China, the world’s largest producer of wheat, to spend $1 billion in emergency water aid as worst drought in 60 years threatens to send Shoe Throwing Index soaring

Stacy Summary:  Again, of course, in terms of climate related disasters and their impact on the economy and on food security, you can choose to believe Lord Monckton, the Koch Bros, Exxon and the Chamber of Commerce; others, however, might want to follow the link and make your own judgment about the integrity of these groups.

China announces $1 billion in emergency water aid to ease its worst drought in 60 years. China is the world’s largest producer of wheat.

Beijing has also promised to use its grain reserves to reduce the pressure on global food prices, which have surged in the past year to record highs due to the floods in Australia and a protracted dry spell in Russia.

Here is a map of the precipitation anomalies for the past month; where China doesn’t actually look all that bad when compared to most of South America, where severe drought turned the Amazon into a net emitter of CO2 last month!

China’s water problems are, of course, exacerbated by rampant and inefficient development and industrialisation; nevertheless, erratic precipitation patterns as the climate changes can be expected to continue to amplify such impacts in the future.

Now for some temperature anomaly updates. As you recall, here is the December 2010 map:

It was cold in Topeka this January, making it the 37th coldest January for the US in the 117 year record.  Topekans might find solace, therefore, in the 100 degree temperature swing projected over the next few days. (Gee, I guess them thar sunspots have returned very suddenly over the Midwest?)

Globally, however, it was the 11th warmest January on record:

As you can see, the Arctic continues to be much warmer than average. And, thus, the January 2011 Arctic sea ice extent lowest on record:

The decline in sea ice extent has been matched by a decline in the sea ice volume:

And also, a dramatic decline in the age of the ice:

And a decline that is seen across every month of the year:

As Rear Admiral David Titley testified to Congress, 17 November 2010:

In terms of climate change impact on missions, the Navy is watching with great interest the changing Arctic environment. September 2007 saw a record low in sea ice extent and the declining trend has continued — September 2010 was third lowest extent on record and the overall trend has shown an 11.2 percent decline per decade in seasonal ice coverage since satellites were first used to measure the Arctic ice in 1979. Perhaps more significantly, estimates from the University of Washington’s Applied Physics Lab show that the amount of sea ice continues to decrease dramatically. September ice volume was the lowest recorded in 2010 at 78 percent below its 1979 maximum and 70 percent below the mean for the 1979-2009 period.

For more on separating the Koch propaganda from the science, here’s another great video from greenman3610:

I’ve been watching the Bruce Parry “Arctic” series. In one epsiode, he was in Greenland where he spent a week or two with an Inuit group who live by hunting walrus; the guy he was hunting with explained that they now have trouble hunting walrus due to the melting ice.   And in this clip from later in Parry’s journey (this time to Canada), an Inuit subsistence hunter, sitting in the same spot from which his family has hunted caribou for many generations, talks about how the caribou are no longer reliably there due to changing climate:

Yes, I know that the Koch Brothers and Lord Monckton insist that the Arctic sea ice extent is actually building and the world is getting colder; so you can either choose to believe their assertions or you can believe the Inuit and the Nasa/NOAA/UAH satellite data that confirms the accuracy of their observations. For those who need an excuse to support their ideology, you can say that the Inuit have lying eyes that are conveniently supported by the fabricated data from the scientists who just want a grant.

180 comments on “China, the world’s largest producer of wheat, to spend $1 billion in emergency water aid as worst drought in 60 years threatens to send Shoe Throwing Index soaring
  1. Mother Earth says:

    @julian nawrath

    It is not a game you moron

  2. indeed says:

    @ Zorro, the globalists are about 30 years ahead of you. Celente says WWIII is around the corner. Obama has cut social programs and yesterday has cut heat assistance, probably a knee jerk response to Rand wanting to cut Isreal off “welfare” to the banksters. Mostly it doesn’t make much difference to me, as I’m ineligible for any type of assistance (including SSA) because I don’t have “health” insurance and because I’m barred from any viable job because I was fired for “disability”, while I’m very capable and able to do a great job. We all have tons of diffusions of responsibility. Soon, all our wishes will come true. The rich get richer and the poor are dead. The Bilderburgs have won.

    Good luck with that Zeitgeist thang. The abundance is working great, huh?

  3. Mother Earth says:


    No, I got it good. It is not personal, but if you come between me and my climate action the longer you persist the more teeth you will have to find.

  4. Dedo says:

    @julian,…..”the Mighty SUN!”

    That reminds me:

  5. Dedo says:

    @Mother,…LOL hahaha,….you’re a funny little man,..!

  6. Mother Earth says:

    For those that never heard it: 1957, GM presents a detailed explanation on how climate is changing because of the burning of coal.

  7. Mother Earth says:


    I’m 1.98 meter and I can probably throw you over a wall..

  8. MirrorMirror says:

    @Happy Dick …. Anyone know the size of comet Elenin?? Been searching without success.

    Its about the size of a car … not very big.

  9. Mother Earth says:


    Which brand of car?

  10. Dedo says:

    @Mother,.. 1.98.,…. Hmmm,… didn’t know they could stack shit that high,..I’m impressed !!

  11. wtf says:

    I’m much more impressed by Warren Buffett’s railroad purchases for when the 18 wheelers can’t afford to fill it up any more….

  12. johnypage says:

    the chart u posted on sea ice extent is only for 1 month, january, how does the chart look if u do an average anual artic sea ice extent?

    Dont do the same tricks the fradulent climate scientists that are pushing man made global warming have been caught doing !

    Can any1 pull up global average temperate records from an accurate source ?

  13. Mother Earth says:


    You work at a shit sculpting atelier? You should definitely try when you go back to work on monday.


    Buffet may have done that to keep them from developing the first ammonia powered freight train.


  14. MirrorMirror says:

    @jph …. Those who continue to shout that “humans could not possibly effect the climate.” you really do miss the point.

    What Humans actually do “do” … is POLLUTE the planet .

    The climate will obviously be affected long term by the dying of the myriad of organisms that once inhabited this place.
    But … If there were NOT other bigger things affecting the climate , I’d say that the MMGW would start to show up on the radar in ca. 100-200 years.

    We’ll see what comes .. probably sooner than most expect.
    ( Earthquakes, Volcanoes , Magnetosphere , galactic changes etc. etc. )

  15. Happy Dick says:

    Thank You Mirror (bout Elenin)

    but why is it not in this list (updated 2/12/11)??? 2010 x1

  16. wtf says:

    Buffett’s never been known to invest in unproven technologies. He’s more into balance sheets, turnarounds…

  17. Zorro / London says:

    Stacey Herbert

    Have you heard the term….Champagne Socialist?


    As for Golobal warming, as to the “great” debate whatever the cause(s) will matter not a jot to the final outcome other than, to use it as a political “rabble rousing” mechanism… whoever?

    If its man-made, then we lemmings have taken this all beyond the point of no return.

    Does anyone seriously think we can just reverse natures gears and cycles.

    We cant cope with Tornados, Cyclones or a lousy Volcano

    If its down to solar activity, then our puny efforts are futile too.

    Perhaps we the insignificant bacteria on this beautiful planet, just cant face, that planetary changes are inevitable in the cosmic schemes of things, and like the arrogant self-obsessed idiots we are, we think we actually make a difference.

    The only reason we exist, is that a meteor of sufficient size has not yet decided our time is up. And one day, sure enough the Earth will be just another lifeless planet.

    My old man once told me that during WWII, men who were fervent deniers of God, at the last moments of their lives, cried out for him.

    Maybe it means nothing or just maybe it means everything? Who knows?

    For sure we live in Historic times for all the WRONG reasons.

    Not many will be spared, when this all finally cristalyses, one way….or another.

  18. Olivia says:

    @stacy herbert

    It seems many of the comments here are similar to mine. Yes, the planet is filthy. But whether climate change is human caused or not , hot or cold, what is more taxes going to do to fix it? Anyway, the earth like all living things, is going through some changes: its magnetic poles are flipping:

    The Gulf of Mexico is GONE. It is killing everything in it’s path. Sometimes quickly, sometimes horribly slow. Animals and us! Not just the hundreds of billions oil, but the many millions of gallons of corexit that BP sprayed over the gulf coast. And now, just like GMO seeds, BP added synthetic microbes that will “eat the oil.” Like the natural ones that became overwhelmed I suppose.

    Speaking of GMO, Whole Foods has given in to be ag. Read:

    as zorro/london commented: They are poisoning us! Just the two points mentioned above: the gulf and gmo food for starters.

    The last word: If you haven’t seen George Carlin’s thoughts on saving the planet. IT IS A MUST SEE!

    It will make you laugh, it will also make you think about the big picture. (George was a philosopher too.) Even if you have seen it before, watch it again. It will still make you laugh. And don’t we need a little of that?


  19. julian nawrath says:

    @ Dedo

    Thanks for the link, Mate!

    @ Mother Earth

    You Really Take Things Personal.
    How old are you?

    You better travel with this guy!

  20. Zorro / London says:


    Patterns in the Ether?

    As for the Bilderbergers winning, maybe?

    But to my knowledge they havent got anywhere to run to from our little planet.

    What goes around, comes around, and maybe they will escape their just desserts or maybe? they just wont.

    No pockets in a shroud so they say. They will rot as well as the next person.

    I am truly sorry to hear of your circumstances. What more can I say.

    Others will do what they can to resist, and perhaps they will prevail or die trying.

  21. 10hawks says:

    Very informative, but that doesn’t prove it’s “man-made”.

  22. IndianaJohn says:

    If’fin the ice melts in my whiskey glass, will the whiskey pour over the rim, on to the table and then on down on to my shoe?
    And if the Arctic sea ice melts, will the New Yorkers have to swim to higher ground. Will Lake Michigan still be under water? Will Topper’s Ditch still flow downhill?
    Remember folks, sippin’ shure beats dippin’

  23. Happy Dick says:

    Wild …. this occurred very close to my home region.


    “Allentown, PA .

    Notice the huge crater. Gas explosions do not leave massive craters, especially that deep. A person could understand a crater that was a couple feet deep, but, not like the image shows below.

    The energy from a gas explosion blows upwards and out. As with any energy it will follow the path of least resistance, which in the case of a gas explosion is upward.

    The buildings in Allentown, PA are all between 100 and 200 years old. These buildings were built strong and have a thick concrete foundation. The energy “should have” bounced off the ground and radiated upwards if it was just a gas explosion.”
    I have talked with UGI, the gas provider, they claim there were no reports of any issues for service calls, gas smells prior to the explosion. Also this asteroid theory is from John Lucas. There is no other claim to an asteroid impact.

    pics …,0,7961495.photogallery

  24. Ho Lee Fook says:

    All in fine form today I see

  25. ryback says:

    Isnt it all an agenda?

    Its more interesting when A.N.SYSTEM breaks down peps dont go after the corrupt. Theyd rather blame the A.N.SYSTEM. I guess there must be a “fingeruptheassobervingandmakingmeaninglesscomments” class. Wheres vrabel?

    But cudos to ya, you did mention rothschild, but not really the whole story.,1635748.html

    So I guess all anomalous temps that are slightly above zero will get turned up to super dark brown flashing glowing orange colour from its present dark brown colour. Gotta get the contrast home. Cos its all your fault, “you” being anyone reading, yeah dude you, but some are more equal than others. Aint that right ted?

    I think hes trying to promote keisers new book!!!!!!!! Is that funny?

  26. Hugo says:

    Hi Max and Stacy,

    I follow your site over a year and love the financial commentary. This excursion into this man made climate change really disturbs me. I bet you know climate gate. So why promote this bull s*it? It does a lot of damage to your reputation in my opinion. Anyone supporting this thesis should get their head out of their asses and look around to see what a screwjob they are about to receive. Ofc Goldman and friends laugh their asses off now they see Max and Stacy promote their new profit from and screw the people device.

  27. stacyherbert says:

    @johnypage – develop a little curiosity matey, it’s not at all hard to find the data and charts you claim you are interested in; it’s all publicly available, as it is, I’ve update the charts to show also the monthly ice extent chart for you and here is a link to the site with which you can find more data related to monthly ice extent:

  28. stacyherbert says:

    @Hugo – I suggest you step away from Fox News (the only broadcaster that selected ‘climategate’ emails on which the deniers should concentrate) and do five minutes (that’s all it takes) of research to learn what Fox News won’t tell you about ‘climategate’; and re: Goldman Sachs laughing; um, Dick Cheney, Halliburton, the King of Saudi Arabia, Exxon, and the Koch Brothers are laughing the asses off right now at your ignorance and apparent lack of curiosity; I recommend this video series if you prefer your info in this format:

  29. Jayme says:

    I’d take the word of an Inuit more seriously than a “scientist” or “Nobel laureate.” After all Obama got a nobel prize … big deal. (I think Bush is going to get the Nobel peace prize next time he visits europe. 🙂 )

    The politically vested interests are not interested in doing what is right as much as doing what is in their favor. Global warming? Tax it but don’t use the money to stop global warming. Global food shortages? Bolster oppressive governments to keep the populations in check to stabilize your interests. Global pollution? Give corporations tax breaks that hire expensive legal teams to destroy local people whom question corporate practices. Allow corporate propaganda to be spread through the local media which claims they are helping preserve the environment for the children that is actually being destroyed.

    When do these facts become used in a way that doesn’t mean the solution to all global problems is killing everyone who is below the top 1% income bracket? Sacrifice is difficult, talk is cheap. These ‘captains of industry’ have built models of economic growth that propagate consumption and when people consume they use terms like “useless eater” to represent the system they helped create… hypocrites.

  30. Illinois Brandon says:

    China really wants and needs coal and we really can’t say no given the trade inbalance of the last decade. The planet will be the big loser.

  31. F. Beard says:

    It is not personal, but if you come between me and my climate action the longer you persist the more teeth you will have to find. Mother Earth

    I don’t blame you. If someone tried to stop me from exhaling CO2, I would be upset too.

  32. F. Beard says:

    China really wants and needs coal and we really can’t say no given the trade inbalance of the last decade. The planet will be the big loser. Illinois Brandon

    Correction. The planet will be a big winner as more plant food is released. I’m glad economics forces the US to do the right thing.

  33. F. Beard says:

    These ‘captains of industry’ have built models of economic growth that propagate consumption and when people consume they use terms like “useless eater” to represent the system they helped create… hypocrites. Jayme

    Bingo! But what’s worse, those ‘captains of industry’ stole the purchasing power they used to build their factories via loans from the government backed counterfeiting cartel, the banking system.

  34. Eduardo says:

    If George Carlin can not put max and stacy to rethink in regard to this
    mission to save the world nothing else will.

    To put faith in scientists is a risky business:
    – There is a lot of money at stake.
    – The climate is a very, very complex system.
    – All the IPCC models does not help in wether forecast (pure junk)
    – The best long term forecast method is based in Sun spots, moon
    – CO2, let me ask again, are you kidding?

  35. rich says:

    ……..(‘(…´…´…. ¯~/’…’)
    ……….”…\………. _.·´

    To the topic of AGW

  36. Mike says:

    So Max, if i was the 11th warmest January, what were the 10 warmest January years?

  37. stacyherbert says:

    @Eduardo – where on earth have you ever seen me write that I want to save the world? i just report the news, if the simple facts can so damage your fragile ideology then maybe you ought to get a more robust ideology to adhere to? but the fact that you projected onto me this notion of saving the world does, of course, reveal with which operating system you’ve been programmed (Beck)

  38. stacyherbert says:

    @Mike – look it up yourself! the process of discovery is good for you, it is much better for you to learn these things on your own rather than have to be told . . . go google it, see where it takes you and report back

  39. wtf says:

    The girl who cried, “Wolf!”

  40. bigsmoke says:

    @ stacyherbert

    Glad to see you’re using the greenman videos. For any of your fans who want to separate hype from the facts, these are an excellent choice.

    For the rest of you (except mother earth), re Climategate….
    Was it a scandal?… Sure… but all it proved was that scientists are human. However, it did not prove the ‘smoking gun’ of some great Global Warming ‘hoax’ as Watts (a glorified weatherman) and McIntrye (amateur scourge of climate science) wants you to believe.

    You guys have got to start looking outside the usual denier memes to get your info. A wider frame of reference may do your brain some good.

  41. Eduardo says:

    If you are just picking news, no problem.
    It is not the case. You are taking the side of “AGW”.

    Compare this “AGW” shit with the classics that made your base:
    – Money gaiser
    – The Oracle (Fantastic name and Incredible Content)
    – Black Role of Debt
    – GS betting against their on clients (Well Before the MSM)
    – Financial Terrorists
    – Max asserting that the dolar will be toilet paper

    This is the stuff… Give us more of that!

    A good chunk of your base are sad becouse the level of the content.

    You are fantastic in finance but you suck when you cover “AGW”. It is propaganda not news. Did you know: “Problem, Reaction, Solution” just think about the solutions presented to us for the “AGW” problem.

    As simple as that!

    Cheers from Brazil!

  42. ryback says:

    ” I just report the news”

    You provide a narrative, on a scientific topic that your not qualified to judge.

    Your big piece wasnt about Exxonn or Koch or dick chaney, or any part of the energy industry at all, they never are, and when some mention Gore you cut their heads off. All your pieces are about is underlying a narrative that feeds into the political classes need to control, one way or another. Alternative media anyone?

  43. Dedo says:

    Folk have really got to learn all the disciplines,…to be remotely aware of what is going on,…and that’s just the tip of an iceberg,…Or is it ?

  44. Original bob says:

    And in the 70’s we were going to freeze to death due to the ice age,9171,944914,00.html

    There is seriously not enough long term data to prove or disprove global warming. However, I do believe that there are too many people on the planet and there is nothing being done to stop the increases therefore.

    Governments want global warming – it’s ultimately leads to a universal tax that can be applied across the planet. I’m very weary of the disproportionate amount of money being spent by governments (through funded research) that are so heavily stacked in the global warming scientists favor. Last I heard the amount of funding for research to prove global warming versus to disprove it was 1000’s of times to 1. I have a few friends who got funding to research the effects of global warming. They said if they had asked for funding to disprove the impact they wouldn’t have got a cent. Follow the money!

    Project how far you would need to curtail human beings carbon / co2 impact on the planet and you’ll go head to head with population expansion. At some point in time you will reach a point where even if you curtailed most of what human beings do it will not make a difference because by simply being alive in such great numbers humans being will have a catastrophic impact.

    There is little point attacking human beings activities in regards to climate change – if it’s true it’s the result of unfettered population increase AND their impact. Note, it’s the number of humans that’s the issue in the first instance.

    Rather than ultimately trying to tax and control human beings activities down to the fart level, where are the global policies curtailing population expansion?

    Seems we are attacking the wrong end of the stick IMO

    Better management of the poo on the planet is useless if you don’t stop the rampant expansion of the poo creators in the first place. Where is the debate on this?

    Can we move on from the debate of whether human beings are drowning in their impact on the planet and onto the actual cause – population numbers?

    If peak oil (or at least cheap peak oil) is a reality, the impact humans have will be dramatically cut but the impact will still march on albeit at a slower rate unless we cut population numbers.

    Even if we cut human beings impact by 50%, how long before population expansion around the globe eliminates that cut anyhow? See the point I am making? It’s about population baby – not so much the impact people make because that’s an effect, not the cause.

    Albert Barlett was right – Human beings greatest failure is their inability to understand the exponential function

  45. Walt says:

    LOL, this is hilarious. I’m seeing a lot of Fox News talking points being repeated here. Stacy is spot on, and those of you losers who ingest Fox News 24/7 should just quit watching Max & Stacy. Those two report FACTS, while Fox make up LIES! How can you both watch Fox News and Listen to Max Keiser at the same time?

    Oh, btw, the biggest propaganda organization source of our time is not the scientists. Most of them have principles, and adhere to facts. It’s the Murdock’s News Corp, Fox News, you want truth? Take what Fox News says, and think the opposite, then you’ll get truth.

  46. Eduardo says:

    I make my own mind.

    I started researching for what coused the crash of 2008.

    I found in this journey:
    – With Ron Paul I agree on: Agree Index: 98%
    .. Foreign police
    .. Budget: Cut the spend overseas first and then reform
    .. Personal Liberties
    .. Hard Money
    .. The rule of law (Defend the constitution)

    – With Ron Paul desagree on:
    .. Regulations (They are needed)
    .. Abortion

    – Peter Schiff (I bought Crash Proof): Agree index: 95%
    .. He missed the deflation but who followed his advice did fine

    – Gerald Celent: Agree index 90%
    ..Repetitive but mostly on spot

    – Glen Beck (He make good points that he them uses to advance pure propaganda)
    .. He promoted the banks bailouts and the wars (so by definition he is scum for me)

    – Alex Jones: Agree index 40%
    .. He brings good information but he presses the fear button too hard (“They are trying to kill us”)

    – Max Kaiser and Stacy: Agree index: 90%
    – Agree:
    ..Derivatives are WMD
    ..Gold and Silver (is the way to protect yourself)
    ..Jail for the bankers
    ..Financial ativism
    – Disagree:

  47. Hugo says:


    I dont follow any major network because it keeps feeding me BS, thats why I like(d) you guys. Ofc I pick up their major scare meme’s.

    I dont dispute climate change, its a given. I just dispute man made CC. In my opinion we came from an irregular calm, stable period. If you come up with cheap propaganda like the one you linked let me give you a fun one to counter. Lets take a peek at greenland (now under a thick icesheet). The Vikings farmed over there in the years 1100 area. Were quite succesfull for a few centuries. Then came the Ice, till now since its thawing and getting green again.

    You deny that GS runs the toy for believers in man made climatechange, the CO2 exchanges? Come on, man made cilimate change meme is for their profit.

    To be clear, I do my best to live sustainable. But thats another discussion.

  48. Eduardo says:

    Side comment:
    Lord Monkton is a “paid for research/propaganda” boy.

    But I think that if you interview him. It will boost the enterteining value of the theme “AGW”.

    He can present FIAT data against “AGW” beter than you can present FIAT data in favor of “AGW”…

    Will be a circus but that is what your show turns when the theme is “AGW”.

  49. stacyherbert says:

    @Original bob – that “oh they were warning about ice age in the 70’s’ line has already been debunked:

    The media is not the majority of the scientific community . Are you able to provide us with scientific journals, peer-reviewed papers or experiments that claimed global cooling was happening? This is where you would find the science and what were the major concerns then. In the video above, the journalist looks at the actual data from the scientific journals of the time and discovers the opposite of your assertion that scientists were concerned about an ice age.

    The ONLY study mentioned in the Time magazine article is sunspots and those were dismissed scientifically as having anything to do with the climate on earth.

    Interesting, therefore, that deniers are trotting out ice ages and sunspots today . . . ? No doubt, in 50 years time, some troll on some website somewhere will claim, with link to Watts or Beck, that “people were concerned about an ice age in 2011” . . . yep.

  50. Eduardo says:

    Greate, the sun spots has less to do with the climate than CO2!

    Go for it stacy…

    You can get any result that you want with “good” parameters and statistics…

    The number tricks that work in finance work in science too…


  51. Hugo says:


    How much scientific fraud is taking place in this discussion? I find the discussion about scientific fraud or not (by replacing measuring insturments to warmer places) perputated by the man made global warmers propagandists a great one.

  52. Hugo says:


    Lol having faith in climate models and non in financial ones. Great oxymoron indeed.

  53. Rick says:

    Nice data Stacy, thanks.

  54. a heermans says:

    wow, my comments were there and now gone…. the keiser censor at work? i did notice that the arctic ice cover chart is now in your story. it shows that the ice cover grows and shrinks. like, uh, nature eh? it isn’t the same EVER!! thanks to the “gods” for that, i mean who really want’s to live in l.a.? just kidding california. what can i say, i’m a ny’er. there is a great map found here made up of gov’t, and air force pictures of the planet showing the great arctic EXPANSION that is taking place…. i love you two, please stick to the political/economic news. it’s not the weather that is bad, it’s those pesky financial terrorists that max and stacy so eloquently expose. keep up the good work, and please drop the climate change party line, it’s bogus. if one must put a toe in that bath water, why not go after the polluters? name names.

  55. Jayme says:

    Well – here is a prediction… with continued draught and increased temperature the Amazon will be in for massive forest fires.

    @Olivia – I agree I’m not certain about AGW but am pretty certain about GW. I hate the idea of government strapping a CO2 meter over my mouth and a CH4 meter elsewhere to guage my daily global warming tax to pay the kleptocrats.

  56. Eduardo says:

    Models and parameter are as good as its ability to forecast.

    Who made the derivatives models and parameters are PHDs too… And had a concensus…

    Stacy and Max know the financial system and can see through but

    they know nothing about the climate, so they can’t see this kind of fraud.

  57. hi M&S,

    please watch this and comment…

    we disagree on the cause of the problem (you claim to know, i claim to not know b/c i haven’t seen any data that proves AGW), we all need to agree that the solutions presented are fraudulent.

    carbon credits are a scam – they enshrine monopolies, lead to more global pollution, impoverish tax payers, reduce jobs in industrialized economies and enrich the insiders. here’s how…

    in short – current businesses collect carbon credits, shut down business, move to areas where they can pollute with impunity and pay slave wages and then pocket the billions in carbon credits as industrialized societies have another excuse to further their gutting.

    surely, you don’t support these kleptocratic, oligarch enshrining, pollution increasing, society asset stripping “solutions.”

    so, how about exposing the fraudulent “solutions?”

  58. @Eduardo

    we do have forecasts based upon the global warming model..

    the end of snow was predicted…

    However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”.

    “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.

    Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past


    “New York City’s record for the snowiest month in history, set less than a year ago, may topple this weekend as more snow falls atop the 19 inches received overnight, forecasters said. ”

    New York City’s Record for Snowiest Month May Fall as More Is on the Way

    this after umpteen gazillion tons of CO2 was added between the projection of no more snow and the actual record snow falls.

    what few people know is that the impact of the sun was simply legislated away by dictate… reminiscent of the dictates that proclaimed the sun to revolve around the earth and the earth to be flat.

    why? b/c they say so!

    now, give them your money and everything will be fine – but don’t look at the chinese slaves, the chinese organ harvesting and the MASSIVE chinese pollution going on behind the scenes!

    oh, and *really* don’t mention the CARBON FOOT PRINT OF WAR!

  59. a heermans says:

    one more chart…… here can be found a chart showing the warming and cooling of our planet over the last 4500years.

    as you can see, it’s been hotter and cooler. a cycle of warming and cooling seems to be expressed in this chart.

  60. Bruce says:

    WeatherWatch with Max & Stacy would be a good segment. Seriously. Just a separate off-shoot production talking about weather and nothing but weather. Complete with maps, charts, you-name-it.

    I’m more concerned about penguin real-estate if the ice is melting. If I were a penguin living on the water’s edge, I’d have lost my home without the aid of any bank.


  61. Hugo says:


    I know my (failed) econometrics. Once I started to look at the models of man made global warming I noticed some of the same assumptions. When digging deeper you start to see the fraud of the imput data to the model. Me is just an amature in the man made global warming discussion but so far I found it ‘build on quicksand’.

    Hope Max and Stacy drop or expose it soon 😉

  62. stacyherbert says:

    @Corporate Skeptic – unhunh, so you just have a newspaper headline that was picked up and run with by all the un-thinking, cut and paste denier sites (and all should just google the keywords used by such deniers as this, notice that there is almost ZERO critical thinking ever displayed, the same headlines are posted over and over and over again . . . kind of like how brainwashing is done, think about that)

    anyway, if anyone who has more than half a brain cell bothers to look at your comment, they will no doubt follow your article and see that not only was the this one scientist talking about Southern England, which the article points out averages 3.7 days of snow or sleet per year, but had that had declined to .7 days of snow in the past decade (this I observed having lived there), well then the thought of going from .7 days to no days of snow per year seems not a crazy stretch; nevertheless, deniers are only interested, remember, in repeating simple phrases and falsehoods over and over and so this one headline of one scientists ASSERTION, he did not mention any studies, no research, data, or anything other than an imagined possible future in a region that averages 3.7 days of snow per year . . . and lo and behold, deniers say that ALL SCIENTISTS (not just one guy) SAID THIS WOULD HAPPEN ALL OVER THE WORLD, INCLUDING CANADA AND ALASKA AND THE ARCTIC THEY DID, THEY DID, THEY DID!!

    Meanwhile, it doesn’t take much critical function to actually go online and find what actual science and modelling was predicting:

    February 1, 2006: Harder Rain, More Snow

    While raising average global temperatures, climate change could also bring more snow, harder rain, or heat waves, meteorologists say. Computer models based on climate data from nine countries indicate every place on the planet will be hit with extreme weather events, including coastal storms and floods.

    Again, you can choose to just listen to the cut and paste propaganda that deniers push without any context, or you can explore for yourself what the science really says. Your choice.

  63. Eduardo says:

    By your scientists, basically anything can happen.
    May be hotter, may be cold. Can snow more or less
    It will be AGW.

    Gizzz I can do that too…

  64. stacyherbert says:

    @a heermans – first of all, you posted a link to the AMSR-E sea ice extent chart thinking it was showing an increase in ice on an annual basis; you clearly were unable to read it as a chart showing monthly changes across several years and hence the right of the chart is going into winter; now you post a chart of reconstruction of temperatures for 4500 years? . . . and from whose bottom did you pull this? normally a person who is not just posting propaganda and lies or one that has even a whiff of curiosity or intelligence to his being would also provide a link to the source and to the methodology; there are other charts available pulled from multiple sources using real scientific method and which look nothing like your own piece of propaganda:

  65. Youri Carma says:

    Globe cooling faster than anticipated and to continue over next 20-30 years says

    Magnetic polar shifts causing massive global superstorms, 4 February 2011, by Piers Corbyn (Helium)

  66. stacyherbert says:

    @Eduardo – sorry but you clearly don’t even have the most basic understanding of science, and I’m talking about first grade stuff; anyone on earth can offer a hypothesis for what they observe; it is only once this hypothesis is TESTED that it can be described as a scientific hypothesis; an interview in a tabloid newspaper with a scientist is not anywhere near an accepted scientific method; we don’t know what the journalist asked to get the answer but one scientist predicting that one day Britain may not have any of the .7 days of snow they were averaging for winter . . . does not seem a wildly implausible prediction to make when the average for that region was 3.7 days over three decades and was at .7 days per year for the current decade; the scientist in question, however, not once referred to any scientific modelling he was undertaking to challenge his assertion; that deniers charge that because one scientist proposed to a journalist a hypothetical snow free winter for England that somehow he spoke for all scientists and that all these scientists when speaking through this one scientist were now predicting it would be snow free around the entire globe is just such a childish assertion and demonstrates that mere propaganda and poop throwing is all they are interested in; again, if it works for you . . .

  67. stacyherbert says:

    @Youri – your guy says, “in December, I predicted a cold January . . . ”

    um, the NOAA predicted it in October:

    It wasn’t exactly rocket science, however, as La Nina ALWAYS delivers predictably cold weather; if you see the two temperature anomaly charts above, you clearly see La Nina – she is the band of blue (cold) on the Pacific Ocean off South America; with La Nina, the Pacific Ocean temperatures drop by up to 3 degrees; notice too that it looks like it is starting to weaken or break up a bit in January; but note that La Nina was with us for September and October and November and December of 2010, which was tied for hottest year on record . . . despite La Nina

  68. Eduardo says:

    There are no climate models that can work for long periods of time, none. Too many factors involved.

    You had numerical calculus (computation methods to solve diferential equations) I had!

    You know what butterfly effect are. I Know.

    In a number of iterations of any numerical algorithm the acumulated error begins to distort de data numbers… The term for how fast the errors grow is “stability of the method” X method is stable in Y domain.

    You can’t forecast for long periods of time with Numerical Models Period!

    I not even started to talk about the number of variables to put in this model.

    They sey that their module can forecast 2 years, 5 years. The are LYING. Loyd Blankfine can sey that his model can forecast. Do you Believe???

    Any one that taked a good class in numerical calculus can assert this (Numerical Recipes) Any one else suffered with this book?

  69. cultamerica says:

    Promoters of AGW are some of the most enlightened numbskulls on the planet (said w/ the utmost respect). But should this be something to be proud of? I would say that it could be if you see everything in reverse. Which may explain the anger and spiteful behavior of the warmies. They believe that man is a virus, and but for them all is ruin. This is an issue relating with psychology not science.
    Perhaps a day will come when we can get past the propaganda and deal with the mental health side of this sad issue.

  70. bob says:

    yes. more bogus charts by “scientists” that want continued grants…

  71. bob says:

    stacy…did you know that sometimes the government tells lies…and even might alter scientific data to create fear?…so that they can..oh, i don’t know…take away peoples rights, and create new (carbon) taxes…

  72. cultamerica says:

    So I’m clicking. Happy?
    It’s not like you don’t work for it though.

    If you can’t digest these well spoken words of Corporate Skeptic posted above,

    “we disagree on the cause of the problem (you claim to know, i claim to not know b/c i haven’t seen any data that proves AGW), we all need to agree that the solutions presented are fraudulent.

    carbon credits are a scam – they enshrine monopolies, lead to more global pollution, impoverish tax payers, reduce jobs in industrialized economies and enrich the insiders. here’s how…”

    then there may be no help for you. Sorry

  73. Lynne says:

    @stacy I think you need to be a scientist or a statistician to interpret the data properly. You are neither and most of us are also neither. So, we cannot know with any certainty and must retain an open mind. We can see for ourselves that the earth’s resources have been misused, that peak oil is here and we can even believe that there is global warming, but the question is – is this caused by CO2? I can’t interpret the science and don’t intend to try, but I do think that the way in which the powers that be have latched on to AGM and are promoting it almost to the extent of making it a religion is very suspicious. That makes me wonder whether global warming is caused by CO2. I am also very disturbed to note that scientists who started off as believers and subsequently changed their minds have been included on reports as supporters of AGM and have been unsuccessful in getting their names removed. You may well find, in the not too distant future, that we will be paying yet another tax on the pretext of rectifying something which we can do nothing about (i.e. solar activity). Furthermore, the day will come when governments will have to ‘fess up’ to the fact that they are spraying us on a daily basis and they will almost certainly say that they are doing so to combat AGM. Whether they themselves believe in AGM is another matter of course.

  74. @Stacy,

    you have the ad hominem down. it adds nothing to your argument, but you are smart enough to know that. ad hominem is logical fallacy – it is designed to avoid logical argument.

    you have no need to keep practicing ad hoominem – you are a black belt already!

    where did that one scientist work? THE CENTER OF AGW RESEARCH?

    yeah, anyone would be a FOOL to listen to a scientist from there and TRUST HIM.

    you are right – we were all half brained idiots for thinking a scientist from there should be taken at face value.

    speaking of logical fallacy – nice straw man you built.

    this scientist made his proclamation in 2000. you countered with an article in 2006 after it was pretty obvious that scientist’s AGW based prediction was turning out false.

    no, you need to show scientists in 2000 claiming this guy was wrong. if they didn’t, then they tacitly agreed with this guy’s WORLDWIDE dissemination of information or they agreed to let it go without contesting it – KNOWING FULL WELL THAT THE PUBLIC WOULD BE MISLED BY THIS INSIDER SCIENTIST’S PROCLAMATION.

    BTW, where is your criticism of him when he made that statement? a link would be appreciated – or an admission that you rolled right along with the idea until mother earth made a fool out of the prophet and caused people like you to develop ad hominem and straw man logical fallacies to support your predetermined position.

    can you produce one example of another global warming scientist disputing his 2000 statement that ran WORLDWIDE in the press IN 2000?

    no? well, that is how propaganda is disseminated – they can get a message that is completely full of chit out WORLDWIDE and then simply proclaim it was one guy.

    i could throw in some ad hominem here, but i don’t need to – and i want to set a good example for you.

    as for corporations looting the citizenry via carbon credits – no comment from Stacy… it doesn’t interest her.

    that’s telling.

    failing to address…

    is duly noted as well.

    but hey, what is discussing issues when all you have to do is call people names and insult them?

    a little straw men, a little appeal to authority and little ad hominem…

    pretty soon you might get called up by the elite!

    everyone else – pay those carbon taxes so your jobs can be taken and the robber barons can increase global pollution and rob the treasury blind – it is all OK b/c Stacy doesn’t even consider it worth a mention.

    since you claim to know it all, what percent of the climate is controlled by the sun?

    please post the research that proves your position (since you obviously think you know for sure).

    or not – you can’t do what you can’t do, right?

    if you can’t prove the sun’s contribution, honesty would demand that you admit you don’t know.

    forget that – ad hominem and straw men will work… as bush said…

    “You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.” – GHW Bush

    You do know that logical fallacy’s express purpose is to fool people… yeah, you claim to have a full brain, so you have to know this.

  75. >>@Eduardo – sorry but you clearly don’t even have the most basic understanding of science, and I’m talking about first grade stuff; anyone on earth can offer a hypothesis for what they observe; it is only once this hypothesis is TESTED that it can be described as a scientific hypothesis;<<

    and when those tests fail completely and utterly – people then use logical fallacy to cover it up.

    so Stacy, what EVIDENCE will convince you that AGW isn't true.

    it isn't science if it isn't falsifiable.

    how do you know the sun's contribution to climate change?

    why don't you address this in detail?

    why don't you comment about how the "solutions" impoverish the people, enrich the oligarchs and increase global CO2 emissions (and other pollution)?

    logical fallacy is easier, i know.

    everyone who disagrees is an idiot.

    only one scientist said snow was going away… yet nobody contested him at the time EXCEPT THE PEOPLE WHO SAID AGW WASN'T PROVEN.


    stacking ad hominem upon ad hominem – trying to attack those who post the article instead of just addressing the article itself.

    but it isn't a path to a solution or understanding.

    once you have convinced yourself everyone else is a complete moron – you are done learning. those in that position define that state as "smart."

    in reality, that word is the anti-thesis of "smart."

    a method of control used by the robber barons is to weave an issue into the essence of one's emotions. once an idea is emotional in nature – and the ego gets involved – very few people are open to new information.

    i recently told a retired physician that water fluoridation was opposed by the EPA scientists union.

    he did as you do – relied on ad hominem.

    he attacked me as a "know it all" – i never made that claim. that's ad hominem and straw man wrapped into one.

    he attacked the website that put the information up – just like you attacked the websites that post the false AGW scientist's prediction.

    he claimed to have actually read research THAT DOESN'T EVEN EXIST – there are no double blind studies showing fluoridated water improves cavity resistance.

    all this before educating himself as to the research highlighted in the EPA scientists union letter.

    he was already emotionally attached to the idea and those who had told him it was all good that he simply had shut down his mind.

    it happens a lot.

    we need to be aware of it and keep our minds open.

    as i said, i don't know how much human pollution contributes to global warming.

    what i do know is that the robber barons are pushing false solutions that enrich themselves, rob societies, increase pollution and i know Stacy didn't even bother to comment on these issues when I presented them to her.

    rather, she jealously defended her emotional belief that she *knows* how much humans impact climate. but not enough to cry BS when a climate research makes absurd predictions WHEN THE ABSURD PREDICTIONS ARE MADE.

    nope, sit on the sideline and then make excuses and attack people who point out how bad said model based predictions ended up IN REALITY.

    and no – i'm not so naive to believe that data can't be manipulated to provide income – look at the federal reserve's and government BOLD FACED lies used to loot the people.

    i have no dog in this race – Max and Stacey won't stop flying or heating their homes or exhaling – and they believe they are killing the planet by doing so.

    but they tacitly support policies used to keep people down in third world countries – and if Stacy could realize that she doesn't know it all, perhaps she could have learned something by watching the video I linked.

    Not that she has to agree with any part of it – but shutting out information is a desire to be ignorant of information.

    Note, I post links while Stacy simply says, "look it up for yourself unless you have half a brain" knowing full well nobody can analyze the data she claims to use to reach her own conclusion when she does that.

  76. Peter Pan says:

    For me the fundamental question is what happened to the ocean level? If indeed so much of ice melted, how come the sea level did not rise, as promised by the Carbon Pope? According to him NY and the house he bought in California should have been under water long time ago. The other thing is the project of creating a stereo image of the Sun to better study its effects on weather patterns. What for? It has been decided that the SUV’s are the ones to blame? Apparently the SUV’s have a very little contribution if the crop froze in Mexico. Those damn Mexicans did not have enough SUV’s.

Watch the latest Keiser Reports:

Buy Gold Online
Buy Gold Online