Global Warming killed humans.

Holy Cow !!!!

Neanderthals disappeared from Earth more than 20,000 years ago, but figuring out why continues to challenge anthropologists. One team of scientists, however, now says they have evidence to back climate change as the main culprit.

The Iberian Peninsula, better known as present-day Spain and Portugal, was one of the last Neanderthal refuges. Many scientists have thought that out-hunting by Homo sapiens and interbreeding with them brought Neanderthals to their demise, but climate change has also been proposed.

Francisco Jiménez-Espejo, a paleoclimatologist at the University of Granada in Spain, says a lack of evidence has left climate change weakly supported—until now. “We put data behind the theory,” he said, filling in a large gap in European climate records when Neanderthals faded out of existence.

The scientists’ study is detailed in a recent issue of Quaternary Science Reviews.

Cold spell

To figure out the temperature, water supply, and windiness of Iberia from 20,000 to 40,000 years ago, the scientists looked at sediments on the ocean floor off Spain and Portugal. Because wind or water erode rocky minerals differently, the pebbles and fragments wash into the sea in different ratios, creating a steady track record of land conditions at the bottom of the ocean.

The scientists also focused on barite, a compound gathered by marine animals. The more barite in sediment, the more lively the oceans were at the time. “When we found big drops in marine productivity, we knew there were big changes in climatic condition in Iberia,” Jiménez-Espejo says.

The study reveals three rough climatic periods for Neanderthals, with the last and harshest period starting about 26,000 years ago. “The last event was very, very cold and dry,” Jiménez-Espejo says, “and other than 250,000 years ago, such a harsh climate was never reached before.”

Other reasons

But is climate change the only reason Neanderthals died out?

Full Story.

The Story of Two Houses

Thanks triple6!!!


HOUSE # 1:

A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas. In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern “snow belt,” either. It’s in the South.

HOUSE # 2:

Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every “green” feature current home construction can provide. The house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house
holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in winter and cools it in summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas, and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.

HOUSE # 1 (20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville, Tennessee. It is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore.

HOUSE # 2 (model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas. Also known as “the Texas White House,” it is the private residence of the President of the United States, George W. Bush.

So whose house is gentler on the environment? Yet another story you WON’T hear on CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC or read about in the New York Times or the WashingtonPost. Indeed, for Mr. Gore, it’s truly “an inconvenient truth.”

The Great Global Warming Swindle

Video is available in the pod viewer. I have a companion ppt. sent to me by a Canadian scientist who has asked to remain nameless. I’ll be putting all of this on the homepage as soon as my webmaster can get the video and ppt. embedded.

Story Here @

Man-made global warming is a hoax. It is a theory based upon some scientific evidence, which conveniently leaves out a lot of scientific data, which would otherwise, disprove it’s credibility.

What you are about to watch is an excellent documentary, aired on UK TV Channel 4, which disproves the hysteria behind the theory of man-made global warming. It uses scientific data to show that climate change is a natural occurrence, which is mainly caused by the Sun. Of course, other factors are involved, but it all comes back to the Sun.

You might call this film man-made global warming anti-propaganda, which grossly discredits Al Gore’s (the world’s leading scientist, inventor of the Internet, and self-proclaimed savior of the world) film, An Inconvenient Truth, which makes the claim that the Earth’s climate is changing on the basis that man’s industrialization has lead to higher concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere.

In this documentary, scientific data shows that rises in CO2 are a result of climate change, not the other way around (CO2 causes climate change). In other words, the Sun warms and cools the planet, and the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere are a result of this change, in reaction to the ocean’s and the atmosphere’s temperatures –heated by the Sun of course.

The documentary features Richard Lizden, a renowned and credible scientist, one of the world’s foremost experts on Meteorology, and man-made global warming skeptic, as well as many other respected scientists in the field.

This is one of the most intelligent arguments that I have seen thus far. All of it makes sense, and is supported by scientific evidence. Much of the hysteria created by the hoax known as man-made global warming has such a lack of real scientific evidence that it is laughable.

The extent of the sheer absurdity and hysteria that people like Al Gore (the world’s leading scientist, inventor of the Internet, and self-proclaimed savior of the world) have created has reached to the outer edges of the extreme. And to sustain itself [the hysteria] has must go further and further to the extreme to remain of vital interest. Money and politics are at the center of this scam and it is a story which the mainstream press gobbles up like a Thanksgiving feast, because everyone knows that doom and gloom sells, especially to those without the capacity to question it.

What the environmentalist extremists do not want you to know, is that there is real scientific data which disproves their theory. There is also evidence that there is a true political agenda behind this; one which is sponsored by those who see communism as a good idea.

This is an excellent and thought provoking documentary which gives great support in disproving the [un]scientific theory of man-made global warming/cooling/climate change/pick your buzzword.

What Al Gore Really Wants

A great piece on the Algore and his crowds agenda for globalization and primitivism.  Or you could just stop reading now and pretend that the Global Warming scare is scientific fact. 

RealClearPolitics – Articles – What Al Gore Really Wants

In New York’s Newsday, Ellis Hennican describes a three-on-three debate held last week in New York City, in which opponents of the global warming hysteria–including that meddling novelist Michael Crichton, along with distinguished British scientist Phillip Stott and MIT’s Richard Lindzen–took on some of the scare’s defenders. The interesting things about this debate is that the organizers polled the audience before and after the event. The result? The number of people who thought that global warming is a “crisis” dropped from 57% to 42%.That’s why folks like Al Gore have to keep claiming that there is an iron-clad “consensus” on global warming and that the debate is “over”–because the moment the debate on the scientific merits of global warming is actually allowed to begin, the alarmists start to lose.

Al Gore is trying to dragoon science in an attempt to win over converts who don’t share his sense of personal spiritual crisis and don’t find his anti-industrial moral vision compelling. But the moment people see through his charade–and realize that what Gore is really pushing is a not a scientific campaign against “pollution” but a quasi-religious crusade against industrial civilization–his campaign will collapse.

The virus of Al Gore on the internet.

It’s amazing to me the way the internet loops in on itself sometimes. Maybe I’m just too new at this stuff to not be amazed.

But last night we linked to Hot Air’s post “Scientists to Goracle”.   Which is a very funny post, BTW.   Allahpundit is my diarist of the month.

So this morning, The New York Times posted this piece, which linked to “House of Chin” through their co-opted Sphere service.

And by this afternoon, Newsbusters has linked to the New York Times piece in this post.

Anyway, hat’s off to Hot Air and Allahpundit, as usual.

Global Warming Expeditition to North Pole cancelled due to Cold-Frostbite

I’d say something very (frost)biting about the irony here. But I’m simply laughing too hard to type.

Frostbite Ends Bancroft-Arnesen Trek

A North Pole expedition meant to bring attention to global warming was called off after one of the explorers got frostbite. The explorers, Ann Bancroft and Liv Arnesen, on Saturday called off what was intended to be a 530-mile trek across the Arctic Ocean after Arnesen suffered frostbite in three of her toes, and extreme cold temperatures drained the batteries in some of their electronic equipment.

‘Ann said losing toes and going forward at all costs was never part of the journey,’ said Ann Atwood, who helped organize the expedition.

On Monday, the pair was at Canada’s Ward Hunt Island, awaiting a plane to take them to Resolute, Canada, where they were to return to Minneapolis later this week.

Bancroft, 51, became the first woman to cross the North Pole on a 1986 expedition. She and Arnesen, 53, of Oslo, Norway, were the first women to ski across Antarctica in 2001.

But the latest trek got off to a bad start. The day they set off from Ward Hunt Island, a plane landing near the women hit their gear, punching a hole in Bancroft’s sled and damaging one of Arnesen’s snowshoes.

They repaired the snowshoe with binding from a ski, but Atwood said the patch job created pressure on Arnesen’s left foot, which led to blisters that then turned into frostbite.

Then there was the cold _ quite a bit colder, Atwood said, then Bancroft and Arnesen had expected. One night they measured the temperature inside their tent at 58 degrees below zero, and outside temperatures were exceeding 100 below zero at times, Atwood said.

My first reaction when they called to say there were calling it off was that they just sounded really, really cold,’ Atwood said.

She said Bancroft and Arnesen were applying hot water bottles to Arnesen’s foot every night, but had to wake up periodically because the bottles froze.

The explorers had planned to call in regular updates to school groups by satellite phone, and had planned online posts with photographic evidence of global warming. In contrast to Bancroft’s 1986 trek across the Arctic with fellow Minnesota explorer Will Steger, this time she and Arnesen were prepared to don body suits and swim through areas where polar ice has melted.

Atwood said there was some irony that a trip to call attention to global warming was scuttled in part by extreme cold temperatures.

‘They were experiencing temperatures that weren’t expected with global warming,’ Atwood said. ‘But one of the things we see with global warming is unpredictability.’

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Scientists to Goracle: Relax

Allahpundit over at Hot Air is quickly becoming my favorite diarist.
Hot Air » Blog Archive » Scientists to Goracle: Relax

It’s a breezy read — although if we don’t reduce our carbon emissions soon, in a few decades that breeze could become a hurricane.

It’s not so much that he’s wrong, they say, as that he’s, well, hysterical.

Some of Mr. Gore’s centrist detractors point to a report last month by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations body that studies global warming. The panel went further than ever before in saying that humans were the main cause of the globe’s warming since 1950, part of Mr. Gore’s message that few scientists dispute. But it also portrayed climate change as a slow-motion process.

It estimated that the world’s seas in this century would rise a maximum of 23 inches — down from earlier estimates. Mr. Gore, citing no particular time frame, envisions rises of up to 20 feet and depicts parts of New York, Florida and other heavily populated areas as sinking beneath the waves, implying, at least visually, that inundation is imminent…

So too, a report last June by the National Academies seemed to contradict Mr. Gore’s portrayal of recent temperatures as the highest in the past millennium. Instead, the report said, current highs appeared unrivaled since only 1600, the tail end of a temperature rise known as the medieval warm period.

You don’t win Oscars with 23-inch waves, buddy. Other scientists, meanwhile, disagree: it’s not that he’s hysterical, it’s that he’s really hysterical. And by “really hysterical” I mean “totally wrong.”

Geologists have documented age upon age of climate swings, and some charge Mr. Gore with ignoring such rhythms.

“Nowhere does Mr. Gore tell his audience that all of the phenomena that he describes fall within the natural range of environmental change on our planet,” Robert M. Carter, a marine geologist at James Cook University in Australia, said in a September blog. “Nor does he present any evidence that climate during the 20th century departed discernibly from its historical pattern of constant change.”

In October, Dr. Easterbrook made similar points at the geological society meeting in Philadelphia. He hotly disputed Mr. Gore’s claim that “our civilization has never experienced any environmental shift remotely similar to this” threatened change.

Nonsense, Dr. Easterbrook told the crowded session. He flashed a slide that showed temperature trends for the past 15,000 years. It highlighted 10 large swings, including the medieval warm period. These shifts, he said, were up to “20 times greater than the warming in the past century.”