Pirate's Cove

From the NY Times Dot Earth blog, Andrew Revkin writes on “Are Words Worthless in the Climate Fight?”

In Science Times this week, I have a story examining the limits of language. Can scientists or anyone else find new words sufficiently potent to inspire action on long-term challenges, like shifting from unfettered use of coal and oil to limit the odds of climate surprises?

I only scratched the surface there and now add a few sobering perspectives here. But I can’t leave it at that. I’ve also challenged people involved in climate science, campaigns or policy to come up with strategies that might help bring not only clarity, but actual real-world change (whichever change they seek). I’ll be posting some of their responses starting Tuesday. I’m asking you to weigh in, as well.

As I wrote in the comments (probably could have done better. It was still early)

Andrew, it is not about words, it is about action. The leaders in the climate change religion talk the talk, but they do not walk the walk. Instead, they are flying all over the world, making speeches (and making lots of cash,) participating in conferences in exotic vacation spots, driving in SUVs and limos, flying private planes, and living in large, CO2 producing homes. Yet, they want everyone else and every country to change the behavior that they themselves refuse to change. In fact, their behavior has gotten worse.

Hypocrisy is wonderful, isn’t it?

Think any of the climahysterics will wonder about that and actually demand that their leaders live the life?

Na.

Let’s find out what a real professional thinks about CO2.  Joseph D’Aleo writes at Icecap

The now familiar plot of the US climate network since 1895 shows a cyclical pattern with a rise from 1895 to a peak near 1930 and decline into the 1970s and then another rise with an apparent peak around 2000. Note the minor warming from the peak in 1930 to the peak in 2000.

The short term fluctuations are driven by factors such as ENSO and volcanic eruptions. The longer term cycles are mainly driven by cycles in the sun and oceans although changes in the last half century have been increasingly blamed on anthropogenic factors. Let’s look at the three longer term factors mentioned and how well they atcually correlated with the observed temperatures.

Clearly the US annul temperatures over the last century have correlated far better with cycles in the sun and oceans than carbon dioxide. Whatsmore, this correlation with carbon dioxide seems to be weakening further in the last decade. Read full details about how this analysis was done here. (WT: Definately read the analysis)

Now I am just waiting for the resultant “but the United Nations IPCC report says…..” Yes, the one that has been rewritten yet again. Kinda like how the Twoofers have rewritten their talking points and Loose Change many times.

And, finally, from Bali

About 190 countries are meeting in Bali, Indonesia, aiming to kick-start two years of talks to agree a new global climate change deal to succeed the Kyoto Protocol from 2013.

Kyoto has created a carbon market whereby rich countries can meet their binding greenhouse gas emissions limits by funding emissions cuts in developing nations, through a trade in carbon offsets worth $5 billion last year.

That trade has attracted speculators including investment banks and specialised carbon project developers, and has cut the cost for rich countries of meeting their Kyoto targets.

Just more proof that climate change is about putting money in people’s pockets. Why else would the leaders not only refuse to practice what they preach, but increase their CO2 output?

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Mark My Words, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Adam’s Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Big Dog’s Weblog, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Chuck Adkins, Conservative Cat, Pursuing Holiness, DragonLady’s World, The World According to Carl, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and Stageleft, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.