How alleviate world hunger? In the next Little Ice Age, and the next real Ice Age, inevitably and inexorably coming to Earth, maybe sooner, maybe later, but absolutely coming, especially how alleviate world hunger? When the Earth’s temperature drops by 2.5 degrees centigrade (4.5 degrees Farenheit) and the growing seasons shorten by weeks or months, how alleviate world hunger? Why is Earth greener today than it has been over the history of human observation from space? (See Surprise: Earths’ Biosphere is Booming, Satellite Data Suggests CO2 the Cause).

To alleviate world hunger, produce more clean carbon dioxide! Carbon dioxide is plant food; and plants make people food. The opposite of pollution, carbon dioxide is necessary for the Earth’s ecosystems. More carbon dioxide means more crop production, simply. For certain, more carbon dioxide does not make Earth any warmer, as recent temperature observation shows:

Earth cools, as carbon dioxide increases

Alleviate world hunger produce more clean carbon dioxide

. . .Far from being a pollutant, man along with every animal on land, fish in the sea, and bird in the air is totally dependent on atmospheric carbon dioxide for his food supply.

Some politicians complain that the United States with only 3% of the world population uses 25% of the energy. But the clean carbon dioxide which we produce is increasing food production everywhere on earth. China, on the other hand, is building new power plants at a record rate using the abundant domestic supply of coal they have and has now passed the United States as the leading producer of carbon dioxide. Although their coal has a high sulfur content, they are building the new plants without any pollution controls. The sulfur dioxide which these power plants are releasing to the atmosphere, besides smelling like rotten eggs is, in sunlight, readily converted to sulfur trioxide, the highly solublegas responsible for most acid rain.

Much more, here.

Famous government scientist James Hansen, starting at point 1, has forecasted point 2.

We are now at point 3.

If you have a LOT OF MONEY, like Maria Heinz, perhaps you would like to incentivize government employee, progressive advocate, and political campaigner Hansen to forecast point 4 (not shown). Like it or not, you are doing the same, anyway.

Dividing the Hansen projected change, by the actual change, between 1988 and today, yields an error of just about 500 percent. But you check it.

Neither repeated violations of the Hatch Act, nor an error in climatic projections of 500 percent, seem to impede James Hansen.

Exploding energy costs, and exploding insurance costs, in the United States, are due to James Hansen, and his 500 percent error rate.

Perhaps a little impediment should be applied.

Chart (modified): Ordinary Eyeball: How did Hansen’s Predictions Do?

We are losing a very important war: the progressive War on Energy!

Learn to get along with no energy. There will be no more oil drilled, no more nuclear plants, not even any new coal-fired electricity plants. Transportation must be unaffordable; to save the Earth. Harry Reid says carbon dioxide has made us all sick! Your nation will be changed, into a hovel, or maybe an anthill. You were too rich, you had too much energy and too many machines. You need to change. Do it quick. The Earth is getting sick (or is it getting cold?). Government subsidized energy, from photovoltaics and wind turbines will be available sporadically at respectable distances from the homes of progressive senators and congresspersons.

Environmentalists and “progressives” nationwide will seize this court decision as an opportunity to cut off another arm and leg of your energy. $4 gasoline and $5 diesel is only the start.

Dynegy coal-fired plant in Georgia stalls

Environmental groups are battling coal-fired power projects because of concerns about so-called greenhouse gases linked to global warming. Houston-based Dynegy, owner of electricity plants in 12 U.S. states, and closely held LS of East Brunswick, N.J., have a joint venture that may develop coal-fueled plants in at least six states, including Georgia and Texas.

About 20 percent of the Georgia plant’s cost, or $400 million, would be for equipment to control pollution, Michael Vogt, Longleaf’s project manager, said in a November opinion article in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. He also said Georgia’s water supplies wouldn’t be jeopardized by the project.

Read here: This is “the first time a court has applied the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision to carbon dioxide from an industrial source.”

/Irony on/ Since carbon dioxide (and nuclear energy) causes

Earthquakes
Global Chilling
Tornadoes
Ice Ages
Hurricanes
Asteroid strikes
Rain
Not Rain
Hail
Not Hail
Unspecified General Toxicity
Warming on Mars
Crop failure
Unemployment & poverty
Solar eclipses
Halitosis
Mosquitos near the Arctic Circle (like never before)
Bathroom falls
Global Warming
Falsification by government-employed showmen posing as scientists
Making Us All Sick (on authority of Harry Reid)
and coming soon, emotional depression

It makes perfect sense /irony off/ that insurance companies would port over James Hansen’s potent global warming and cash redistribution software package, to assist in quoting insurance to honest, if gullible, (but otherwise healthy) Americans.

According to The Wall Street Journal (here):

. . . Costs for homeowner insurance along the East and Gulf coasts have risen 20% to 100% since 2004, says the Insurance Information Institute, a trade group. In the three years through 2006, says the institute, property and casualty insurers registered record profits, topping out at $65.8 billion in 2006. (Despite severe U.S. weather that has caused about $8.9 billion in insured property losses to date this year, it’s too early to forecast 2008 profits.)

Helping to drive these developments is a little-known tool of the insurance world: Computerized catastrophe modeling. Crafted by several independent firms and used by most insurers, so-called cat models rely on complex data to estimate probable losses from hurricanes.

Read more.

Computerized catastrophe modeling is the new actuarial power drink, thanks to the doomsaying of Al Gore and James Hansen. And this while Earth’s oceans cool.

/irony on/Thank you Al Gore/irony off/.

Can periodic cooling on Earth be explained by planetary alignment?

The Dalton Minimum followed the Maunder Minimum by something like 150 to 200 years. The Maunder Minimum was more severe and lasted longer, about 80 years compared to about 25 years for the length of the Dalton Minimum. It is difficult to choose the exact beginning, zenith, or end of these cool periods on Earth, particularly for the Maunder. We might choose the year 1820 to associate with the nadir of sunspot activity during the Dalton Minimum - slightly more than 180 years ago.

If the Sun’s magnetic cycle is sensitive to tidal forces, or other effects from the orbiting planetary mass, the number 180 may be magic. Scientists suggest, in a recent paper entitled “Does a Spin–Orbit Coupling Between the Sun and the Jovian Planets Govern the Solar Cycle?” (see the abstract here) that the combined effects of Saturn and Jupiter could induce magnetic cycle fluctuations in the Sun with a period of just about exactly 180 years.

As author Ian Wilson explained to Andrew Bolt from post Cooling coming:

It supports the contention that the level of activity on the Sun will significantly diminish sometime in the next decade and remain low for about 20 - 30 years. On each occasion that the Sun has done this in the past the World’s mean temperature has dropped by ~ 1 - 2 C.

Physicist Luboš Motl in this article states

The paper is effectively another peer-reviewed case for global cooling.

It is no small comfort that at least our deepest-thinking (skeptical) scientists are investigating Solar behavior and its impact on Earth’s climate. In the past, Solar magnetic behavior has been closely linked with very pronounced climate changes. Our government funded scientists however are busy figuring out how to pump carbon dioxide down abandoned mine shafts; how embarrassing.

Anthony Watts also blogs on this Global Cooling paper here.

Stop with the incessant sea level hysteria, Al Gore. It is apparent now that global warming and rising sea levels are the least of our worries. Carbon dioxide goes up, but sea level has stopped going up; and may well be going down, along with ocean temperatures as measured secretly by the Argo buoys. Jim Hansen and Al Gore, how about some non-fiction computer models? What ever happened to Truth in Climate?

(A millimeter, mm, is .0394 inches).

Read more at UC-Boulder Sea Level Change or Global Cooling Real.

From Andrew Bolt, H/T Tom Nelson

If these data can be validated and they confirm what appears to be cooling oceans as measured by the 3000+ floating and diving sensors of Argo, then warming is the least of our worries.

Should observes CO2 levels start to decline over the next year or so, then that would correspond to overall cooling of oceans, as the solubility of CO2 in the oceans increases as the water gets colder. A “minor” dip in average, near-surface ocean temperature would negate all man-made CO2 release.

The decline in ocean temperature is most likely to be caused by a reduction in heating by the sun; by direct decline in the sun’s intensity; by an increase in low cloud cover, or a combination of both.

A prolonged cooling will only be a problem if we are denied access to affordable and abundant energy. That’s a certainty.

berfel of Perth (Reply)
Thu 26 Jun 08 (12:53am)

Jim Hansen’s comprehensive computer models indisputably revealed that Cycle 24 would start up in March; then May. As of June 25, no Cycle 24.

Jim Hansen does not have a clue about when Cycle 24 will start, because he has been utterly absorbed in extorting carbon ransom from successful (capitalist) economies. Other responsible scientists, by the thousands have deplored the distortion, lies, and pathetically bad science. Still, your tax dollars exclusively feed global warming hysteria, Al Gore and Jim Hansen’s personal gold mine.

Relevant to food, our supply of the same is utterly dependent on the generous growing seasons of the recent warm period. We have no margin in food productivity for icy exigency, as this latest spring growing season demonstrated.

Which Solar cycle is it, that will mark another Solar shut-down as occurred in 1650, and numerous, perhaps uncountable, occasions before? Is it Cycle 24? Sunspot-free days are only one of many poorly understood and criminally under-researched characteristics of our only source of warmth, the Sun.

The Solar shut-down of 1650, called the Maunder Minimum, drastically abbreviated crop growing seasons and resulted in large-scale human suffering and death.

A New Ice Age is absolutely on its way, as Al Gore, Jim Hansen, and affiliated parasites line their pockets and divert scientific effort from its legitimate purpose; the grain riots have already started. Could it be the reluctant Cycle 24?

H/T: Cycle 24; see Trend Charts

Doug Ross Story

More drilling will not reduce oil prices; when ever has increased supply undercut the price of a commodity before? When has the promise of increased supply ever dimmed the ardor of speculators, before? What ever would cause the price of a commodity to decrease, when its supply increases, anyway? Obviously, we can’t drill our way out of this.

Since oil is a predominant cause of the Earth’s temperature going up, you need Obama’s Magic Solar Energy Beans instead.

If your crops suffer vast widespread failure due to Global Chilling in the current Al Gore Minimum, you can cook up a mess of the Magic Solar Energy Beans instead of pouring them into your tank. Recipe book available. Just remember how warm the Earth was supposed to be (according to advanced COMPUTER models), and enjoy those Obama Magic Solar Energy Beans.

Deja Vu: We did this before, in those progressive Jimmy Carter years!

If solar energy is the solution, what exactly is, and when was, the problem, “progressives?”

Why hasn’t solar energy done anything for us, since Jimmy Carter?

1. Increasing the supply of oil will not reduce its price.
2. Photovoltaics work GREAT at night; A watt at night is just as cheap as a watt at noon, with photovoltaics. (When you need energy at night, you should REMEMBER the energy you had at noon).
3. Silicon has been unavailable to make photovoltaics and chips because of Bush and Cheney and Big Oil.
4. Higher transportation costs of food will help Americans lose weight.
5. Wind power is fine, in red states.
6. The oceans temperatures are insignificant if they are going down.
7. Cosmic rays are a Republican invention.
8. ANWR and Florida off-shore are exquisitely fragile ecosystems, because oil exists under them.
9. Antarctic ice is just about gone.
10. Chinese environmental practices are far advanced beyond American Big Oil and thus not threatening the exquisitely fragile ecosystem off-shore Florida localized above the oil.
11. Economic progress, if centrally planned, will revolutionize humanity (as it has before). This can be called “change.”
12. Temperature is insignificant if it is going down.
13. American oil companies have caused the high gasoline prices in the US and China.
14. Commodity markets have a rule that speculators only can purchase oil on margin; and not sell it on margin.
15. Speculators are unconcerned about the supply of oil increasing. They will only continue to drive prices up no matter how much supply is increased.
16. Comprehensive, central planning makes the best economy. Energy is only one example.
17. Democrats are good at planning oil production. See?
18. Prudhoe Bay’s exquisitely fragile ecosystem only looks healthy today.
19. The brilliance of ethanol from corn is a shining example of the benefits of comprehensive central planning.
20. Grain products cause obesity anyway.

Much more to come. Or add yours.

We can drill our way out of this. We got into this by not drilling. If we keep not drilling, we will get only further into it.

If we are NOT DRILLING more oil when Iran attacks Israel as it promises to do, we will have less oil than if we are drilling more oil. Is this clear? In point of fact, we will always have more oil if we drill for it than if we don’t, ALWAYS. No matter what the premise. No matter what happens in the Middle-east, or Nigeria, or Venezuela, or Mexico. If you want a helpless, defenseless, moribund America, make us more dependent on foreign oil and foreign powers by not drilling; you are already having a smashing success.

“We can’t drill our way out of this” is practically an oxymoron (upon prolonged reconsideration, it is absolutely an oxymoron). There is every way in which drilling can get us out of this; and there is no way in which drilling more oil cannot get us out of it, because “it” is having less oil.

Speculators will sell oil rapidly when they are convinced we will drill. Same for gasoline.

Stop forcing speculators to buy oil by assuring them we will not drill! If you don’t like speculators bidding up oil, you have only to convince them we will drill for it. They will sell it by the gigaton. They will run away from it like the plague.

Yes we can drill our way out of this. If we can do anything at all, we can drill our way out of this.

Or maybe you prefer Americans do without energy? Without Energy Life Is Brutal and Short. You think America should revert (progress) back to the village? Is that what you mean when you say “Yes, we can revert back to the village?”

Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less