Is AGW collapsing?

The internet is ablaze with the story of Phil Jones, the former head of CRU, stating that:

"He also agreed that there had been two periods which experienced similar warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could be explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could not.

He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no ‘statistically significant’ warming, although he argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend.

And he said that the debate over whether the world could have been even warmer than now during the medieval period, when there is evidence of high temperatures in northern countries, was far from settled."


Read more about this at : http://web.me.com/sinfonia1/Clamour_Of_The_Times/Clamour_Of_The_Times/Entries/2010/2/13_A_Most_Important_Interview.html


This is significant. When a proponent of AGW admits what Jones has admitted, it calls into question the science of AGW. If it is not warming now, yet CO2 is still increasing, you have to ask the question "why?'' If the hockey stick is does not really exist, then we've had times when temperature was warmer than today, without disaster you have to ask the question, "why should we change the way we live?"

Add to this the multitude of scandals from the IPCC and what appears to be a warming bias by the GISS in global temperatures and you have the perfect storm.

I'm seeing movement from the proponents of AGW. They have stepped back and are starting to argue we need to do what they wanted to force us to do because of AGW, but now it is because of peak oil, too much dependence on the middle east, etc. Expect to hear more and more about "green jobs," and how it will solve the economic problems and be good for our national security.