The IPCC needs Obama's team of spin masters to survive their latest report

Obama's spin machine has come to POTUS's rescue many times. Now they need to come to the rescue of the International Panel on Climate Change.

The global cooling deniers at the IPCC need just that kind of spin given the fact that they can't reconcile the global cooling that is occurring in spite of all their research and computer models predicting the opposite.

They have passed Obamaspeak 101 by first trying to change the words. Global warming became global climate change. Global cooling is now referred to in their latest report as a "pause." The hockey stick has become a...okay, they just stopped talking about that all together.

These steps are good but they need more.

They need something much more sophisticated to fool the international populace and give their liberal media cohorts fodder for their green literary swill. What they need is Axelrod and his artists at OFA to craft a scientific report demonstrating that all of the efforts of the IPCC have resulted in an unprecedented turnaround in climate.

From the folks that have been mopping up after Obama's messes for five years, we get: "Yes, folks, because of the trillions of dollars spent on fixes recommended by the brilliant minds at the IPCC, after 15 long years we are seeing results with global temperatures stabilizing."  

This could work. After all, Obama's political machine was recently in full spin mode with the Syria red line debacle. When Obama and Kerry tag teamed on the foreign policy disaster only to be made worse by Putin, always the opportunist, swooping in to save the day. Obama's teleprompters flashed the only thing that made sense -- they claimed that he had planned it that way all along. His spin masters put out the word on Sunday morning talk shows that Obama needed to back Assad into a corner with all that tough speechification to get the Syrian mass murderer to negotiate with his Russian BFF.

If they can repeatedly save the day for a bumbling Obama, they can certainly work magic for the global warming opportunists.

But there is a lot more at stake besides just some face-saving for a cadre of scientists and government officials.

The IPCC's problem is not dissimilar to what has happened with civil rights and racism. There are people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson who are financially tied to the perpetuation of the myth that race relations continue to be bad or are getting worse. With climate change there are people like Al Gore and thousands of scientists who are financially tied through green venture funds and grant dollars to perpetuating the myth of global warming and its supposed negative effects.

Of course, the IPCC is no slouch when it comes to spinning. They've been fooling the Nobel committee for years. So, while they admit that the earth isn't warming quite as fast as they predicted, they are now virtually certain that the warming that isn't happening has been caused by humans.

From the Economist: "The [IPCC] report is more definitive than in the past about the role of people in causing climate change. It says that it is "extremely likely"-IPCC speak for having a probability of over 95%-that man is responsible." (LINK)

Global cooling skeptics at the UN admit that they can't fool the world by comparing and creating hockey stick graphs of global temperatures, so they need to find another culprit. One that is not so easy to measure with a thermometer outside your kitchen window. How about "radiative forcing"? According to their intentionally incomprehensible research, there is no sign that the rise in radiative forcing has slowed during the past 15 years of flat surface temperatures. The best estimate for total man-made radiative forcing in 2011 is 43% above 2005 levels, according to the report.

Wow that sounds awful -- um -- I think. If we don't stop all these human produced "radiative forcing" thingies, we're all going to start glowing or something. Somebody should do something.

Now that they have an official sounding term that nobody can possibly understand they have to find a place for all that missing heat to have gone. Somewhere that nobody can ever really go. Andrea Mitchell might suggest putting it on an approaching asteroid but even Bill Nye wouldn't believe that one.

These "scientists" are smarter than her. Okay, everyone is smarter than Andrea Mitchell.

How about under the oceans? Nobody can go out on their dock and drop a 2,000 foot line with a thermometer attached to check up on these "experts." I'm also pretty sure that nobody back in 1750, let alone 1950, was tracking the temperature of the world's ocean depths. So they can claim any historical data to be true without question because, like Paul Krugman, they are smarter than us.

Luckily they don't have to give up on anthropomorphic warming all together just yet. The world is still warming at an alarming rate of 0.05C per decade. They can still hang their collective hats on that. The inconvenient truth is that the growth in popularity of Bikram yoga over the last decade can account for a rise of 0.05C.

The IPCC authors do point out that the fifteen year cooling trend is dependent on the starting and ending dates. Change one date and the results change so it's not reliable statistical methodology. Welcome to Statistics 101. Unfortunately, using fifteen years ending today appears much more reasonable than their still touting levels from 1995 to 2007 and ignoring 2008 to 2013.

Okay, let's all agree that statistics can be made to say whatever you want. In other words, we can each take the same statistic pool and come to completely different answers and both can be correct. But instead, as in this case, let's take one set of statistics and compare it to the expected effect on another set of statistics over time.

The backbone of the IPCC scientists' assumptions is that the level of carbon in the atmosphere will result in an increase in temperatures over a period of time in the future. This has been repeated so many times that it has been taken as fact for the last decade, but it was always just a theory waiting to be proven out in time by monitoring key statistics.

Well the results are in and the reality is that contrary to their contrived computer models, the climate has been cooling for 17 years back to 1995 when the IPCC first made their prediction. Because it was accepted globally as an undeniable certainty, it has been used as the premise for trillions of dollars of carbon emissions legislation (as well as many millions in profits for Al Gore).

The IPCC attempt to discredit statistical analysis falls apart when they point out measurements for the shrinking ice in Greenland and the Arctic based on analysis of the statistics:

"The Greenland ice sheet, the Antarctic sea ice and the Arctic sea ice have all lost mass (got thinner). The extent of the Arctic sea ice has shrunk by 3.5-4.1% a decade in 1979-2012, more than was estimated in 2007, and the summer sea-ice minimum is shrinking by about 10% a decade." (LINK)

Never mind that there has been massive volcanic activity under the glaciers causing massive melt off. And the Arctic sea ice - what about those wooden sailing vessels back in the 1890's that reported coming within 150km of circumnavigating the Arctic? Seems like other forces may be involved - maybe. You don't need Indian smoke signals to get that message.

And this is just the tip of their melting iceberg. Only the spin-masters at Obama For America can save the cooling deniers at the IPCC.

Obama's spin machine has come to POTUS's rescue many times. Now they need to come to the rescue of the International Panel on Climate Change.

The global cooling deniers at the IPCC need just that kind of spin given the fact that they can't reconcile the global cooling that is occurring in spite of all their research and computer models predicting the opposite.

They have passed Obamaspeak 101 by first trying to change the words. Global warming became global climate change. Global cooling is now referred to in their latest report as a "pause." The hockey stick has become a...okay, they just stopped talking about that all together.

These steps are good but they need more.

They need something much more sophisticated to fool the international populace and give their liberal media cohorts fodder for their green literary swill. What they need is Axelrod and his artists at OFA to craft a scientific report demonstrating that all of the efforts of the IPCC have resulted in an unprecedented turnaround in climate.

From the folks that have been mopping up after Obama's messes for five years, we get: "Yes, folks, because of the trillions of dollars spent on fixes recommended by the brilliant minds at the IPCC, after 15 long years we are seeing results with global temperatures stabilizing."  

This could work. After all, Obama's political machine was recently in full spin mode with the Syria red line debacle. When Obama and Kerry tag teamed on the foreign policy disaster only to be made worse by Putin, always the opportunist, swooping in to save the day. Obama's teleprompters flashed the only thing that made sense -- they claimed that he had planned it that way all along. His spin masters put out the word on Sunday morning talk shows that Obama needed to back Assad into a corner with all that tough speechification to get the Syrian mass murderer to negotiate with his Russian BFF.

If they can repeatedly save the day for a bumbling Obama, they can certainly work magic for the global warming opportunists.

But there is a lot more at stake besides just some face-saving for a cadre of scientists and government officials.

The IPCC's problem is not dissimilar to what has happened with civil rights and racism. There are people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson who are financially tied to the perpetuation of the myth that race relations continue to be bad or are getting worse. With climate change there are people like Al Gore and thousands of scientists who are financially tied through green venture funds and grant dollars to perpetuating the myth of global warming and its supposed negative effects.

Of course, the IPCC is no slouch when it comes to spinning. They've been fooling the Nobel committee for years. So, while they admit that the earth isn't warming quite as fast as they predicted, they are now virtually certain that the warming that isn't happening has been caused by humans.

From the Economist: "The [IPCC] report is more definitive than in the past about the role of people in causing climate change. It says that it is "extremely likely"-IPCC speak for having a probability of over 95%-that man is responsible." (LINK)

Global cooling skeptics at the UN admit that they can't fool the world by comparing and creating hockey stick graphs of global temperatures, so they need to find another culprit. One that is not so easy to measure with a thermometer outside your kitchen window. How about "radiative forcing"? According to their intentionally incomprehensible research, there is no sign that the rise in radiative forcing has slowed during the past 15 years of flat surface temperatures. The best estimate for total man-made radiative forcing in 2011 is 43% above 2005 levels, according to the report.

Wow that sounds awful -- um -- I think. If we don't stop all these human produced "radiative forcing" thingies, we're all going to start glowing or something. Somebody should do something.

Now that they have an official sounding term that nobody can possibly understand they have to find a place for all that missing heat to have gone. Somewhere that nobody can ever really go. Andrea Mitchell might suggest putting it on an approaching asteroid but even Bill Nye wouldn't believe that one.

These "scientists" are smarter than her. Okay, everyone is smarter than Andrea Mitchell.

How about under the oceans? Nobody can go out on their dock and drop a 2,000 foot line with a thermometer attached to check up on these "experts." I'm also pretty sure that nobody back in 1750, let alone 1950, was tracking the temperature of the world's ocean depths. So they can claim any historical data to be true without question because, like Paul Krugman, they are smarter than us.

Luckily they don't have to give up on anthropomorphic warming all together just yet. The world is still warming at an alarming rate of 0.05C per decade. They can still hang their collective hats on that. The inconvenient truth is that the growth in popularity of Bikram yoga over the last decade can account for a rise of 0.05C.

The IPCC authors do point out that the fifteen year cooling trend is dependent on the starting and ending dates. Change one date and the results change so it's not reliable statistical methodology. Welcome to Statistics 101. Unfortunately, using fifteen years ending today appears much more reasonable than their still touting levels from 1995 to 2007 and ignoring 2008 to 2013.

Okay, let's all agree that statistics can be made to say whatever you want. In other words, we can each take the same statistic pool and come to completely different answers and both can be correct. But instead, as in this case, let's take one set of statistics and compare it to the expected effect on another set of statistics over time.

The backbone of the IPCC scientists' assumptions is that the level of carbon in the atmosphere will result in an increase in temperatures over a period of time in the future. This has been repeated so many times that it has been taken as fact for the last decade, but it was always just a theory waiting to be proven out in time by monitoring key statistics.

Well the results are in and the reality is that contrary to their contrived computer models, the climate has been cooling for 17 years back to 1995 when the IPCC first made their prediction. Because it was accepted globally as an undeniable certainty, it has been used as the premise for trillions of dollars of carbon emissions legislation (as well as many millions in profits for Al Gore).

The IPCC attempt to discredit statistical analysis falls apart when they point out measurements for the shrinking ice in Greenland and the Arctic based on analysis of the statistics:

"The Greenland ice sheet, the Antarctic sea ice and the Arctic sea ice have all lost mass (got thinner). The extent of the Arctic sea ice has shrunk by 3.5-4.1% a decade in 1979-2012, more than was estimated in 2007, and the summer sea-ice minimum is shrinking by about 10% a decade." (LINK)

Never mind that there has been massive volcanic activity under the glaciers causing massive melt off. And the Arctic sea ice - what about those wooden sailing vessels back in the 1890's that reported coming within 150km of circumnavigating the Arctic? Seems like other forces may be involved - maybe. You don't need Indian smoke signals to get that message.

And this is just the tip of their melting iceberg. Only the spin-masters at Obama For America can save the cooling deniers at the IPCC.