Yeah you're right the issue is global cooling, that's why West Antarctica and Greenland are melting at an accelerating rate... because of cooling right? Drastic reductions in glaciers throughout the world, once again cooling? You can accuse the temperature record of being incorrect sure, but the real world proxies are quite indicative of true trends. There is not only increases in Antarctic and Greenland ice losses but there are distinct accelerations which have resulted in over 50% increases in losses in 10 years... that's cooling? Also, if you knew anything about climate science (which you apparently don't) you would know the 'hide the decline' comment refers to the divergence problem in that particular set of tree rings whereby the rings no longer matched temperature records after 1960. The rings after 1960 were thus replaced with the actual temperature records to solve this problem. Once again you should know this stuff before you talk about it. As someone in the glaciology field, for you to suggest global cooling is ridiculous.

Mr. glaciologist, glaciers are not only formed by cold, they need moisture to grow. Lack of snowfall to build them can also cause them to shrink. Moisture in the atmosphere is caused by heat evaporating water from the oceans. No heat, no moisture........Go back and read your books.

Mr. glaciologist, perhaps you've not read Ann's aticles often enough to recognize sarcasm? Be that as it may, please pull your nose out of the air to look this astronautical engineer (gee, I can use fancy titles too) in the eye and answer a couple of questions. 1) Even if your beloved glaciers are indeed on a forced diet, how does that prove "man made" global warming? Haven't the glaciers receded previously? Was that caused by "mammoth made" global warming? 2) Other than putting you out of a job and the inconvenience of re-naming Glacier National Park, what is the harm to mankind of a reduction in the glacier poplulation? Wasn't Greenland actually green in the not too distant past? Wasn't much of North America once covered in glaciers? Isn't there evidence that Antarctica once was dry land? And yet, here we are, alive and mostly well. 3) Could it be possible that "Climate Change" is caused by the fact that (wait for it, this is incredibly insightful) the CLIMATE CHANGES?

Gotta love how the Global Warming Priest comes flying out of the woodwork to defend the indefensible. The fact that his brethren were CAUGHT red-handed faking their research makes no dent in his dogma. He's a True Believer.

What's odd is, this is hardly the first time they've been caught gaming their research. This isn't even the first time THIS YEAR they've been caught. Hell, it's not even the first time in the last six months. They keep getting caught and the media keeps covering up the story.

Why? Well, it's sure not because the Earth really is warmer. That's why these Global Warming Priests had to change the name of the thing. You can't call something Global Warming when there's no warming, or people will laugh at you. In fact, people were laughing, so they had to change the name when the Earth stubbornly refused to warm up. Now it's called Climate Change, which they hope will be the catch-all term they can use JUST IN CASE the Earth actually turns out to be cooling.

Because they don't have the faintest idea what they're talking about, and they know it. It's quite possible the Earth could be cooling -- just as likely as warming -- and they know that too. That's why they changed the name to something that accommodates that possibility.

Ten years ago, guys like Mister Haughty Glaciologist told us that BY TODAY the Earth would be 3-4 degrees warmer, and this would be a huge problem. Well, it's today now, and that hasn't happened. In fact, the Earth (as these Global Warming Fraudmeisters were desperately trying to hide) has actually cooled slightly during the time when it was supposed to be warming. AlGore famously said that the lack of warming is actually further proof of Global Warming, and that Global Warming is just taking a little rest. It's tired. Not even Newsweek was dumb enough to trumpet THAT headline.

Mister Glaciologist tries to pretend the "scientists" were merely substituting known data for uncertain data, but that's not even the issue under investigation. What they were caught doing was taking HUNDREDS of core samples, combing through them for anomalous data that supported their pet theory, and then publishing that data as though it represented ALL the cores. They found core samples from THREE TREES that contained data they wanted. They discarded the data from HUNDREDS of other samples because it was not convenient.

That's not science. That's fraud.

This is the biggest story to hit the scientific community in DECADES. This is fraud on a massive scale, deliberate, calculated fraud that apparently affected scores of "climate scientists" to such a degree that they literally dismantled the peer-review process. They totally abandoned the Scientific Method.

This is the result many scientists warned us about decades ago as the likely danger of letting politics get its hands on the machinery of Science. When governments started pouring billions of dollars into Global Warming research, the scientists' metric changed from "searching for the truth, wherever it leads" to "protecting our grant money." VOILA!

If this methodology is not punished SEVERELY, it will spread to other fields, wherever government entangles itself in the funding. We're already seeing astonishing pronouncements from government "medical bureaus" peeling back recommendations the American Cancer Society spent decades educating the public about. Suddenly, the metric is not "save lives." The new metric is "save money." So we have edicts that "it's more cost effective to delay mammograms until women are in the 50s." That's stunning.

And it's the same problem that currently infests the field of climate research. Money is corrupting the integrity of scientific endeavors. And the most corrupt are the ones defending the fraud.

The scariest parts are:the peer review process may have been totally corrupted, and 2)MSM's ignoring this. It would be nice to look back at the articles on the Pentagon papers and see if people who believed them were labeled"skeptics" etc. If I recall the Washington Post and New York times loved the people who leaked these. Comparing their words in columns might be quite interesting. They also need investigating

Robert should check NASA's recent research. They show that the major influnce on the warming in the Arctic since 1976 is "aerosols", not CO2. That's the problem, If we pitch all our money on carbon taxes we won't have any left to fix the real problem. We know aerosols (SOx. NOx, particulates etc.) are killing our citizens. These must be mitigated before chasing th carbon ghost. That will help the Artic and our citizens

Ah yes we do have Global warming! It's called June here in the Northern hemisphere and December in Australia! We also have global cooling(just reverse the months above). There is climate change all around us but we certainly shouldn't run around saying that "the sky is falling" like the litle chicken of fairy tale fame.

First, evolution requires change. When people complain about climate change, what exactly is the problem? Change is inevitable. Which year from the past represents what the climate is supposed to be? Should we make an effort to return to that time? How did the people in charge decide which point in the evolutionary process is the target?

And then there is this inconvenient truth

http://www.iceagenow.com/List_of_Expanding_Glaciers.htm

Mik