By Noel Sheppard, Newsbusters

Scientists from around the world are denouncing an Associated Press article hysterically claiming that global warming is “a ticking time bomb” about to explode, and that we’re “running out of time” to do anything about it. As reported by NewsBusters, Seth Borenstein, the AP’s “national science writer,” published a piece Sunday entitled “Obama Left With Little Time to Curb Global Warming.”

Scientists from all over the world have responded to share their view of this alarmist propaganda: How can this guy call himself a “science reporter?” He is perhaps the worst propagandist in all the media, and that’s stating something. In his latest screed, he screams: “global warming is accelerating”. How then does he explain the fact that the mean global temperature (as measured by satellite) is the same as it was in 1980? How can global warming be “accelerating” when the last two years have seen dramatic cooling?  Is this guy totally removed from all reality????? He completely ignores any evidence contrary to his personal beliefs, and twists everything to meet his preconceived notions. How can anyone so ignorant be a reporter for AP? Seriously?—David Deming, University of Oklahoma

“Since Clinton’s inauguration, summer Arctic sea ice has lost the equivalent of Alaska, California and Texas. The 10 hottest years on record have occurred since Clinton’s second inauguration. Global warming is accelerating.” Rubbish!  Global warming is not “accelerating”:  global warming has stopped.  There has been no statistically significant rise in (mean global temperature: MGT) since 1995 and MGT has fallen since 1998. The Earth has been warming from the Little Ice Age (LIA) for 300 years so, of course, the warmest years happened recently.  But that warming from the LIA peaked in the El Nino year of 1998.  MGT has been near but below that peak for the last 10 years.

Arctic ice advances and recedes over decades.  2007 saw a minimum in Arctic ice cover in the short period that it has been monitored using satellites.  But 2008 saw the most rapid growth in Arctic ice cover in that same period and Arctic ice cover is now back to the average it has had in the period.  Also, 95% of polar ice is in the Antarctic and Antarctic ice is increasing. Nobody can know if the recent halt to global warming is temporary, permanent or the start of a new warming or cooling phase.  But it is certain that anybody who proclaims that “Global warming is accelerating” is a liar, a fool, or both.—Richard S. Courtney, a UN IPCC expert reviewer and a UK-based climate and atmospheric science consultant.

The Great Global Warming Hoax appears to be a collaborative effort between the worlds [sic] incompetent scientists and the worlds [sic] scientifically illiterate journalists.  Science Illiterates like Borenstein are the Chicken Littles of the 21st Century, spreading climate change poppycock like bread crumbs in the forest.  The crumbs, hopefully, will lead them to a paycheck at the end of the week from their similarly science-illiterate employers.  Well, the lower-I.Q. portion of the population has to eat, too....< sigh >—James A. Peden, atmospheric physicist formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.  Read more here.

By HendrikTennekes Guest Blog on Climate Science

My weblogs of 28 October and 7 November, and a incisive two-page centerfold article by Karel Knip in the November 8 issue of NRC/ Handelsblad, Rotterdam’s counterpart to the New York Times, finally received a clear response from KNMI, the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute.

In a November 10 message to the director-in-chief of KNMI, I suggested that the Institute should contemplate issuing a low-end estimate for sea-level rise, in order to balance the alarmist furor sweeping the country. This is exactly what KNMI decided to do. In an op-ed piece in the December 11 issue of NRC/Handelsblad, Wilco Hazeleger, a senior scientist in the global climate research group at KNMI, writes:

“In the past century the sea level has risen twenty centimeters. There is no evidence for accelerated sea-level rise. It is my opinion that there is no need for drastic measures. It is wise to adopt a flexible, step-by-step adaptation strategy. By all means, let us not respond precipitously.”

This opinion, of course, chimes with the statement by Professor Marcel Stive that I quoted earlier:

“Fortunately, the time rate of climate change is slow compared to the life span of the defense structures along our coast. There is enough time for adaptation. We should monitor the situation carefully, but up to now climate change does not cause severe problems for our coastal defense system. IPCC has given lower estimates for the expected sea level rise in four successive reports.”

As far as I am concerned, this settles the matter. KNMI has spoken. It has spoken clearly. There is no imminent danger of accelerated sea-level rise.

Source: University of Colorado, Boulder

By Teddy Davis, ABC News

One of Barack Obama’s closest allies in the Senate said Tuesday that she hopes the economic downturn can induce the incoming president to delay the centerpiece of his plan for reducing carbon emissions. “Let me speak for me here because I think this is very dangerous,” said Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo. “I would like to keep my relationship with Barack at this point. Let me speak for me.”

McCaskill said she hoped Obama would delay a plan to institute a cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. “I think a delay may be necessary,” she continued. “Yes, we’ve got to do something. Yes, we have to move forward. But we can’t kill the business climate at the same time. I’m from a state where most of the people who turn on the lights in the state get it from utility companies that depend on coal. And the cost of switching all that to clean coal technology or to alternative sources is going to be borne by them—by regular folks who are trying to figure out how to pay their mortgages right now.”

McCaskill cemented her ties to Obama during the Democratic presidential primary campaign by becoming the first female senator to endorse him over Hillary Clinton. She made her cap-and-trade comments to Ron Brownstein, the political director of Atlantic Media, during a National Journal discussion of Obama’s “First 100 Days” held in Washington, D.C.

Under the Obama plan, the federal government would set a ceiling on carbon emissions and require companies to bid for permits to emit greenhouse gases through an auction. The government would gradually lower the amount of credits available. Firms that reduced their emissions below the required level could sell leftover credits to other polluters. Obama would take a small portion of the auction receipts, $15 billion per year, and use it on energy efficiency, alternative fuels, and what his campaign promise book, “Change We Can Believe In,” refers to as “other measures to help the economy adjust.”

Raising concerns about cap-and-trade is nothing new for McCaskill. In June she was one of 10 Democratic senators to sign a letter criticizing a cap-and-trade proposal sponsored by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., the chair of the Environment and Public Works Committee. The letter said that a federal cap-and-trade program must ensure that consumers and workers in all regions of the country are protected from “undue hardship.” Opponents of the Boxer plan worried that it would raise the cost for electricity generated from fossil fuels.

“I’m one of the senators that signed a letter on cap-and-trade,” McCaskill said Tuesday. “We’ve got to find a more moderate middle here because you’re playing with fire.” Read more here.