View Article

Click source for MUST SEE VIDEO LINK

Updated below with more comments from Joe Bastardi
The following update is fron the original article at NoTrickZone.com

Joe Bastardi Calls Manmade CO2 Global Warming “An Obvious Fraud”

UPDATE: via IceCap.us

Tom Nelson reported Joe Romm of Think Progress spouted off after Joe Bastardi’s Saturday morning FOX appearance in which he was asked to comment on CO2 and global climate changes. “Joe Bastardi Pulls a Charlie Sheen on Fox News, Pushing “Utter Nonsense” on Climate Science”. Joe proves again why he and Heidi Cullen (and throw in Obama) are the worst investments the billionair George Soros ever made.

Joe R. began :Those who watched Fox News over the weekend were treated to a brief but ambitious science lesson on “Why CO2 Can’t Cause Warming”:Oh boy. Let’s take these one at a time.” He went on to show how little Romm knows about climate. Gore also sounded off in obscenties this weekend. A new Rasmussen poll shows the American public trusts the objectivity and credibility of impassioned global warming “scientists” about as much as used car salesmen, and boy is Al Gore ticked. If Michele Bachmann is Newsweek‘s Queen of Rage, Al Gore must be America’s potty-mouthed King of Bizarre Temper Tantrums.

While the sinking credibility of activist scientists is primarily due to documented scientific misconduct, it can’t help that the public face of global warming alarmism is an increasingly bizarre, tantrumatic potty-mouth who habitually lectures down to the American people like they are morally inferior beings. I am not a big cheerleader for the “Sky Is Falling” global warming campaign, but I can’t help but offer the following advice: You really need to get yourselves a new spokesperson. Tom Nelson.

Joe Bastardi responded…

The PDO changes, sunspot activity is down from the max around 2000. The Earths temps level out and co2 continues to rise. To the folks at climate progress.. if co2 is causing the temperature rise, why is it the temperatures have leveled off while co2 continues to rise, and the other 2 forcing mechanisms have changed. Where are the trapping hot spots at 400mb? Where is the positive feedback? Why is the temperature not in any of the IPCC ranges issued 20 years ago? Even Phil Jones admitted there has been no warming, so how can co2 be the cause? Where is the heat.. The ocean bottom, a cave somewhere? And how is it the satellites say it fine after the PDO switched to warm, but cant find it now?

By The way, I didnt see Joe Rohm or any of my other accusers in my thermodynamic classes at Penn State where I earned a degree in the University’s prime, graduating 2/3 rds of the worlds meteorologists at the time. To my friends at climate progress, media matters, etc, its a simple test.. If the earth’s temps fall back to where they were in the 70s by 2030, because of the changes in the oceanic cycles, which have been warm since the start of the satellite era, then what we are seeing now will be proven, co2 has nothing to do with it. If temps rise, in the face of the major drivers that have turned around ( oceanic, solar) as measured by OBJECTIVE SATELLITE MEASUREMENTS, WHICH WE HAVE ONLY HAD SINCE THE 70S) then co2 has something, if not almost everything to do with it. HERE IS THE PROBLEM. There is no answer you will admit to being wrong. I will at least admit I am wrong if my simple test doesn’t do what i say. Mine involves logic, reason, and basic laws of science, and as I said before, I did not see any of my critics in any meteorology or atmospheric chemistry class.

So that is my challenge. Temps have leveled off, co2 is continuing to rise. If you cant admit you are wrong about that, let us all know what we have to see for you to admit you are wrong.

I suspect we wont get an answer, since everything that happens, even if it cools, will be an answer they will claim they were right about

And by the way, Quit lying about me. I am all for any and all energy use that will make our world cleaner and energy cheaper. I am all for energy independence. I could care less where it comes from, because you still have to know if its going to be cold or warm, and how much you need to use. Windfarms for instance are a meteorologists dream since not only do they need to know the result of the weather, but the actual weather, so its a first and second derivative. The same with the solar ideas. Personally , I like the idea of on site wind and solar sufficiency, empowering your own home to reduce cost, but to me this is a forecast. Obviously for you its something completely different, and because it is, it is you, not me, that doesn’t take the facts into account.