We're going to miss Fred Singer, but more and more are picking up the mantle on the science end. But we need more to work on the real goals and agenda of IPCC and the UN as evidenced by this recent speech by the head of IPCC:

"The United Nation’s climate chief says that reordering the global economy to fight climate change is the “most difficult” task the international body has ever undertaken.

“This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history,” Christiana Figueres, who heads up the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, told reporters.

“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for the, at least, 150 years, since the industrial revolution,” Figueres said."
http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/05/climat...

If you do a little parsing of the opening sentence based on reality, you get the pictured: "to fight climate change", a hopeless and impossible task not well understood by any scientist. "reordering the global economy", the real goal.

Later on in the article she voices the goal of by 2020, each rich nation to contribute 1% of GDP to the poor and developing nations every year. Redistribution on a global scale.

A little search of her background: an avowed communist that believes that communism is the best form of government to accomplish her goals.

Hello dbhalling,
I found their experiences related to getting published more informative than their facts; of which I was already familiar. It is the alarmist cabal that are the deniers and hold the power to quash any skeptics. For those who haven't seen it, I would recommend the movie- An Inconsistent Truth. Phil Valentine makes a well deserved mockery of the biggest self serving purveyors of fear and refutes the notion of settled science. http://aninconsistenttruth.com/
Respectfully,
O.A.

Climate Change is just another form of mysticism only couched in pseudo-science. It uses one of the oldest forms of false argument that works like this:
A: There are Coca-Cola factories on Neptune.
B: Nonsense, you can't prove that.
A: Well, you can't prove that there aren't.
Too simple? Nobody will be taken in? Look closely.

Powerful stuff! The most honest and logical discussion about Climate Change I have seen or heard.

The more information that emerges from and about these people is disgusting.

In the event that they are successful in their activity they will have basically destroyed the economic world as we know it. ALL of the poor people will stay poor and become even poorer and all of the people who have funds will become equally poor and then the wealthy countries will resemble all of the poor countries that produce NOTHING. ALL of these people should be drawn and quartered because they can not be reasoned with nor do they even want to enter into the discussion of why anyone would want to help them from the world that we come from.

Where is Algore in this climate of 100 year cold temps?

Science writer, Bob Zimmerman, covers this climate change stuff impartially on his website www.behindtheblack.com.

besides the "funny science" to relate to climate change, changes that do occur would be expected as the earth's climate is not a static force but is constantly over geological time as well...

I enjoyed watching it, thanks. I didn't learn anything new, but I am happy to hear there is an organized effort to expose the lies.

This is a good illustration of the difference between climate and weather. It is also a good exhibition of how data can be used by anyone to justify their "science". There is not enough evidence to indicate, even if we are entering a warming period, any need to do anything but adapt.

How about this brainstorm...
http://www.newsobserver.com/2015/02/10/4...

Un---****** - believable!