ozone was going to herald in a new ice age and then it just slipped from the public debate? That is what will happen now with the CO2 argument. This, however, will give ammunition to the climate change alarmists who, as part of their plans to cripple the economies of the industrialized nations, turn their guns on methane.

We have already seen evidence of this in some of the insane legislation and rulings from the EPA directed primarily at livestock farmers. The environmental regulations that our EPA propose even have language in it to limit the amount of methane that a farmer will be allowed to have his animals expel. If they don't meet the requirements then they face heavy fines. All of this is designed to drive livestock producers out of business or cause the cost of meat to skyrocket to such a level that only those who today can afford to eat Wagyu beef--like our first family does--will be able to afford to put meat on the table.

To all the climate change acolytes: Please update your style books to reflect this change.

On a related note, Europe continues to suffer from a prolonged cold snap, it is now 34° in Atlanta, first time we have been above freezing in a week I think, and I watched my Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets lose the coldest Orange Bowl on record.

The Science is Settled: 100 Reasons Why Climate Change is Natural; Plus: Heavy Snow for Copengahen!

Make sure you keep this away from the obsessed Global Warmers. Just reading it near them may melt their brains.

Then again, bombard them with the facts.

Top ten listed. Go here for the rest.

1) There is “no real scientific proof” that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from man’s activity.

2) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.

3) Warmer periods of the Earth’s history came around 800 years before rises in CO2 levels.

4) After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.

5) Throughout the Earth’s history, temperatures have often been warmer than now and CO2 levels have often been higher – more than ten times as high.

6) Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time.

7) The 0.7C increase in the average global temperature over the last hundred years is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends.

8) The IPCC theory is driven by just 60 scientists and favourable reviewers not the 4,000 usually cited.

9) Leaked e-mails from British climate scientists – in a scandal known as “Climate-gate” - suggest that that has been manipulated to exaggerate global warming

10) A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of climate change during the past hundred years.

Now how hilarious is this? The Gore Effect!

Wednesday
Cloudy with heavy snowfall. Maximum day temperatures around 2 degrees Celsius, minimum night temperatures around minus 3 degrees Celsius.

Prominent Climate Hoaxer: 'Denial Industry is Out to Dupe the Public'

Talk about a massive case of projection. A guy who's at the forefront of the climate-change scam has the gall to make the claim the "denial industry" is out to hoodwink the public.

It doesn't get any funnier than this.

When you survey the trail of wreckage left by the climate emails crisis, three things become clear. The first is the tendency of those who claim to be the champions of climate science to minimise their importance. Those who have most to lose if the science is wrong have perversely sought to justify the secretive and chummy ethos that some of the emails reveal. If science is not transparent and accountable, it's not science.

I believe that all supporting data, codes and programmes should be made available as soon as an article is published in a peer-reviewed journal. That anyone should have to lodge a freedom of information request to obtain them is wrong. That the request should be turned down is worse. That a scientist suggests deleting material that might be covered by that request is unjustifiable. Everyone who values the scientific process should demand complete transparency, across all branches of science.

The second observation is the tendency of those who don't give a fig about science to maximise their importance. The denial industry, which has no interest in establishing the truth about global warming, insists that these emails, which concern three or four scientists and just one or two lines of evidence, destroy the entire canon of climate science.

OK, so if it's a mere "one or two" lines of evidence and "three or four" scammers, how does that translate to a "trail of wreckage"?

Uh, Mr. Monbiot, it is because the "evidence" has been hidden that your world is crumbling around you. Pointing fingers at those who question the junk science and playing make believe about "one or two" lines of evidence isn't going to wash away the stain.

As to the "denial industry" having no interest in establishing the "truth" about mythical global warming you are indeed correct. There is no global warming, so therefore there is no truth to establish. What we're more interested in is exposing the fraud that you and your co-conspirators have perpetrated on the public.

When I use the term denial industry, I'm referring to those who are paid to say that man-made global warming isn't happening. The great majority of people who believe this have not been paid: they have been duped. Reading Climate Cover-Up, you keep stumbling across familiar phrases and concepts which you can see every day on the comment threads. The book shows that these memes were planted by PR companies and hired experts.

Oh, and we don't see familiar phrases repeated every day by the climate scammers?

Can we project any more here, Mr. Moonbat?

Yup, we're all just a bunch of unwitting dupes, and the brainwashed public and schoolkids who have the daylights scared out them them on a daily basis have just been inculcated with the truth. No, they're not dupes, just messengers of the greater truth, whatever that is today.

'Load of Hot Air Underpinned by Fraud'

The headline could pretty much describe anything connected with the left. All talk, mostly lies.

In this case it's ClimateGate, the biggest scandal of the century that is becoming more difficult to contain by the day.

THE scientific consensus that mankind has caused climate change was rocked yesterday as a leading academic called it a “load of hot air underpinned by fraud”.

Professor Ian Plimer condemned the climate change lobby as “climate comrades” keeping the “gravy train” going.

In a controversial talk just days before the start of a climate summit attended by world leaders in Copenhagen, Prof Plimer said Governments were treating the public like “fools” and using climate change to increase taxes.

He said carbon dioxide has had no impact on temperature and that recent warming was part of the natural cycle of climate stretching over ­billions of years.

Prof Plimer told a London audience: “Climates always change. They always have and they always will. They are driven by a number of factors that are random and cyclical.”

His comments came days after a scandal in climate-change research emerged through the leak of emails from the world-leading research unit at the University of East Anglia. They appeared to show that scientists had been massaging data to prove that global warming was taking place.

The Climate Research Unit also admitted getting rid of much of its raw climate data, which means other scientists cannot check the subsequent research. Last night the head of the CRU, Professor Phil Jones, said he would stand down while an independent review took place.

Professor Plimer said climate change was caused by natural events such as volcanic eruptions, the shifting of the Earth’s orbit and cosmic radiation. He said: “Carbon dioxide levels have been up to 1,000 times higher in the past. CO2 cannot be driving global warming now.

“In the past we have had rapid and significant climate change with temperature changes greater than anything we are measuring today. They are driven by processes that have been going on since the beginning of time.”

Yes, and despite pointing this out to the hoaxers for many years we're are instead called deniers.

Well, the truth is on our side and it is these hoaxers who are now on defense, where they shall remain until they come clean or are completely exposed for the frauds and charlatans they are.

Al Gore remains unavailable for comment.

James Delingpole says it's all unraveling now.

Shake Hands With a Con Artist for Only $1200!

Ever since his climate change hoax was exposed he must figure time on his con-job is running out. How else can he explain actually charging people $1200 to shake his hand? Talk about insatiable greed.

"Have you ever shaken hands with an American vice president? If not, now is your chance. Meet Al Gore in Copenhagen during the UN Climate Change Conference," notes the Danish tourism commission, which is helping Mr. Gore promote "Our Choice," his newest book about global warming in all its alarming modalities.

"Tickets are available in different price ranges for the event. If you want it all, you can purchase a VIP ticket, where you get a chance to shake hands with Al Gore, get a copy of Our Choice and have your picture taken with him. The VIP event costs DKK 5,999 and includes drinks and a light snack."

Wait, what? How much is that in American dollars? The currency conversion says it all, too: 5,999 Danish kroners is equivalent to $1,209.

I imagine Kool-Aid must be among the drink choices.

Globwarm Myth of the Day: Eating Less Sausage Will Save the Planet

As the scandal of the century mushrooms further and the credibility of the global warming hoaxers evaporates faster than Barack Obama's approval rating, today's exercise in stupidity bring us this inane drivel out of the U.K.

Cutting a sausage a day from the average British diet is necessary to save the planet, scientists claim.

Their controversial report, which partly blames meat-eaters for climate change, was backed by Environment Secretary Hilary Benn's department last night.

The scientists called for a 30 per cent reduction in the number of farm animals bred for meat to prevent rising temperatures and rising sea levels.

The average meat intake in men is 970g a week and in women 550g a week. A 30 per cent reduction in men is equivalent to seven 40g sausages, two 130g chicken breasts, four 70g lamb chops or 12 bacon rashers of 25g.

Such a reduction would also bring significant health benefits, the scientists said, by reducing premature deaths from heart disease in Britain by 17 per cent - equivalent to 18,000 lives a year.

They claimed food production from animals was a major source of agricultural greenhouse gas emissions, and that by 2030, rising demand for meat was expected to drive up livestock production globally by 85 per cent from 2000 levels, leading to substantial emission increases.

The authors, led by Dr Alan Dangour, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, and Dr Sharon Friel, from the Australian National University in Canberra, wrote in the medical journal The Lancet that improvements in agricultural efficiency were 'necessary but not sufficient to meet targets to reduce emissions'.

Ah yes, The Lancet, the home of those bogus Iraq fatalities from several years ago, a report funded by the thug George Soros.

Meanwhile, more climate change fraud has been exposed.

Rather than admit they've all been in on the greatest hoax of modern time, the reality deniers are just doubling down with more hysteria. Their credibility has been shattered yet they still move forward, inching ever close to the cliff's edge. Their fall will be a steep one.

Out: Global Warming; In: 'Our Deteriorating Atmosphere'

Goodness, this one is nearly as dumb as calling terrorism a man-caused disaster.

The problem with global warming, some environmentalists believe, is “global warming.”

The term turns people off, fostering images of shaggy-haired liberals, economic sacrifice and complex scientific disputes, according to extensive polling and focus group sessions conducted by ecoAmerica, a nonprofit environmental marketing and messaging firm in Washington.

Another problem with global warming is it's complete nonsense, a hoax, a scam. In fact people were turned off several years ago to the nonstop doom and gloom, they renamed it climate change. I also don't necessarily envision a shaggy-haired liberal. More like a pedantic, over-fed, failed politician, but I digress.

Instead of grim warnings about global warming, the firm advises, talk about “our deteriorating atmosphere.” Drop discussions of carbon dioxide and bring up “moving away from the dirty fuels of the past.” Don’t confuse people with cap and trade; use terms like “cap and cash back” or “pollution reduction refund.”

Cap and cash back? Are these people for real? Cap and trade will result in an enormous increase in prices to the consumer and we're supposed to play some Orwellian word games and call it cash back?

Is this kind of like Obama's tax cuts that will result in higher taxes?

EcoAmerica has been conducting research for the last several years to find new ways to frame environmental issues and so build public support for climate change legislation and other initiatives. A summary of the group’s latest findings and recommendations was accidentally sent by e-mail to a number of news organizations by someone who sat in this week on a briefing intended for government officials and environmental leaders.

Ooops, cat's out of the bag. Accidentally sent by e-mail. Hey, why be so cumbersome with the language? I've got a better, more eco-friendly word for accidentally sent by e-mail? How about stupidity?

This part I find curious, and frankly I'm surprised the New York Times even mentions it.

Environmental issues consistently rate near the bottom of public worry, according to many public opinion polls. A Pew Research Center poll released in January found global warming last among 20 voter concerns'

That's right, dead last.

Makes you wonder why we're pummeled over the head 24/7/365 about something nobody cares about.

Alas, there's a sinister reason why.

“We know why it’s lowest,” said Mr. Perkowitz, a marketer of outdoor clothing and home furnishings before he started ecoAmerica, whose activities are financed by corporations, foundations and individuals. “When someone thinks of global warming, they think of a politicized, polarized argument. When you say ‘global warming,’ a certain group of Americans think that’s a code word for progressive liberals, gay marriage and other such issues.”

Huh? Gay marriage? Oh yes, another one of those issues, along with global warming, that few people care about yet the progressive liberals are obsessed with.

Hmm. Maybe it's time for a focus group to come up with a new phrase for gay marriage?

Great News: Previous Dire Warnings of Globwarm Weren't Dire Enough

As more people tune these chicken littles out, they just keep ratcheting up their hysteria. After years of endless scare tactics, they've decided they were quite hysterical enough and are making even wilder claims.

IT seems the dire warnings about the oncoming devastation wrought by global warming were not dire enough, a top climate scientist says.
It has been just over a year since the Nobel-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) published a landmark report warning of rising sea levels, expanding deserts, more intense storms and the extinction of up to 30 per cent of plant and animal species.

But recent climate studies suggest that report significantly underestimates the potential severity of global warming over the next 100 years, a senior member of the panel said.

"We now have data showing that from 2000 to 2007, greenhouse gas emissions increased far more rapidly than we expected," said Chris Field, who was a coordinating lead author of the report.
This is "primarily because developing countries like China and India saw a huge upsurge in electric power generation, almost all of it based on coal," Mr Field said ahead of a presentation to the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Without decisive action to slow global warming, higher temperatures could ignite tropical forests and thaw the Arctic tundra, potentially releasing billions of tons of carbon dioxide that has been stored for thousands of years.

That could raise temperatures even more and create "a vicious cycle that could spiral out of control by the end of the century".

Just think: We could save the planet a few years if Al Gore didn't have such a massive carbon footprint.

Monday Doom and Gloom: Kyoto Has Failed, We're All Doomed

A little unbridled hysteria to get your week off on a positive note.

Now that the vaunted Kyoto protocol has been established as worthless (hey, there's a reason it got zero votes in the United States Senate), it's time for--you guessed it--Kyoto 2!

But what are we to do? All our policies to date to tackle global warming have been miserable failures. The Kyoto protocol has created a vast carbon market but done little to reduce emissions. The main effect of the EU's emissions trading scheme has been to transfer about €30bn or more from consumers to Europe's biggest polluters, the power companies. The EU and US foray into biofuels has, at huge cost, increased greenhouse gas emissions and created a world food crisis, causing starvation in many poor countries.

A vast carbon market where certain obese hucksters (I won't name name, but you know who I'm talking about) get rich while children starve!

So are all our efforts doomed to failure? Yes, so long as our governments remain craven to special interests, whether carbon traders or fossil fuel companies. The carbon market is a valuable tool, but must be subordinate to climatic imperatives. The truth is that to prevent runaway greenhouse warming, we will have to leave most of the world's fossil fuels in the ground, especially carbon-heavy coal, oil shales and tar sands. The fossil fuel and power companies must be faced down.

Global problems need global solutions, and we also need an effective replacement for the failed Kyoto protocol. The entire Kyoto system of national allocations is obsolete because of the huge volumes of energy embodied in products traded across national boundaries. It also presents a major obstacle to any new agreement – as demonstrated by the 2008 G8 meeting in Japan that degenerated into a squabble over national emission rights.

The answer? Scrap national allocations and place a single global cap on greenhouse gas emissions, applied "upstream" – for instance, at the oil refinery, coal-washing station and cement factory. Sell permits up to that cap in a global auction, and use the proceeds to finance solutions to climate change – accelerating the use of renewable energy, raising energy efficiency, protecting forests, promoting climate-friendly farming, and researching geoengineering technologies. And commit hundreds of billions of dollars per year to finance adaptation to climate change, especially in poor countries.

Such a package of measures would allow us to achieve zero net greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, and long-term stabilisation at 350 parts per million of CO2 equivalent. This avoids the economic pain that a cap-and-trade system alone would cause, and targets assistance at the poor, who are least to blame and most need help. The permit auction would raise about $1 trillion per year, enough to finance a spread of solutions. At a quarter of the world's annual oil spending, it is a price well worth paying.

Better yet, make the worst polluters (China, for example) pay their fair share.

But no, we can't do that. We have to make Western nations bear the brunt of this transfer of wealth instead, while lining the pockets of fat hucksters who live large on the gullibility of naive people.

Global Warming Scammer Wants to Put Oil Company Executives on Trial

We're getting into really dangerous territory when people want to put those who disagree with them on trial.

James Hansen has been exposed as a two-bit fraud along with Al Gore for perpetrating one of the greatest hoaxes ever, yet I don't see anyone urging they be put on trial. Mercilessly ridiculed, yes; but charged with crimes?

Perhaps they should be sued for fraud, but put on trial?

James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists, will today call 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.

Hansen will use the symbolically charged 20th anniversary of his groundbreaking speech to the US Congress - in which he was among the first to sound the alarm over the reality of global warming - to argue that radical steps need to be taken immediately if the "perfect storm" of irreversible climate change is not to become inevitable.

Speaking before Congress again, he will accuse the chief executive officers of companies such as ExxonMobil and Peabody Energy of being fully aware of the disinformation about climate change they are spreading.

In an interview with the Guardian he said: "When you are in that kind of position, as the CEO of one the primary players who have been putting out misinformation even via organisations that affect what gets into school textbooks, then I think that's a crime."

Well, sorry, Mr. Hansen, just because you think it's crime, doesn't make it so.

The astonishing arrogance of these global warming freaks never ceases to amaze. It's when these true believers disregard any science disputing them and become drunk with power they become very dangerous.

It's clear Gore, Hanson and their ilk have no use for free speech. They could use a refresher.

Naturally, the media is lapping up his nonsense.

GlobWarm Now a 'Human Rights' Issue, Poor Hardest Hit

Another useless decree from the UN.

Climate change is now officially a human rights issue, as the UN Human Rights Council on Friday passed a resolution on the subject, recognising that the world's poor are particularly vulnerable.

The council also gave the green light for a study into the impact of climate change on human rights, describing climate change as a "global problem .. that requires a global solution".

The resolution, submitted by the Maldives and passed without a vote, also noted that the poor tend to have limited resources to cope with the impact of global warming.

The country's Foreign Minister Abdulla Shahid told AFP that climate change "violates all human rights" -- from the basic to the fundamental.

"In the case of Maldives, the right to life itself," he said.

The island state is among the world's most vulnerable states to global warming, as it risks being submerged by rising sea waters.

Shahid said Maldives appreciated various forums which have already been discussing the climate change issue.

"But the very important aspect of the human dimension is sometimes lost. Scientific and economic issues have all been taken into account," he said, adding that the country wanted to use the resolution to highlight the human dimension of the problem.

When introducing the resolution in Geneva, Maldives' representative told delegates that the debate on the subject had so far tended to focus on physical effects, while the "phenomenon on human beings" had been largely overlooked.

"It is time to highlight the human face of climate change," he said.

And you suckers who pay for this meaningless drivel from the UN are now on the hook for the tab.

Meanwhile, more stupidity to raise awareness.

Global Convergence of Climate Kooks

The global warming climate change crowd was out in force around the globe today, apparently having nothing better to do with their lives than to spread misinformation, fear and panic.

Several thousand climate campaigners marched through London and Stockholm on Saturday calling on governments around the world to take urgent action to tackle global warming.

Carrying banners with slogans like "cut carbon not forests" and "actions speak louder than words" protesters in London marched in torrential rain and biting cold past parliament and through Trafalgar Square to rally in front of the U.S. embassy.

I wonder if anyone of these idiots realized the irony of whining about alleged global warming on a bitterly cold day?

Naturally, it gave these twits yet another opportunity to take a cheap swipe at George W. Bush since, in fact, he's the root of all planetary evil and has altered the world's temperature all by himself. Amazing what such a stupid man can accomplish, isn't it?

Some posters carried a picture of U.S. President George W. Bush and the words "Wanted for crimes against the planet". The United States is the world's biggest emitter of carbon gases.

That may be so, but I guess feeding the planet comes at a price.

In Sweden, police said about 1,000 protesters marched through Stockholm in the rain carrying banners reading "make love, not CO2", "kids for the climate" and "flying kills" in Swedish and English.

Tell that to all the eggheads who flew to Bali for their recent summit.

"I've never seen so many people come to a demonstration in Stockholm," said Susanna Ahlfors, 34, marching with her two children. "If we don't act now, things will go really bad. I'm worried about their future."

The protesters urged the world to stop driving and start biking and admonished Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt for "staying quiet while the water is rising".

Hey, that's a great idea. Let's just stop traveling altogether and we'll save the planet.

Check out the crew who organized the silliness in London.

This may seem pretty obvious: to save the planet and billions of people on it - from the horrific tide of death and destruction that will come from the catastrophic destabilisation of global climate. But there are two main things we're pushing at the demo, which are reflected on the route we've chosen for the march.

Good grief, people, take a deep breath. The hubris of people thinking a stupid march is going to save billions.

More brilliance from them.

But the biggest block on progress at those UN Talks is still, as it has been for a decade or more, the United States. In particular the Bush administration has both rejected Kyoto (in 20001) and cynicaly manouevered to sabotage progress at the UN Climate Talks.

At the risk of repeating myself for, oh, the thousandth time, it was the Clinton administration and the United States Senate, by a vote of 95-0, that declined to ratify Kyoto.

Nothing like blaming Bush for something he had nothing to do with. Maybe those jokers should be more concerned with their illiteracy than their vainglorious attempts at saving billions of lives.

Hey, At Least We're Better Than the Saudis!

More climate change nonsense coming out of Bali.

I long for the day when we don't get any dubious global warming or climate change idiocy, though I suspect that day will never come.

A new report rates the climate-protection performance of 56 countries that account for 90 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions. While Germany came in at second-best, the US ranked second worst.

Yes, this absurd report claims we're worse than Mexico and India.

As if.

Into the circular file this one goes...

The index, compiled by Germanwatch, a nonprofit climate research institute based in Berlin and Bonn, evaluates and ranks the climate-protection performance of 56 industrialized nations that account for 90 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions. On this year's list, Sweden retained the top spot, while Saudi Arabia was deemed the most irresponsible emitter among the world's major economies.

Demonstating the politics behind this sham summit in Bali, they acknowledge we'd have a better report card if only we caved in and submitted to the demands of the globwarm alarmist crowd.

"To improve their ranking, the US would need to contribute considerably to the current climate discussions (in Bali) and would need to commit to binding emissions reductions," said Busch.