moonbattery logo

Nov 29 2011

Global Warming Hoaxers Resort to Crude Photoshops

When you start off with Al Gore as your frontman, you don’t have far to go before you hit bottom. Global warming hoaxers have reached it. Check out this ominous photo, versions of which appear frequently in the media:

phony-smog

Nasty looking smog, isn’t it? Except it used to be harmless steam — until Photoshop was applied. Here’s output from Photoshopped Image Killer:

global-warming-photoshop

Watt’s Up With That explains how you too can convert water vapor and equally innocuous CO2 into sinister smog. It’s so easy, the “mainstream” media can do it.

On a tip from Scott.

Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on Google+Pin on PinterestShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on Twitter


  • http://www.henrypbabcock.com Henry

    No biggie… fake but accurate.

  • Dr. 9

    “The natural tendency of every government is to grow steadily worse – that is, to grow more satisfactory to those who constitute it and less satisfactory to those who support it…”
    –- H. L. Mencken

  • Charlie

    I cudda been the prez. I cudda beat him like a rented mule.

  • Lao’s Infected Sphincter

    The Daily Beast is part of Newsweak. Enough said.

  • SR

    Environmentalists mum on illegal immigration

    http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=1486152

  • Had it up to here :/

    The term ‘smog’ is not used properly here. The ‘photo’ is not an attempt to show smog as it cannot. Smog is the result of widespread smoke mixing with fog (or any water vapor)hence the term SMOG (smoke/fog) Frequent in the los angeles basin by the by.

  • Pingback: Jetzt aufgedeckt: Klimahysteriker manipulieren Fotos mit Photoshop | Jihad Watch Deutschland

  • Viking04

    Auf English, Bitte.

  • hiram
  • Eric

    Technically, water vapor/steam is 10-20 times more effective as a ‘greenhouse gas’ than is CO2, so the photoshoper would do well to leave the white steam alone. But lets not quibble, as the atmosphere of earth isn’t a closed environment anyway, ‘greenhouse’ effect is negated because there is no roof. It would be nice for people to remember this little tidbit, or for econazis to understand it in the first place.

  • Bob Roberts

    Eric says: November 29, 2011 at 11:22 pm
    Technically, water vapor/steam is 10-20 times more effective as a ‘greenhouse gas’ than is CO2

    ————–

    True… and, in fact, even the most lunatic Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change Alarmists (work out the acronym for that one, won’t you?) admitted that CO2 alone wouldn’t cause serious warming – it would only do so by causing more water vapor to be evaporated and carried into the atmosphere, where the water vapor, not the CO2, wound up causing more warming.

    While CO2 does, over very narrow bands, absorb certain wavelengths of infrared energy very efficiently, and while at least one of these bands is a place where water vapor is somewhat transparent to that particular set of wavelengths, CO2 does not, as claimed, “trap” anything. It merely slightly slows the loss of this energy to space.

    All that nonsense about the north pole and Greenland melting? Well, there was actually a low in north polar ice – caused not by CO2 but by well understood shifts in Arctic Ocean and polar atmospheric currents which have since reversed, leading to rapid re-accumulation of ice, a fact the media and the left aren’t really all that interested in sharing with you.

    Plus it was telling that they failed to mention that at the same time the north pole set a record for minimum ice (only since we began snapping hi-rez, large scale pictures, which isn’t that long and hence isn’t that significant) the south pole set a MAXIMUM record for ice. Funny how they only tell you the side of the truth that supports their deliberately false conclusions, eh?

    And remember when they said the “northwest passage” would soon be ice free year round?

    2010 Arctic Ice anomalies – MORE ice SOONER than expected: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2483856/posts

    As is commonly the case, once some honest person finds and posts something that disproves the alarmist theories, the link they got the data from breaks – as is the case with the data for the link from the above story.

    Dueling records, only one reported by the left: http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/a_new_record_for_antartic_total_ice_extent

    The long and short of it is that the planet’s ice load tends to fluctuate from north to south and, while they’re trying to make the case it’s slowly decreasing (and I’m not saying it’s not – that is to be expected and even hoped for during an interglacial period) but they’re deliberately doing everything they can to act like that decrease is a bad thing and is happening unusually fast when in fact it is not.

    It was amazing that even when the data clearly showed that arctic ice was recovering amazingly fast, the left still tried to spin it as either still decreasing or being perilously close to doing so.

  • Bob Roberts

    http://icecap.us/

    A great place to start your education about the continuing climate, energy and carbon hoaxes.

  • Bob Roberts

    Phil Jones has described the main problem with the skeptics: they prefer to mostly look at observations and ignore papers on modeling because they believe by default models are wrong! Another basic problem, as Phil Jones realized elsewhere, is that all models are wrong, indeed. These two problems add up to a big problem and it’s created purely by the skeptics. If they weren’t thinking that the models are wrong, no one would care because the only other people who know that the models are wrong are all the other climatologists and they would never tell it to anyone.

  • Bob Roberts

    Last week, 5,000 files of private email correspondence among several of the world’s top climate scientists were anonymously leaked onto the Internet. Like the first “climategate” leak of 2009, the latest release shows top scientists in the field fudging data, conspiring to bully and silence opponents, and displaying far less certainty about the reliability of anthropogenic global warming theory in private than they ever admit in public.

    The scientists include men like Michael Mann of Penn State University and Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia, both of whose reports inform what President Obama has called “the gold standard” of international climate science, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

    The new release of emails was timed to coincide with the second anniversary of the original climategate leak and with the upcoming United Nations climate summit in Durban, South Africa. And it has already stirred strong emotions. To Rep. Ed Markey (D., Mass.), for example, the leaker or leakers responsible are attempting to “sabotage the international climate talks” and should be identified and brought “to justice.”

    One might sympathize with Mr. Markey’s outrage if, say, the emails were maliciously rewritten or invented. But at least one scientist involved�Mr. Mann�has confirmed that the emails are genuine, as were the first batch released two years ago. So any malfeasance revealed therein ought to be blamed on the scientists who wrote them, rather than on the whistleblower who exposed them.

    Consider an email written by Mr. Mann in August 2007. “I have been talking w/ folks in the states about finding an investigative journalist to investigate and expose McIntyre, and his thus far unexplored connections with fossil fuel interests. Perhaps the same needs to be done w/ this Keenan guy.” Doug Keenan is a skeptic and gadfly of the climate-change establishment. Steve McIntyre is the tenacious Canadian ex-mining engineer whose dogged research helped expose flaws in Mr. Mann’s “hockey stick” graph of global temperatures.

    One can understand Mr. Mann’s irritation. His hockey stick, which purported to demonstrate the link between man-made carbon emissions and catastrophic global warming, was the central pillar of the IPCC’s 2001 Third Assessment Report, and it brought him near-legendary status in his community. Naturally he wanted to put Mr. McIntyre in his place.

    The sensible way to do so is to prove Mr. McIntyre wrong using facts and evidence and improved data. Instead the email reveals Mr. Mann casting about for a way to smear him. If the case for man-made global warming is really as strong as the so-called consensus claims it is, why do the climategate emails show scientists attempting to stamp out dissenting points of view? Why must they manipulate data, such as Mr. Jones’s infamous effort (revealed in the first batch of climategate emails) to “hide the decline,” deliberately concealing an inconvenient divergence, post-1960, between real-world, observed temperature data and scientists’ preferred proxies derived from analyzing tree rings?

    This is the real significance of the climategate emails. They show that major scientists who inform the IPCC can’t be trusted to stick to the science and avoid political activism. This, in turn, has very worrying implications for the major international policy decisions adopted on the basis of their research.

  • Bob Roberts

    OK lao and the other sock puppets, I’ll say it first. What I’m about to post is weather, not climate.

    COLDEST NOVEMBER TEMPERATURE AT FAIRBANKS SINCE 1994

    Now there’s more to it, though. The IPCC, in it’s huge POLITICAL work, based on CONSENSUS, not SCIENCE, included a graph which showed a bell curve representing past weather/temperatures and another showing what, according to them, was our future. IN the second curve, the midline was shifted to the hot end of the scale. Now any person who studied basic statistics knows that means we should, over time, see more and more “hot” events and less and less “cold” events – not that the cold events will disappear. They’ll just become significantly less frequent.

    Has that happened?

    In a word, NO! In fact, though it’s going to take 5-10 more years to use statistics to prove it conclusively, enough data is in to show that, as the sun reached and passed it’s recent energy peak and became quieter than it has ever been since we developed the capability to monitor it this effectively, cold events seem to be increasing, and hot events decreasing, at rates that suggest the bell curve may actually have shifted towards the cold side.

    This despite the fact human consumption of fossil fuels, human production of CO2, and atmospheric concentration of CO2 have all continued to rise despite all the promises by all the nations to cut down.

    Stop climate change?

    Good luck trying. Don’t ask me to help. You’re wasting your time, effort and money. Mine too, and I do wish you would stop.

  • Lao the stain

    Listen Bama, Bill was the biggest sleaze, I know Bill, and your NOT BILL

  • Bryan

    Show me a picture that HASNT been run through photoshop that ends up on someone’s website? I’d vouch to say at least 80-90% of photos on large publication websites have been through at least a little bit of photoshop.

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy