European regulators have opened an investigation into whether Google unfairly manipulates its search results to boost its own products, and whether its advertising network is rigged to drive up prices.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/may/11/google-advertising-system-under-scrutiny

Well, we knew they had the technology, didn't we? This is what they have been doing to skew the results returned by a search for e.g. climate change. Now it appears that someone has cottoned on to the fact that the technology was actually developed to rig the advertising market and drive up prices.

The Register has covered that press release from the IPCC in Justins link

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/05/10/ipcc_srren_pre_release/

"IPCC report: Renewables can never meet energy demand, Unless most people die or remain miserably poor"

Which about covers it ;¬)

Australian climate scientists get rapped (video)

Warning - content may offend

WUWT has a great report from New Zeland. Their High Court has ruled that Green Peace is too political to qualify as a charity. Several commenters have suggested that suggested that GP register as a religion.

business.scoop.co.nz/2011/05/09/greenpeace-too-political-to-register-as-charity-nz-court

Justin Ert ;-)

Thanks for the link. I didn't know about this one.

Usual renewables advocacy. 80% of global energy supply from renewables, eh?

It never ceases to amaze me that organisations seeking credibility (eg IPCC) lend their imprimatur to b*ll*cks like this.

Mind you, it is WG3...

TT, seems the guardian is making the more idiotic of its global warming articles commentless, the one of buckeling rails and WiFi deserts was also commentless, but the same subject in the Telegraph allowed comments and they were 100% saying the report was rubbish.

@breath of fresh air

Pity that Graun article on La Nina isn't commentable. It's got a quote from a "weather expert" saying "It used to occur once every five to six years, but it is increasingly frequent and severe due to global warming."

However, if you look at NOAA's La Nina page, that doesn't seem to be borne out by the data.

Has this been covered anywhere?
http://srren.ipcc-wg3.de/
The IPCC have a Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation. Choice cuts include:
"Close to 80 percent of the world’s energy supply COULD be met by renewables by mid-century if backed by the right enabling public policies a new report shows"... and:
"...a cut of around a third in greenhouse gas emissions from business-as-usual projections, COULD assist in keeping concentrations of greenhouse gases at 450 parts per million."... And:
"This COULD contribute towards a goal of holding the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius...".
There is a nice SPM and a press release, but I guess the report itself comes later.

La Nina causes floods, but it also made worse by Global Warming !!!!!

I thought La nina was a cooling event, as usual my engineering logic is suspect in the eyes of post normal science ;)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/10/heavy-rains-flooding-colombia

A MUST listen....
BBC - More or Less
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b010xykh

BBC reporter: If you can't prove that there are [Environment refugees], we should not be making the statement.. we can't prove it

response: Quote of the week? -

'You can't prove that smoking cause cancer, Science is never ever completely final, Science is always a bit iffy'

'a bit iffy' !!!!

from Norman Myers, when challenged that the 50 million refugees was now shown to be wrong.