Amazing Science of Global Warming Politics


If you abandon the scientific method, introduce the subjective element into scientific practice, apply your culture and rely on instinct then perhaps – for you – AGW (human-induced global warming) really exists…

It wouldn’t be very scientific to claim humanity is causing the present global cooling trend. The Western mania about global warming also is not ‘scientific.’ Claims that there is a consensus of opinion among scientists about the hypothesis that climate change is human-induced is genuine snake oil: humanity’s impact is local not global, to wit:

The globe has many serious environmental problems. Most of these problems are regional or local in nature, not global. Forced global reductions in human-produced greenhouse gases will not offer much benefit for the globe’s serious regional and local environmental problems. We should, of course, make all reasonable reductions in greenhouse gases to the extent that we do not pay too high an economic price. We need a prosperous economy to have sufficient resources to further adapt and expand energy production. ~Wm Gray

Saying humanity has caused global warming is a p0litical statement: the latest Gallup poll shows that global warming believers are mostly Democrats. While not scientific it is good politics to defame scientists like William Gray who are skeptical of human-induced global warming (the AGW hypothesis) and call them, deniers.

The attacks were ferocious and nasty, which has become a measure of proximity to the truth. ~Dr. Tim Ball

The Left’s political propaganda campaign against deniers, skeptics and unbelievers of AGW has been more than intellectually dishonest. To re-label fear of global warming to fear if ‘climate change’ was deceptive but it also was ineffective: as a political means to raise taxes and control the masses it has been a social engineering failure because everyone knows climate changes whether or not Eurocommunists approve.

Is it really any wonder an insider at CRU (the Climate Research Center) back in 2009 decided to blow the whistle on the global warming alarmists? The CRUgate whistleblower obviously did not feel he was working with real scientists. Honest scientists don’t use fudge-factors to generate politically-correct results that are scientifically baseless.  (See e.g., The Amazing Story Behind The Global Warming Scam Jan 29, 2009)

…one ugly manifestation of absolute certainty in near-theological movements is their approach to dissidents. Dissidents in these absolutist groups are outlawed, condescended to, pressured, bullied, lied about, trashed, slandered, and distorted out of any recognition. (See, : To exact vengeance on individuals whose views you disagree with is dogmatism.)

Can we trust a system that awards PhDs to those who believe their mathematical climate models are reliable providers of accurate, global temperature information 50 to 100 years into the future? Sure, sure it was innovative of Michael Mann to create ‘hockey sticks’ out of white noise but it wasn’t hard. People like Al Gore and the climatists of Western academia have only proven they have no shame.

Ten years ago I simply parroted what the IPCC told us. One day I started checking the facts and data – first I started with a sense of doubt but then I became outraged when I discovered that much of what the IPCC and the media were telling us was sheer nonsense and was not even supported by any scientific facts and measurements. To this day I still feel shame that as a scientist I made presentations of their science without first checking it. ~Klaus Eckert Puls

CO2 was given a bad rap, like coffee, alcohol, chocolate. People know better — remember when the food Nazis said eggs were bad for you? Global warming is the new cholesterol! The time has come for the people to embrace pragmatism and admit humanity needs less government-funded AGW research and a lot more energy.

A reconsideration of what equitable energy access means for human development and the environment is needed. As this paper demonstrates, a massive expansion of energy systems, primarily carried out in the rapidly urbanizing global South, in combination with the rapid acceleration of clean energy innovation, is a more pragmatic, just, and morally acceptable framework for thinking about energy access. The time has come to embrace a high-energy planet. (See, Our High Energy Planet — A Climate Pragmatism Project)

To all the religious fervor of global warming alarmists, add Leftist politics and a pinch of government science and you have the makings of a not so benign despotism.


Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Proof of Global Warming… Alas

The Wall

Chicago Just Had Its Coldest Winter In History. Here’s Proof of global warming! Alas, it is getting easier to see what Western academia’s global warming alarmists are up to but, what does it teach the children, that guessing is okay?

Take this climate matter everybody is thinking about. They all talk, they pass laws, they do things, as if they knew what was happening. I don’t think anybody really knows what’s happening. They just guess. And a whole group of them meet together and encourage each other’s guesses. ~James Lovelock

It seems to me a lot of time was devoted in the past to drawing a big distinction between ‘weather’ and ‘climate’ (i.e., decades of weather). It is that difference that climatologists claim excuses the lack of forecasting capability of GCMs –e.g., these models are climate forecasts not weather forecasts (maybe not in just 20 or 30 years but our GCMs will be proved right in 50 or 100 years, just trust us, trust the government, we’re scientists and we’re here to save the world).

But, that was the old message. Now, it’s the ‘weather’ that we should worry about because today’s worrisome ‘weather’ will be reflected in tomorrow’s global warming. We no longer need to wait for 50 years to see if government scientists’ predictions of calamitous climate change are correct: we only need to look at current weather conditions –i.e., bad weather means dire warnings of government climatists are spot on proof of global warming.

It’s a con job.  You know Western academia doesn’t care: keeping the argument going long enough as if the fate of the Earth hangs in the balance – just keep the funding rolling until we retire on our fat pensions – that’s all they really care about.

… accounts of brainwashing by activists masquerading as teachers in our primary and secondary schools are legion. ~Tony Thomas

That Western academia was so successful in pulling off a hoax with scare tactics is amazing but also revealing and scary. To realize just how far they are willing to go for self-serving and ideological purposes, to perpetuate a belief in their climate forecasting skills and the worldly horrors of every description that lie ahead if they are ignored – using unverifiable models that see generations into the future — has been like a cold knife in the hot back of society.

But an environmental movement had been established and its funding and very existence depended on having a continuing crisis issue… So the concept of uncontrollable atmospheric warming from the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels became the cornerstone issue of the environmental movement. ~John Coleman, The Amazing Story… 

Imagine how sensitive — how discriminating — a climate-forecaster’s model must be to correlate an increase in atmospheric CO2 around the globe — measured in ppm — with an increase in the frequency of intense Atlantic Hurricanes today and a fallen world tomorrow. I can imagine it. But, who could believe it. The global warming, disastrous climate change believers are the same people who said, you can keep your doctor, and who claimed last Tuesday that, 7.1 million people have enrolled in federal or state exchanges for health care coverage.

People in most fields outside of it [economics] do not have problems eliminating extreme values from their sample, when the difference in payoff between outcomes is not significant, which is generally the case in education and medicine…

 A casual weather forecaster does the same with extreme temperatures — an unusual occurrence might be deemed to skew the overall result (though we will see that this may turn out to be a mistake when it comes to forecasting future properties of the ice cap). So people in finance borrow the technique and, ignore infrequent events, not noticing that the effect of a rare event can bankrupt a company.

Many scientists in the physical world are also subject to such foolishness, misreading statistics. One flagrant example is in the global-warming debate. Many scientists failed to notice it in its early stages as they removed from their sample the spikes in temperature, under the belief that these were not likely to recur. It may be a good idea to take out the extremes when computing the average temperatures for vacation scheduling. But it does not work when we study the physical properties of the weather — particularly when one cares about a cumulative effect. These scientists initially ignored the fact that these spikes, although rare, had the effect of adding disproportionately to the cumulative melting of the ice cap. Just as in finance, an event, although rare, that brings large consequences cannot just be ignored. ~Nassim Nicholas Taleb, Fooled by Randomness (2004)

Initially we were asked to support the findings of a failed government-education complex to save the world from global warming caused by Americans and all who engage in the business of living by participating in the evil free enterprise economy. Claims of looming catastrophe where everywhere. But as the loony science of climate forecasting matured the actual threat to us all has been refined: now we’re being asked to continue funding the UN-IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and climate-forecasting in Western universities to prevent worser weather.

Why does the Left hamstring homegrown productivity and self-sufficiency at every turn and purposefully expose the economy to the artificial shortages and vagaries in the prices of conflict minerals? The answer is pretty simple: they are Marxists and want to see Americanism destroyed. The Left and the right can never have a reasoned discussion about AGW theory because the Left’s infatuation with global warming has nothing to do with science; for the Left it’s all about its value as a tool for social change. Economist Richard Tol went so far as to have his name removed from a chapter (of which he was lead author) from the latest IPCC report. “In the SPM [Summary for Policymakers], and much more largely in the media, we see all these scare stories,” Tol says. “We’re all going to die, the four horsemen of the apocalypse.”

Since the start of the crisis in the eurozone, the income of the average Greek has fallen more than 20 percent. Climate change is not, then, the biggest problem facing humankind. It is not even its biggest environmental problem… Many more people die in unusually cold winters than in unusually hot summers. ~Richard Tol (Bogus prophecies of doom will not fix the climate, Financial Times)

It is not the weather or future climate that is worrisome. It is the widespread impact today of a dysfunctional government-education system that is consequential. Leftist pandering is marching society off of the European Union’s (EU’s) bridge to nowhere. Question: IF THE EU WERE A PART of the United States of America, would it belong to the richest or the poorest group of states? That simple question was asked and answered by EU economists years ago: Luxembourg aside (which is as rich as Washington DC where  Leftist and liberal Utopian politicians and government bureaucrats pay themselves with your money to decide how you will live), the EU would fall among the bottom five states.

If you want to know if your child is getting a proper education, ask the teachers in the local school if the coldest winter in Chicago history is proof of global warming. Where do you move when they say, Yes! Their ‘yes’ vote means that educators in your school believe in the subjective element over the objective — that the role of instinct trumps scientific practice. Their ‘yes’ vote means science is dead because, as Dr. Roger A. Pielke, Sr., reminds us, Science needs to advance by following the scientific method. This needs to be independent of culture or any other external influence.

Alas, the global warming alarmists have already used up all of the crazy ideas, as Dr. Roy Spencer reminds us. As far as they are concerned, global warming causes everything. Alas, atmospheric physics is not just a matter of opinion arrived at by government scientists and Leftist politicians. Nature has a say and a lack of warming is not proof of warming no matter how much it serves the interests of Western academia and liberal media to believe otherwise.

The best we can do– the best science can do– is make sure that at least, we get to choose among competing biases. ~Dr Peter Watts

(Updated, 11-April-2014)

Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Global Warming and Catastrophic Deluge Science

Life on Water Earth

Global temperatures have been very stable because natural mechanisms govern the climate on our water world. Everything else said about an average temperature of our Earth is superstitious flapdoodle — a myth — masquerading as science.

Why has Earth’s temperature stayed so stable? Global temperature has stayed within a narrow band for at least the last half billion years. During that time the planet has seen meteor strikes, and millennia long widespread volcanic eruptions, and huge forest fires, and oceans disappearing as continents were lifted out of the sea, and huge changes in the land cover, and all manner of good, bad, and ugly events. Each of these events had a large effect on the forcings. Despite all of that, despite all of the variation in the forcings and the changes in the losses during all of that geological time, the earth’s temperature hasn’t moved around much at all. A few percent. And the variation over the last 10,000 years has been less than ±1%. For a system as complex as the climate, this is amazing stability. ~Willis Eschenbach

Some continue to worship Penn State teacher Michael Mann’s ‘hockey stick’ – the graph put forward by Al Gore and the UN-IPCC – that purports to show an unusually high increase in global temperatures during the last half century. Some will believe anything especially if it portrays America in a bad light. Nevertheless, the hockey stick is a proven scientific fraud.

“The increase in temperature between 1910 and 1940 was virtually identical to the increase between 1970 and 2000. Yet the IPCC does not attribute the increase from 1910–1942 to human influence,” says Greenpeace founder and Leftist environmental heretic Dr. Patrick Moore who then asks, “does the IPCC believe that a virtually identical increase in temperature after 1950 is caused mainly by human influence, when it has no explanation for nearly identical increase from 1910 to 1940?”

Hans von Storch, Question: What is the subjective element in scientific practice? Does culture matter? What is the role of instinct?

Roger A. Pielke, Sr., Reply: Science needs to advance by following the scientific method. This needs to be independent of culture or any other external influence.

(Interview, AGU Newsletter, September 5, 2010)

Those who continue to believe in hockey stick science deserve the seriousness we’d give to those who believe global warming is caused by aliens. And, all who hold public positions of trust and responsibility or who use public money to continue pushing hockey stick science on the people should be held accountable.

And, like a lucrative football program with errant coaching staff, they will whitewash their own scandals… Penn State proved this by responding to the scandal in its football program and Michael Mann’s troubles in almost identical fashion… They want the money. They do not want the strings, like transparency and accountability. (Christopher Horner, The Liberal War on Transparency: Confessions…)

The long handle of the hockey stick means that the Earth’s climate was flat until the later half of the 20th century. How can that be? What happened to the Medieval Warm Period (MWP), the Little Ice Age (LIA) and where are PDOs (Pacific Decadal Oscillations) and cycles like El Niño and La Niña?

The ersatz Phlogistonians of climate change science are hiding the MWP, LIA, historical climate patterns and even the collapse of global warming hysteria that was ushered in by a long global warming hiatus and the current global cooling trend. Western teachers of global warming alarmism still refuse to admit MBH98/99/08 (aka, the ‘hockey stick’ graph) is a proven fraud. Like modern day witchdoctors these weathered academics continue to pretend their climate models (GCMs), meticulously tuned to foretell doom, are still valid. It is as if climatologists claimed they succeeded in capturing the future in a bottle. Climatologists call non-believers, deniers; far worse, however, climatologists are denying the obvious.

What we can learn from this geologic climate changes is that the past is indeed the key to the future. In 1999, the year after the warmest year of recent times, I projected the climate pattern from the past century and past 500 years into the future and predicted that we would be due for 25-30 years of global cooling beginning about 2000. The PDO changed from its warm to cool mode in 1999 and since then we have had global cooling, quite moderate to flat (interrupted by two warm El Ninos) and intensifying since 2007. ~Dr. Don Easterbrook

It is inarguable that most of the rise in the Earth’s temperature since the LIA has occurred with no assistance whatsoever from humanity. Such global warming is at the least evidence of a ‘natural component’ that must also exist in the last half of the 20th century. The climatists of global warming alarmism have difficulty admitting the obvious because such warming due to natural causes – about 0.5°C /100 years – is sufficient to explain all of the global warming we see over the last 200 years.

Given the natural component of global warming, there is no room left for any other causal factors. No further explanations are necessary so hysterical ravings about a warming catastrophe is ludicrous (and exposed as hoax and a scare tactic). We already can estimate the temperature 100 years from now—e.g., 0.5°C warmer than it is today (± 0.2°C depending on the effects of multi-decadal oscillations). And, our estimate will probably be pretty close if the Earth does not instead descend into an ice age that may in fact be overdue and very likely inevitable, someday. The weather varies and climate change is natural and unavoidable.

During the past century, five of these climate fluctuations can be tied to glacial oscillations, oceanic temperature changes, atmospheric temperature changes, and solar variation… The older fluctuations can be linked to… variation in cosmogenic radiation. Historic climatic and oceanic temperature fluctuations are associated with solar variations. The excellent correlation of glacial, climatic, oceanic, and solar variation strongly suggests cause and effect relationships. Past patterns of these variations allow projection into the future. ~Dr. Don Easterbrook

If not for ideological reasons – i.e., Left vs. right politics – why would government scientists purposefully reject observational evidence, like the obvious role of the Sun, and instead adopt climate change beliefs based solely upon unverifiable models?

Solar activity has always varied. Around the year 1000, we had a period of very high solar activity, which coincided with the Medieval Warm Period. It was a time when frosts in May were almost unknown – a matter of great importance for a good harvest. Vikings settled in Greenland and explored the coast of North America. On the whole it was a good time. For example, China’s population doubled in this period.

But after about 1300 solar activity declined and the world began to get colder. It was the beginning of the episode we now call the Little Ice Age. In this cold time, all the Viking settlements in Greenland disappeared. Sweden surprised Denmark by marching across the ice, and in London the Thames froze repeatedly. But more serious were the long periods of crop failures, which resulted in poorly nourished populations, reduced in Europe by about 30 per cent because of disease and hunger.

It’s important to realize that the Little Ice Age was a global event. It ended in the late 19th Century and was followed by increasing solar activity. Over the past 50 years solar activity has been at its highest since the medieval warmth of 1000 years ago. But now it appears that the Sun has changed again, and is returning towards what solar scientists call a “grand minimum” such as we saw in the Little Ice Age.

The match between solar activity and climate through the ages is sometimes explained away as coincidence. Yet it turns out that, almost no matter when you look and not just in the last 1000 years, there is a link. Solar activity has repeatedly fluctuated between high and low during the past 10,000 years. In fact the Sun spent about 17 per cent of those 10,000 years in a sleeping mode, with a cooling Earth the result…

That the Sun might now fall asleep in a deep minimum was suggested by solar scientists at a meeting in Kiruna in Sweden two years ago. So when Nigel Calder and I updated our book The Chilling Stars, we wrote a little provocatively that, we are advising our friends to enjoy global warming while it lasts.

In fact global warming has stopped and a cooling is beginning. Mojib Latif from the University of Kiel argued at the recent UN World Climate Conference in Geneva that the cooling may continue through the next 10 to 20 years. His explanation was a natural change in the North Atlantic circulation, not in solar activity. But no matter how you interpret them, natural variations in climate are making a comeback… (While the sun sleeps, Translation approved by Henrik Svensmark)

What does the best evidence now tell us? That man-made global warming is a mere hypothesis that has been inflated by both exaggeration and downright malfeasance, fueled by the awarding of fat grants and salaries to any scientist who’ll produce the ‘right’ results. ~Matt Patterson, NY Post, 03-Sep-2010

Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Is Global Warming for the Birds?

For the birds~2

The Left couldn’t care less about global warming. AGW, the theory that humanity is causing global warming, is nothing more than a political tactic.

 Other than rooting for America’s downfall, staying in power is pretty much the only strategy they have. John de Graaf (We can’t grow on) epitomizes the mental miasma of the Left–e.g., in other words: IT CAN’T BE DONE. Period. This is the belief that underlies everything the Left and the liberal Utopians (management of decline not maximization of opportunity) believe and feel: a stunted logic spoon-fed to children who become too fearful to change their soiled diapers.

And, it explains global warming alarmism, the Left’s anti-Americanism: their antipathy toward the idea of individual exceptionalism.  The Left believes everything has been said; that every good idea has been had and patented. Every flavor has been tasted. Every song written, played and sung. There’s nothing new to be thought.

The Left  wants it to be true that there is nothing new under the sun. It’s this belief that motivates their ill will toward everything that everyone else wants to do: China can’t have cars; Africa cannot be free; Capitalism can’t work; there are too many people in the world — economic growth cannot keep up — and, so many people simply must die and those that survive must be more miserable than preceding generations.

To acquire and maintain political power the Left demands that the people should have free health care, free education, and more leisure time. The Left believes the people are entitled to these things but someone else must pay for them. Building material things, however — like more Hoover Dams or nuclear power plants — must stop.

The underlying beliefs of the Leftists are a confession of inner powerlessness, feelings of worthlessness, self-defeat. They will make the world pay for their poverty of spirit and it is that kind of poverty that explains why the Left denies faith and hope and feels threatened by the successes of others. It’s why the Western academics of AGW global warming alarmism create models of a world comprised only of black carbon; models that even deny the Sun and blame people for engaging in the business of living.

There is so much we humans can never know. And, it hurts so much to pretend we know more than we do. The world has warmed and cooled many times before and we should learn from that. Looking at the Minoan, the Roman and Medieval warming periods we see the birth of new religions that replaced other religions whose beginnings were more closely associated with periods of glaciation. Giving flight to our minds’ eyes we can almost feel the birth of these new metaphysical ‘truths’ corresponding to epochal shifts of populations during these periods of changing climate as travelers crossed the frozen Arctic at one time, and in another time Vikings plundered Paris and founded colonies in Greenland and perhaps even in Canada.

What other raw cause and effect relationships are too close for us to see? Can we imagine that in addition to times of relative material plenty, such as the current interglacial warming period has afforded to Western Civilization, that the current warming period also has given birth to the new religion of AGW global warming alarmism and the philosophy that humanity is a big mistake because the Earth is simply too small?

Telescoping things, global warming is far better for the human race by all objective indicators compared to life in the Little Ice Age or during the Maunder and Dalton minimums. Even so, perhaps a life of relative plenty – economic success — together with the vagaries of human nature and the frailty of the mass superstition and the intellect of the consensus — sows the seeds of our eventual moral decline. The relative freedom from want that modern society affords comes with a loss of perspective. Take for example the ‘science’ of Michael Mann that passes for erudition in the realm of Western academia that has people like Al Gore as a patron saint. Who could be impressed with such examples?

The insanity of global warming alarmism may simply be a symptom of moral decline and eventual death of a culture and a society, brought about by the self-defeating nihilism of the new religion and philosophy that creates new truths that devalue the old teachings and founding principles and laugh at the once enduring traditions that united people. We don’t know where or how it will all end. Who years ago would have predicted the devaluation of the perceived value of procreation itself together with the aborting of fetuses and fertilization of embryos by doctors and children raised by strangers in government dropout factories.

In a crazy sort of quixotic way, global warming may in fact signal the end of something. Does it signal the end of Western civilization? The world is always changing. We are changing with it. Is moral decline the reason the West is dying? Is it the only reason?

Climate is governed by millions of factors, from the flip of a butterfly’s wing, through volcanic eruptions, the oceans and natural greenhouse gases, to solar activity and meteors. (Philip Stott)

Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Global Warming Cracked Out


Humanity put climate change in a box!
If not for lack of warming we’d be cooling.

This does not look like the catastrophic climate change that wealthy Leftist democrat politicians like Al Gore and John Kerry warned us about? Even the APS (American Physical Society) is beginning to ask questions–e.g., While the Global Mean Surface Temperature (GMST) rose strongly from 1980-98, it has shown no significant rise for the past 15 years…

If feedbacks are powerful and positive, the alarmist case is strong. If feedbacks are weak or negative, there is no basis for any climate scare or for trillions of dollars to be spent on curbing CO2 emissions. ~Tony Thomas, Quadrant Online

The APS would like to know: To what would you attribute the stasis? What’s with the hiatus? The GMST is just standing still. Now is the time for the government climatists of global warming alarmism to answer the APS’ big question: What are the implications of this statis for confidence in the models and their projections?

Are we in a state of perpetual climate equilibrium? If not for humanity’s miniscule contribution to Earth’s atmosphere would winters in the northern hemisphere be even colder? Did humanity cause a changeless climate with its CO2? Is the Earth really flat afterall? Is this zero-trend normal? Did we put climate in a box? Instead of status quo, would it – should it be – colder than hell right now?

This is the mildest catastrophe ever. What a mellow devastation: global warming is zip, zilch, nada! Isn’t it about time the Left admits Paul Ehrlich (The Population Bomb, 1968) and John Holdren (the government’s recently retired global warming science Czar) have been dead wrong about most everything? “We’ve already had too much economic growth in the US,” Ehrlich claimed. “Economic growth in rich countries like ours is the disease, not the cure.” The Left still believes this.

In the first sentence of The Population Bomb, Ehrlich wrote, as follows: “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970′s and 1980′s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.” Obviously, Ehrlich was wrong: the latest big problem du jour is that kids are too fat.

What else was ecologist Ehrlich wrong about? How about his, Perspective on Nuclear Power: “Giving society cheap, abundant energy … would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.” Oh no he di’int say that! But, he did and many on the Left agree with him still.

Ehrlich’s prediction of, the nutritional disaster, that to him seemed, likely to overtake humanity in the 1970s (or, at the latest, the  1980s), not only did not happen, today we’re absurdly turning corn into ethanol. At about the time Ehrlich’s predictions of doom were failing to materialize, the Left then gave wings to the vast tragedy of global warming! Amazingly, the Left’s solution to global warming really would create a tragic situation that rivals Ehrlich’s dire warnings–e.g., that could lead to a billion or more  people starving to death, by making energy more expensive for those in the third world and developing countries.

Western academia has become the Vladimir Putin of science. They believe if us folks only knew and were capable of understanding climate change as they do we’d all be just as alarmed; but, since we don’t get it, academia will take it upon themselves to simply tell us what we must think… for our own good.

It is a powerful convergence of interests among a very large number of elites, including politicians who want to make it seem as though they’re saving the world, environmentalists who want to raise money and get control over very large issues like our entire energy policy, media, for sensationalism, Universities and professors for grants… It is a kind of nasty combination of extreme political ideology and a religious cult all rolled into one, and it’s taken over way too much of our thought process and way too much of our priorities. ~Patrick Moore (Senate Testimony, 2-25-2014)

Despite his Malthusian warnings and call for big government programs, “hundreds of millions of people” did not die of famine as Paul Ehrlich predicted. Burt Rutan reminds us that Erhrlich’s friend, John Holdren, calculated in 1980 that famines due to climate change could leave a billion people dead by 2020. He championed “population control measures,” and believed 280 million Americans would likely be “too many.” Rutan says these Malthusians forget that, with bodies come minds, minds that can innovate, invent, find ways to farm energy, find substitutes for scarce resources and find new ways to feed people.

 “The next scare seems to be running out of water, a silly scare when you look at a photo of our planet.” ~Burt Rutan

Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Nature Overshadows Global Warming Science


Reality is hell when you are looking for something else. Western civilization is now the leader in coming up with crazy ideas that scientists initially believe are totally valid; but, they’re not. We’ve seen this happen before: “It was as if nature gave me this great result and then tried to take it back.” See, Jonah Lehrer

The important question now is, what happens to climate change science when global warming disappears? Is AGW theory (the theory that humanity causes global warming) true or not? After much study, has science discovered the irrelevancy of AGW theory?

It’s as if our facts were losing their truth: claims that have been enshrined in textbooks are suddenly unprovable. ~Jonah Lehrer

Anti-scientific behavior didn’t begin with the AGW alarmist weather cult but they have made it impossible to separate church and science from any legitimate scientific discussion about climate. Even the language has been corrupted. Climate Change?

There are big differences between making or being the news and just reporting it. Who is an honest broker nowadays? There’s no integrity, no honor, no respect for the truth anywhere and that gives rise to what what we now have: Leftist government-sponsored fear and propaganda for ideological purposes, the scientific method be damned.

The Left also must accept responsibility for the death of millions. They have turned  their collective and consensual backs on the humanitarian issue of our time!

[E]nvironmentalists should recognize the shale gas revolution as beneficial to society – and lend their full support to helping it advance. ~Richard and Elizabeth Muller

The concern Western academia’s global warming alarmists have for the whole world certainly sounds awesome. Such concern is however substantially diminished by their belief that the rest of humanity just doesn’t belong – that, humanity is a big mistake.

For science, the biggest problem is not that from the get-go the findings of research, like Michael Mann’s ‘hockey stick,’ failed the test of replication. That is a failure at the most basic level of the scientific method but it’s worse that Mann knew before anyone that his work could never be replicated and did all he could do to hide how bad his research was. When access to Mann’s model was finally obtained, simply running white noise through it produced a ‘hockey stick.’ So from the beginning the global warming house of cards was never built on the best of good intentions. It was built on fraud and deceit.

Aside from having a financial interest in putting out research useful to government that shows AGW theory is real, the climatists of Western academia want so badly to believe the theory is true that for them, reality no longer matters. Now they say Mann’s hockey stick is unimportant to AGW argument. How many tests must AGW theory fail before the common knowledge about it changes from the theory being considered ‘true’ to knowing it’s utterly false?

There’s so much uncertainty involved in the business of estimating the average temperature of the globe in 30-50 years. Initially, Michael Mann was uncertain the MWP (Medieval Warm Period) and LIA (Little Ice Age) ever existed. There is uncertainty even now about the logarithmic effect that puts a lid on CO2′s contribution to global warming (“The relationship between temperature and CO2,” according to Dr. Timothy Ball, “is like painting a window black to block sunlight. The first coat blocks most of the light. Second and third coats reduce very little more. Current CO2 levels are like the first coat of black paint.”); and, Mann is suing reporter Mark Steyn and fellow academic Tim Ball for having the temerity to question his scientific integrity. And now — because global warming has stopped — there is considerable uncertainty about how much climate change is actually due to natural causes, like changes in solar activity and the negative feedbacks of water vapor and clouds. How large do uncertainties have to be to make our estimates worthless?

Our society is still wasting money on producing more and more filing cabinets full of worthless global warming research because AGW theory seems like a true idea to Leftists. It only makes sense to Leftists that human activity is causing global warming, and that global warming is a problem, and that capitalism cannot deal with it and is in fact exacerbating the problem. We’re still wasting money on global warming because Leftists are large and in charge and not because AGW theory has any scientific validity: Leftists simply choose to believe AGW theory is real–it is as simple as that! Global warming has become the red headed stepchild of reason: it is social and political science masquerading as the science of climatology.

Nature is reality. The hiatus is a triumph of reality over ignorance. Global warming alarmists have become irrelevant because we no longer need their models to know the real truth: the numbers speak for themselves. For a brief moment Western academia nearly succeeded in driving the price of energy beyond the reach of humanity in the third world and developing countries but nature snowed on their parade.

Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket. ~Eric Hoffer

Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Evolution of Global Warming Science Hits a Wall

The Paperwork
Does… leave the world a better place than you were born into, work as a moral code? I would say it does not because there is no real guidance there–e.g., does humanity matter in this equation? The banning of DDT cost millions of lives. Making energy more expensive by banning fossil fuel – for the good of the world — exposes the world’s poor to more misery, poverty and death. Evolution doesn’t give extra credit for ideas that only seem to be better than they are.

Coming up with anything individually satisfying that is more than an ephemeral value judgment is hard; and, it’s the hard things that have been puzzled over for 1,000s of years — by many a wise individual — preceded by an ancient societal wisdom into which we all are born. As a result, isn’t morality the product of a grudging endeavor, hammered into form by those facing unimaginably great human travail — from long before the time of writing– that might generally be called, principles of faith to live and die by that inform and guide us?

Is it not the case that these principles are every bit as strong and indispensable to our survival as an “instinct” that informs the living bird and all future birds of a feather to fly South when the time is about right? From that perspective, doesn’t atheology, for example, simply dismiss 1,000s of years of temporal evolution?

Are the living traditions simply to be dismissed by an atheist’s new beliefs or have myriad new and well-suited theories of human conduct always existed, flowing from and just waiting to be realized as the undeniable product of the same mutable, random, cumulative, synergistic chemical reactions and processes that gave rise to our existence? Must all of us moderns accept that morality, principles, ethics, self-awareness and an understanding of our place in the universe are amorally-impelled: the result of interactions and reactions of complex elements, compounds and ultimately biological systems with systems within systems until finally, voilà, it is I, a living being — existing for a brief and insignificant point in time – that only now is finally capable of understanding all faith is illusion?

So if Darwinian evolutionary biology is still a viable scientific theory, is it nevertheless a “harmful truth” in the Straussian sense? Does it necessarily undermine the moral order? Is it necessarily in conflict with religion? [Irving] Kristol thinks so. According to him, it undermines even “the belief that there is such a thing as a moral code.” ~Brian Doherty

Whether by design or chance, life was breathed into Darwinism by philosophers at tables in French cafés, only to live and die in the mean streets of LA. “When we ask about the origin of life,” says Denyse O’Leary, “what question are we trying to answer? Darwin was a materialist; that is, he saw life as made up only of material bodies. He wanted to know how such a body could form, with input only from the laws of nature acting on chance events. In reality, life is mainly information. Our physical lives are not the sum of the chemicals that make up our bodies; they are also the staggering amount of information that governs the operation of the billions of molecular machines that manage all the chemicals. When we die, the chemicals are all still there, but the system of information that holds them together is lost. Perhaps the question we should ask is not how does life form by chance, but what is the source of all the information that life requires? Answering this question won’t be easy, because information is not measured in the same type of units as matter or energy. It is a real quantity but not a material one.”

For unpredictable events with ranges and frequencies that are not completely understood, similar but not equivalent steps, can be taken. It is, for example, possible to maximize average “subjective” returns based on intuitive assessments of the relative frequency of possible events, even when only a subset of the actual possibilities are known. It is also possible to form contingent plans based on the possibilities of which one is aware. However, if the range and connections among events are not completely understood, subjective estimates of probabilities will not be accurate and it will not be possible to have a conditional plan that accounts for every event that may occur. One may pack a sweater and umbrella for a trip to the beach, but have no idea about what to do when the tsunami alarm goes off. Indeed, one may not even understand the meaning of a tsunami siren, or warning announcement in Japanese, even if one hears the siren and warning and knows what a tsunami is. ~Roger D. Congleton

Western academia’s fixation on global warming and climate change introduces us to what life is like in shadow of the Tower of Babel. Statisticians, McShane and Wyner found absolutely no signal whatsoever in the proxy data Michael Mann used to fabricate the apocryphal hockey stick graph that both charged and found all of us guilty of the crime of causing global warming. Moreover, it is a fact that going on 20 years now there has been no global warming despite increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 and the dire predictions of government scientists based on their Global Circulation Models (GCMs). And yet we see the government using public money to fund a search by other scientists (like that of Thorarinsdottir, et al.) for the optimal method of determining whether the ‘fingerprint’ of man still may properly be found within the output of an assortment of these failed GCMs.

Can us moderns still make rational, moral choices when science hits a wall? Probably, if we know at least one thing: A man’s got to know his limitations. Our methodologies  must immediately fail when we start at the outset by erroneously admitting assorted GCMs embody evidence of humanity’s tampering with the global climate without any finding whatsoever concerning the scientific validity of the methodology employed by the supposed experts of single-causation model-making (i.e., models that begin with a scientist’s belief that humanity’s CO2 causes global warming).

The GCMs of the government’s model-makers have demonstrated only their inherent unreliability: the marked differences between model-predictions compared to actual conditions will always be the very most we can ever presently know for sure about anything. The models were wrong! Nature always knows more about everything than we know and that is something we cannot continue to ignore.

A deterministic view
of a probabilistic world
clouds our future.

Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Instantiate Nature of Global Warming

Harsh Blooms

Notice how there is never an end, to what we can dream up, and want to say, about how we feel, about any complex matter? Researching thought processes is like describing what makes something funny. We have objectified nothing if in the end, all our rationalizations cannot be used to enable someone to program a computer to make a decision. Our inability to objectify a problem simply acknowledges the subjectivity we bring to decision-making.

The weights that are given to various facts, beliefs and assumptions will vary from person-to-person and group-to-group. The complexity of the matter increases as we add the social and psychological dynamics of foundational principles like, accountability, personal responsibility and individual liberty until finally, we realize it is impossible to arrive at sensible solutions except with a market-based approach.

The verdict of decision-makers are most trustworthy when people vote with their own dollars. Voting with what you own essentially is voting your own life’s blood because as that is what is invested to earn those dollars. The problem we face in the West today is too many people are voting with the life’s blood of others. We are turning the productive into victims of ritual blood-letting and that is beginning to buckle society at the knees.

We have become victims of instantiate thinking –i.e., a reductionist logic where we accept as our understanding of the whole of something, nothing more that the creation of the mind of someone else, based only on a few snapshots. For example, with respect global warming alarmists we are looking through the blinking eyes of government scientists who in turn have turned the multiple interacting instantiations of an infinitely grander reality ruled by natural causes – comprised of global atmospheric, oceanic and celestial dynamics – into arrays of numbers to make still images that are simple enough to be easily understood and yet have little if any usefulness outside a digital world.

What if Michael Mann – the incestuous mother and father of the ‘hockey stick’ graph (that Al Gore waived in our faces to scare us out of flying around the globe in a private jet… like him) – had really yearned for an accurate mathematical representation of the complex world in which we live? If so, he would not have hidden from public view the source code that he used to produce his ‘hockey stick’ view of the world (that the IPCC also waived in our faces to scare us out of flying around the globe like they do). Mann should have graciously accepted the fact that he had but a bare glimpse of a series of moments upon which something of substance was to be built-up and held out as reality. Mann would then have made his program source code available for others to build-upon.


The “triggering” determination at issue here is at the core of EPA’s current program to restrict hydrocarbon based energy and make it more expensive and less available. The Endangerment Finding and subsequent triggering determination came about when Congress failed to pass President Obama’s proposed “cap and trade” legislation during his first term. As described by the President during his 2008 campaign, that legislation was specifically intended to reduce carbon emissions by forcing a massive increase in the price of energy: “Under my plan . . . electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” Erica Martinson, Uttered in 2008, Still Haunting Obama in 2012, Politico (Apr. 5, 2012, 11: 37 PM), Adding C02 to the stationary source PSD permitting program seeks to accomplish the same result through forcing the massive closure of coal based power plants (a process already well underway) and hindering and delaying the construction and operation of power sources that use the cheapest forms of energy, which are hydrocarbon based energy. And EPA seeks to achieve that result without new legislation, and instead as a supposed interpretation of over 35-year-old legislation never previously thought to cover this subject matter.

(See, Amicus_curiae-EF_SC_Merit_12-1146etseq.tsacScientistsFinal_Final)

Everyone knows global warming is a Left versus right political issue but, it also pits those who care about what happens today — comprised of those who actually must work for a living– with those who make a living simply pretending to care about tomorrow:

Who among us,
other than those who eschew complexity,
will look at the forces that effect Earth’s climate,
– the sun, the moon, the planets and all the stars –
and see only a fingerprint of humanity?

NOTICE: WordPress informed me that based on the numbers, if this blog were a NYC subway train, it would take about 3 trips to carry the many people who have viewed it. And, I am told that some of the most popular posts were written before last year–i.e., an indication that what’s written has staying power!  For example: The Academic Winter of Global Warming Alarmism.

Is it Okay to Get Politics Out of Science?

Or, browse through these when you have the time:
How Close Was America to a Leftist Coup?
Is it Okay to Get Politics Out of Science?
Zeitgeist and the Golden Calf of Global Warming
Economic Growth and the Irish Potato Famine
Fear of Global Warming a Phobia
Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Well-Analyzed Non-Problem of Global Warming

For the Birds

There is a word for when self-righteous proponents are supremely confident about the inevitability of a certain outcome despite all manner of gaps in human understanding, a history of chicanery and mountains of compelling evidence to the contrary: foolish. “How should I put it… I think that you don’t want to use the word incontrovertible unless you know what you are talking about.” ~Richard Lindzen

Global warming or climate change has become a value-driven problem. Even among those who see global warming as a problem, who is taking to the streets saying a global warming disaster is right around the corner? And, what if humanity is only responsible for half of it? How about less than half of it? A third? What if only a fraction of global warming is caused by humanity’s CO2? What if from Earth’s historical record, rather than a tiny change measured in parts per million of a single greenhouse gas, natural variability is solely responsible for our climate?

Who would be blameless in a future determined by an estimate of our guilt arrived at by the expert judgment of nervous little people using computer models? Who else among us can look at the forces that effect Earth’s climate–forces that include the sun, the moon and planets and all the stars–and see only the fingerprint of humanity?

Expert opinion has become a weapon that changes with each expert. It begins with multiple lines of evidence from which emerges an echo of truth. Experts analyze this reflection of reality and look around us for a cause. Even if our techniques are not adequate to make any sense out of what we see, experts will look for what appears to be a plausible explanation. And, shall we all invest our life’s energy in that expert assessment?

Going on 18 years there has been no global warming; and, for the last 20 years the months of December and January have shown a cooling trend in North America. But, Western academia’s GCMs (Global Circulation Models) give us a different picture of the world: a world that is warming due to humanity’s release of CO2 into the atmosphere. So, where’s the beef?

So again, I don’t want the community to come away with the fact that there is this — model is resting on a large amount on mystery meat. They are not. There is mystery meat for sure. But there is a very large amount of process modeling and process observations and backstop data that we can’t incorporate simply because of computational limitations. ~Dr. Bill Collins (APS Climate Change… Workshop)

The models of the global warming alarmist are like Magic 8 balls that only give answers the modelers want to see. Reality doesn’t matter. “Matthew England,” says Ben Pile, “accused them [skeptics of global warming alarmism] of lying about the hiatus [lack of any warming since 1998] as recently as 2012. In the space of less than a year, England changed his mind about the stall in global warming, made it the object of a study, and found a way to explain it. It seems that climate scientists like England lack the cool, rational, and value-free approach necessary to investigate the material world.” (Ben Pile, SpikedThe global warming pause: the dangers of politicising science)

When you politicize science and reality interferes with your propaganda, you must  find a new message, PDQ. For global warming alarmists that means coming up with new theories to explain the absence of global warming for over 17 years despite increasing atmospheric CO2 levels, as follows:

The most popular of these theories [about where the 'missing' heat is hiding out] is that, somehow, the heat that should be appearing at the planet’s surface has instead found its way to the deep ocean. But this hypothesis suffers from three main problems. First, there is very little data – the ocean is vast, and unlike the land and sea surface which can be viewed from space, its depths are especially difficult to monitor. Second, the effect, even if it is real, is so small it may not be practicably measurable at all. Third, there is no clearly understood mechanism by which energy may have been transported through the atmosphere and upper layers of the ocean, undetected, to heat the water beneath. (See, Ben Pile, supra)

I think we know where the heat is hiding: it’s hangin’ out in some sleazy motel off the strip just waitin’ for a packed house of Democrats — like we see in California — and, then global warming authoritarianism will raise its ugly red head, like before. “I have read,” says Dr. Roy Spencer (explaining society’s authoritarianism problem with an over-educated elite of Western tenured academics circling overhead like a colony of gulls pooping on the foolish people who feed them), “that Nazi Germany had more PhDs per capita than any other country… So, as long as they continue to call people like me deniers, I will call them global warming Nazis… Considering the fact that these people are supporting policies that will kill far more people than the Nazis ever did — all in the name of what they consider to be a righteous cause — I think it is very appropriate.”

Its time to increase the integrity of climate research… and truly promoting academic freedom so that scientists are free to pursue research without fear of recriminations from the gatekeepers and consensus police. ~Dr. Judith Curry

Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Noisy Red Hockey Sticks and Climate Change Politics

Future of Global Warming-L



Reports that say that something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don’t know we don’t know. ~Donald Rumsfeld

Finally, we have accurate data – using satellites to measure the temperature of the lower-troposphere — and just then, global warming stopped! Among all the unknowns, we see the shimmering of truth like a jewel beneath the waves –i.e., now there’s something we really do know: there has been 0.00°C of global warming over the last 17.5 years. Do tell… despite increasing atmospheric CO2; and, I think we know the reason why: what goes up must come down.

As it turns out the billion of dollars that Western civilization has funneled to academia to measure, adjust, maintain and explain the mountains of data about the temperatures over the lands and waters of the world has been a big waste of time and money. As it turns out, while Western academics have been busy spreading fears of global warming alarmism, a lazy sun has led to an easily observable 20-year long cooling trend during the December/January periods for all, “9 climate regions in the US.” Like Paul Revere riding through the night to warn the patriots, this cooling trend signaled the coming 17.5 year hiatus in warming around the globe and helps to explain why many scientists outside the West see decades ahead of future global cooling in our future not warming. (See, AGW movement collapsing – cooling December/January now for 20 years!)

Gone are the days when a feckless academic can sift and sieve secret numbers – boiled over with undisclosed computer programs using unverified models — to produce a ‘hockey stick’ graph depicting a scary Gorean future of runaway global warming,  supposedly in sync with an increase in human-caused atmospheric CO2. Mathematically speaking, Western academia’s support of Michael Mann’s hockey stick has been like witchdoctors huddled around a green bubbling brew of magic potion; and, the IPCC’s use of Mann’s work for ideological purposes has made a mockery of science.

As a religious leader Mann perhaps had a great deal of influence over his sycophantic followers. But as a scientist you are not supposed to teach how to produce a flood of hockey stick-shaped graphs by simply feeding white noise into a mathematical model that works like a maniacal global warming doomsday machine stuck in maximum overdrive.

White noise, has equal power density across the entire frequency spectrum, that is, it has constant energy at all frequencies. When this is graphically represented, white noise has a flat power spectral density. In a practical example, white noise is what is used to refer to that steady, even soothing sound produced when tuning in to an unused radio or TV frequency. White noise has an equal amount of energy per frequency band in contrast to pink noise, which has an equal amount of energy per octave. Pink noise has a frequency spectrum that is flat in logarithmic space. The power density of pink noise, compared with white noise, decreases by 3 dB (decibels) per octave. It is said that pink noise is the most soothing sound to the human ear. Pink noise has the same frequency distribution as falling rain.

Red noise is similar to pink noise, but it has relatively more energy at lower frequencies than pink noise. Red noise has a power density that decreases 6 dB per octave as the frequency increases. Of course, red noise was named after a connection with red light, which is on the low end of the visible light spectrum. Mathematically speaking, integrating white noise produces red noise. Red noise in the paleoclimatology context comes from the fact that tree rings have correlation from year to year, that is, if a tree grows well in a given year, it will store carbohydrates and will tend to have a good year of growth the following year as well. Red noise in the paleoclimatology context is modeled by a first-order autoregressive model.

(See, Edward J. Wegman, et al., Ad Hoc Committee Report On The ‘Hockey Stick’ Global Climate Reconstruction)

Amazingly, Western academics don’t even need data — especially if they are paleoclimate dendrologists (and their tree rings are not telling them what they want to hear) – to be acclaimed global warming doomsday prognosticators with the ear of Leftist politicians and bureaucrats in the highest levels of government. Simply construct models that turn white noise into noisy red hockey sticks. “In general,” says Wegman, “we found [Mann’s methods] to be somewhat obscure and incomplete and the criticisms [by Mann's skeptical critics] to be valid and compelling… It is important to note the isolation of the paleoclimate community; even though they rely heavily on statistical methods they do not seem to be interacting with the statistical community… Moreover, the work has been sufficiently politicized that this community can hardly reassess their public positions without losing credibility.”

Global warming academics need not even tell the truth to be quoted in the mainstream media. “Overall,” says Wegman, “our committee believes that Mann’s assessments that the decade of the 1990s was the hottest decade of the millennium and that 1998 was the hottest year of the millennium cannot be supported by his analysis.”

David Holland published in the 2007 Energy & Environment, (Vol. 18, No. 7) the results of his review of the IPCC process and found, “bias and concealment” in “the hockey stick affair.” Holland, “concluded that the IPCC has neither the structure nor the necessary independence and supervision of its processes to be acceptable as the monopoly authority on climate science.”

Will Rogers said, When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. Recognizing the problems of, “systematic error that are larger than the observed anomalies… [and] burying the bad news about model performance,” statistics Professor Leonard Smith (London School of Economics) is smart to ask, “Can (we) climate modelers stop digging?” Smith sees, “the demonstrated value of earth/climate forecasts,” as follows: (1) “significant” in the “medium-range,” of about two weeks or less; (2) of value seasonally for, “some months and regions;” and (3), not of much value at all for global or regional purposes when looking decades into the future. (See, The user made me do it: seamless forecasts, higher hemlines, and credible computation)

No probability forecast is complete without an estimate
of its own irrelevance. ~Leonard Smith

There are at least two things about which we all can be certain. First, given that climate change is inevitable, the past is prologue and nothing we can do will ever stop the climate from changing, our best adaptation strategy is to have the courage to do nothing! Finally, society must face the fact that the Golden Goose is on the mat, the economy will continue to shrink, futures will be dashed and our liberties will be trampled if we cannot get the weasels out of the chicken coop.

Probably there is no other field of applied science in which so much money has been spent to effect so little progress as in weather forecasting. ~H. C. Willett, The Forecast Problem, Compendium of Meteorology (1951)

The fears that global warming is caused by modernity says more about our society than our climate.  Mann’s hockey stick is symbolic of the fall of Western civilization, the loss of honor and integrity in science and the sacrifice of truth and honesty in academia and politics on the altar of a failed Leftist ideology that is based on self-defeating fears about individual freedom and taking personal responsibility for our own lives.

Climate change controversy gets air-time. Although controversies are allegedly about science, often such disputes are used as a proxy for conflicts between alternative visions of what society should be like and about who has authority to promote such visions. ~Mike Hulme

Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments