Science, who cares about the science this is about politics

Russ Steele

As the Governor and his AGW cult friends meet in San Francisco at The Governor’s Conference on Extreme Climate Risks and California’s Future, they will be using a document prepared by the California Climate Change Center titled Our Changing Climate: Assessing the Risks to California.  It would be unkind to say this document is a pack of lies, but it certainly bends the truth through omissions and ignorance of the real facts.  It is a document prepared by people with an agenda to sway our political leaders to a specific point of view, that humans are responsible or climate change the only solution is behavior modification, returning to a simpler life before we started using fossil fuels.

As we approach the conference date let’s look as some of the claims, starting with rapidly rising sea levels.  San Francisco is on the cusp of enacting some draconian land use regulation based on the projected sea level rise.  The real question is the sea level rising as claimed in the Our Changing Climate report?  Lets take a look, starting on page 12 Rising Sea Levels, with this cut quote and graphic of San Francisco Sea Level Rise:

Sea levels could rise up to three feet by the end of the century, accelerating  coastal erosion, threating vital levees, and disrupting wetlands.


Note that this is 2011 and the sea level plot cuts off at at about 2006, and if you look closely at the data from about 2000 you can see sea level have been declining. Now take a look at this chart from NOAA, recording the change in San Francisco sea level change.

 As you can see Sea Level are declining in San Francisco Bay, as the dreaded levels of CO2 continue to increase.  Now if CO2 increase were responsible for sea level rise, you would think we would see some increase in sea levels.  So, why was the graphic truncated to about 2006, when it is clear the sea levels are dropping.  To mislead and scary you?

Reading on the reader learns that the sea level rise is based on the UN IPCC computer models.

As we now know from Climategate 1.0 and 2.0 that even the scientist that prepared the models did not give any credence to the results.

From the Climategate 2.0 collection:

University of East Anglia’s Jones comments on the climate models:

Basic problem is that all models are wrong – not got enough middle and low level clouds.

Professor Jagadish Shukla, a lead IPCC author writes,

… It is inconceivable that policymakers will be willing to make billion-and trillion-dollar decisions for adaptation to the projected regional climate change based on models that do not even describe and simulate the processes that are the building blocks of climate variability.

Well is appears that Governor Brown and his happy AGW cult members are more than willing to make billion dollar decisions based on the faulty computer models.  Here are the real global sea levels:

Why are the Governor  and his cult friend using failed computer models to make decision when the real world demonstrates the models are wrong and the scientist that developed the models tell us they have no credibility. Right, this is about politics and not science.


About Russ Steele
Freelance writer and climate change blogger. Russ spent twenty years in the Air Force as a navigator specializing in electronics warfare and digital systems. After his service he was employed for sixteen years as concept developer for TRW, an aerospace and automotive company, and then was CEO of a non-profit Internet provider for 18 months. Russ's articles have appeared in Comstock's Business, Capitol Journal, Trailer Life, Monitoring Times, and Idaho Magazine.

3 Responses to Science, who cares about the science this is about politics

  1. Dena Wiltsie says:

    In the beginning our founding fathers looked over our great country and gave us a Republic so we could grow to be even greater with wealth and power for all. Franklin when ask what type of government they had made said “A republic if you can keep it”. We did have petty greed come into play over the years but it wasn’t till World War II that the government gained the power to control every aspect of the country. Some say it was needed to execute the war, but it was never given up after the war was over. California has decided by reelecting Jerry Brown that they don’t like living under a Republic and would rather have a Socialist government. Jerry Brown’s motives for taking the actions he has are not totally clear but you can guess that money or power will come into play at some point in the decision process. If nothing else, he is preparing for his retirement to a nice legal job with a firm that he provided work for while he was governor.
    We need a return to the ideas of the founding fathers where the country and the people are put before personal gain. We still have many people who would stand up for freedom but how do we get them elected when they go up against professional politicians who construct a far more powerful election machine than an honest person?

  2. Yep, it is about politics and power. The left wants to gain more hegemony over the people and since carbon is in everything, they finally got the strategy down to the elemental chart. Of course the loons that campaigned against Prop 23 which would have brought the madness to a halt are going to be at the meeting to protect their money incomes from grants to study a mad-made computer generated hoax. And we get to hear from these grant seeking loons how terrible we are. There is a story on the lack of or the increased cost of, heating oil in the northeast. Of course they use a 90 plus year old lady as an example to garner guilt. The strategy will work on some but it is my experience the only people that will truly help the lady are not the loons on the left, it will be the friends on the right. What is interesting to me is the heating oil is a fossil fuel so the lack of the warmth it creates makes the voter more apt to vote for an R so the D’s cry a river their is not enough, at least subsidized fuel! The liberal’s heads are spinning every winter. Do we trash oil? Do we subsidize the little old lady so she buy the oil? What to do what to do.

  3. Pingback: California Sea Level Rise Alarmism is Real, Sea Level Rise? « Is it 2012 in Nevada County Yet?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: