Slipping Offical Thermometers of Global Warming

Official Saving Falling Temperature and Hgh Stick Hockey

Saving Official Temperatures from
Alarmists’ High Stick and Natures Hip Check

The climate does not happen overnight but after 100 years it may change overnight –e.g., water is transported and spread throughout the Atlantic and exported to the Indian and Pacific oceans before updwelling in Antarctic waters. The return flow of warm water from the Pacific through the Indian ocean and the Caribbean to the North Atlantic, a distance of 40,000 km, takes from 13 to 130 years. (Solheima, et al.). That is just a small example of what comprises global weather dynamics.

Why do the Earthly model-makers of global warming believe they can deal with lag times like we see in the example above –e.g., 13 to 130 years? Consider that we are not even aware of all the natural phenomena that take place around us — as we look back in time at past weather to tease out future trends — all of which are involved in climate change that we only understand, after-the-fact.

Who is to say that the effects of the polarity reversal of the Sun’s magnetic field that marked Solar Cycle 24’s midpoint last April will not act in concert with other natural forces to amplify the effects of the Sun on the Earth’s future climate? We just don’t know: lag times and amounts could be large or small. But, what has Western academia ever done in the past that would give us confidence in their belief – despite all of the uncertainties that exist – that they can foresee the future and are competent to inform politicians how to change it? Unfortunately, few scientists of global warming alarmism will admit, as does Richard Betts below, to how little they know about CO2 and global warming –e.g.,

Everyone agrees we can’t predict the long-term response of the climate to ongoing CO2 rise with great accuracy. It could be large, it could be small. We don’t know. The old-style energy balance models got us this far. We can’t be certain of large changes in future, but can’t rule them out either. So climate mitigation policy is a political judgment based on what policymakers think carries the greater risk in the future – decarbonizing or not decarbonizing.

What we do know is there has been a lot of corruption in the climate community. And, nothing speaks more loudly about such corruption than examples of when periods of historical cooling suddenly become evidence of current global warming –e.g.,

Australia’s weather agency the Bureau of Meteorology (see BOM above) simply changed their raw data to turn a 100-year cooling trend into a 100-year warming trend. It has not gone unnoticed that the BOM simply changed history and when caught, still will not admit that previously good raw data (-0.35°C /century) was fudged to tell a lie about a scary hot future (+1.73°C /century).

Reporting on the purported justification for such changes (Graham Lloyd, ‘Heat is on over weather bureau homogenising temperature records,’ The Australian), “BoM says historic high temperatures are unreliable, some having been collected by thermometers housed in a beer crate on an outback veranda.” That is unbelievable! (See, Jennifer Marohasy)

 He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past. ~George Orwell, 1984

 

 

Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Global Warming Statement We Need to Hear

IMG_20140826_093304

EPA STATEMENT
(A Statement We’d Like to See)

EPA Statement on Global Warming Studies FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

EPA is issuing this statement today in response to UN-IPCC press releases on its review of the global warming studies focusing on the release by humans of CO2 into the atmosphere that have been conducted by the Western academia.

CO2, a gas, is composed primarily of two common elements, carbon and oxygen. Each of these are building blocks for life on Earth.

In previous published findings of global warming and CO2 conducted in the West, government-funded scientists concluded from their studies, that: increases in atmospheric CO2 is the fault of humanity and these increases are causing global warming (i.e., AGW theory); such warming is having and will continue to have deadly consequences for all life on Earth (e.g., CO2 is a climate pollutant); our current way of life in the modern world should be re-evaluated (humanity must stop using fossil fuels to produce energy); and, we must immediately act to eliminate the problem (i.e., replace capitalism with socialism).

The EPA’s review of these Western studies concluded, among other things, that on the basis of all evidence currently available to EPA: Western academics’ conclusion that CO2 is a climate pollutant is not supported by the data; and EPA sees no need to further review earlier scientific opinions throughout history on the safety of CO2 or to accept as inevitable a takeover by the Left of our daily lives.

Since the ideals of individual liberty were first enthroned in the minds of U.S. citizens, its teaching and practice has been questioned by some. To date, however, the agency has not been presented with scientific information that would support a change in our conclusions about the need to protect the liberal ideal of individual liberty. Those conclusions are based on a detailed review of a large body of information, including more than 200 years of observing the benefits to the individual, to society and to all humanity of less government and more personal freedom.

AGW is not a problem it is a symptom of a problem: the very big problem that the government-education complex is unsustainable. Our schools are helping government destroy society to stay in power. Observing that, America’s institutions of higher education, are an example of, a fundamentally unsustainable social and economic model, Paul Campos (The Atlantic) concluded that:

The only real difference between for-profit and nonprofit schools is that while for-profits are run for the benefit of their owners, nonprofits are run for the benefit of the most-powerful stakeholders within those institutions… The applicability of these almost Zen-like adages to the structure of higher education in America [Herbert Stein – If something cannot go on forever, it will stop; and, Michael Hudson – Debts that can't be paid, won't be] helps explain why the Harvard Business School professor Clayton Christensen predicted in 2013 that as many as half of the nation’s universities may go bankrupt in the next 15 years.

Now that they have followers in Western cities, ignoring ISIS when they believe “Zionism is Nazism” would be foolhardy. We know what they think of Christianity and the ideal of individual liberty. Like the Left, they also hate our way of life. But, what would ISIS say about Climatism?

 Year 17 of No Global Warming – America Held Hostage!

Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

End Global Warming by Government Fiat?

Fiat Warming

Climate change drives energy policy…

There is, however, no way to reconcile the loss humanity’s God-given right to individual liberty, with the Western secular-socialist political agenda of eradicating carbon dioxide emissions around the world by government fiat.

The debate is polarized in a black-white yes-no sort of way, which is a consequence of oversimplifying the problem and its solution. Although you wouldn’t think so by listening to the Obama administration on the topic of climate change, the debate is becoming more complex and nuanced. Drivers for the growing number of layers in the climate debate are the implications of the 21st century hiatus in warming, the growing economic realities of attempting to transition away from fossil fuels, and a growing understanding of the clash of values involved. ~Judith Curry (The Kardashians and Climate Change…)

The Left has raised the alarm that human-caused global warming (AGW) may lead to the extinction of all species on Earth. Over 6,000 new species (new to us) have recently been discovered in the oceans over a ten year period. And, as many more await discovery in the near future. It sounds like the Left is worried about AGW leading to catastrophic extinctions of species that they currently know nothing about and do not care to know about because discovering new species will of course require the use of more energy.

How dangerous is human activity to the survival of all life on Earth? I’m not sure what it would take to present a clear and present danger to, for example, the recently discovered yeti crab (so unusual it is to be the first of a new animal family): it’s already blind; and, it lives off the coast of Chile near deep-see hydrothermal vents that spew toxic chemicals.

Going on two decades of a global warming hiatus and the IPCC and Eurocommunists of Western Europe, for example, are more certain about the validity of AGW theory than ever before. Not even nature has a voice in the government-education institutions. Even so, if we adjust for academia’s adjustments we may be faced with a “decline” and “fall” in the average temperature of the Earth: not a hiatus or pause but a cooling globe instead.

97% of model executions wrongly predicted greater warming…  [15 years from 1998 to 2012,] models exaggerate the influence of greenhouse gases on temperature… The reality is… the IPCC hasn’t achieved much at all. ~John McLean

We have a better idea as time goes on about what the government and the institutions of academia believe is the average level of global warming. But, what is the average level of corruption in government and global warming science? It’s too bad we can no longer trust academia. Climatology is giving science a bad name. After the foi2009.pdf CRUgate disclosures and given academia’s continuing love affair with the debunked hockey-stick science of climatologist and serial litigator, Michael Mann, did we really need proof of nonsense computer-generated junk science–e.g.,

Over the past two years, computer scientist Cyril Labbé of Joseph Fourier University in Grenoble, France, has catalogued computer-generated papers that made it into more than 30 published conference proceedings between 2008 and 2013… Labbé developed a way to automatically detect manuscripts composed by a piece of software called SCIgen, which randomly combines strings of words to produce fake computer-science papers. SCIgen was invented in 2005 by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge to prove that conferences would accept meaningless papers. ~Richard Van Noorden, (‘Publishers withdraw more than 120 gibberish papers’, Nature)

What if the expertise of global warming alarmists is undeniable but the injury they seek to prevent can be compared to a trip and fall hazard faced by all of humanity caused by a difference of one-quarter inch in elevation between a parking lot and a sidewalk in front of a Mississippi Walmart?

The Left is willing to make certain assumptions that no one else will. When you give a few people power over many – such as we now have with the Left being represented by academia and mainstream secular-socialist government and media – it’s not long before the ears of despots are filled with the sort of ringing that leads to raging propaganda and the death of millions. The time has come for both the FDA and the EPA to be declared DOA and be seriously downsized, along with the government-education complex and the federal bureaucracy. It’s tighten, lighten, and brighten time. The preservation of individual liberty demands it.

The failure of the traditional model of climate science communication has resulted in more exaggeration and alarmism, appeals to authority, appeals to fear, appeals to prejudice, demonizing those that disagree, name-calling, oversimplification… There is a burgeoning field of social science research related to science communications.  Hopefully this will spur more engagement and less propaganda. ~Judith Curry

 

 

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

Gov’t Heedless of a Solar Activity Record!

More Monet

A Modern Grand Maximum Simply Ignored

Important news: evidence of a possible solar influence on Earth’s climate, appears to be undeniable. But, what of CO2 and the so-called greenhouse effect? Is it real? Nope– the analogy that increasing atmospheric CO2 acts like a greenhouse has been shattered with the grand debunking of an old experiment, proving Al Gore does not know his gas from a hole in a bottle! (Climate change in a shoebox: Right result, wrong physics)

What we now know about the sun explains everything about late 20th century warming. As it turns out, “the modern Grand maximum (which occurred during solar cycles 19–23, i.e., 1950-2009),” says Ilya Usoskin, “was a rare or even unique event, in both magnitude and duration, in the past three millennia.” [Usoskin et al., Evidence for distinct modes of solar activity, A&A 562 (2014) - PDF]

Grand solar maxima occur when several solar cycles exhibit greater than average activity… Solar cycles still occur during these grand solar maximum periods but the intensity of those cycles are greater. Grand solar maxima have shown some correlation with global and regional climate changes. ~wiki

Even wiki seems to understand that changes in solar activity have an influence on Earth’s climate. Generally, “solar activity is well confined within a relatively narrow range,” says Usoskin. But what happens in an extreme case of solar activity –e.g., how about a, 3,000-year solar activity record? We know because we just lived through it –i.e., a period of global warming.

IPCC scientists have conducted relatively few studies of the Sun’s influence on modern warming, assuming that the temperature influence of this rare and unique Grand maximum of solar activity, which has occurred only once in the past 3,000 years, is far inferior to the radiative power provided by the rising CO2 concentration of the Earth’s atmosphere. ~CO2 Science

So true and that is why we live in this bizarre and Kafkaesque reality of academia’s global warming alarmism. Working stiffs in the free enterprise economy, engaged in the business of living for the benefit of all society, like Randian heroes, are accused of the crime of releasing CO2 into the atmosphere and destroying the Earth as government scientists simply ignore decades-long, unique and rare record-setting solar events.

All we have to do is count sunspots. “During solar maximum,” as anyone can read in wiki, “large numbers of sunspots appear and the sun’s irradiance output grows.” Instead, for years we’ve been wasting tax dollars on practitioners of the new science (dare I say, art) of Parameterization Gazing. These gazers (nay, scryers) feel uniquely qualified to lend their unique insight to the global warming project and have pledged their very souls to the mission of saving the world from Americanism.

Given such a lofty goal, I feel obliged to join this scryers club of devoted Earth-savers and it really is very simple: we look at grid cells. The world is divided up into grids with official thermometers in them and we look at the data, albeit data that has been suitably massaged, adjusted and corrected for this very purpose. That’s where our job begins as only 20% of these grids actually have official thermometer readings. We scryers must fill in the gaps and supply all of the missing data. The work requires deep reflection as we must scry the results of neighboring grid cells and provide data where no data exists or has been lost or deleted or has otherwise simply gone missing.

Although not required, when I am at work scrying, I wear a handmade hairshirt and a “Yes We Can” hat to focus all of my efforts and insights on the serious job at hand. A lot of statistics are involved and many complex mathematical computations also are required that can only be done at the subconscious level where the results are passed through the mind’s eye of the scryer to sharpen the clarity and coherency of the information that otherwise would be nothing but irreconcilable images of little or no use to the continuing  advancement of humanity and the needed saving of the planet.

We scryers literally see the future in the data! For some, interpreting the data requires a self-induced, trance-like state of awareness with candlelight and burning incense to increase their receptivity. Personally, I prefer the light of an old CRT tube which for me lends a sort old-world digital-ness and credibility to the nascent science of climatology.

Embarking on this mission with nothing more than a bit of sleep-deprivation, a copious lavage of blond-roast coffee and the occasional 3-sip of Irish Whiskey for company, I have found that saving humanity from the humiliation of capitalism, self-awareness and personal responsibility has been a grueling and yet satisfying process. The only downside is that with modern global warming being the result of the largest grand maxima in 3,000 years, the continued support of Mann’s hockey stick (long after it was debunked), cannot be seen as anything other than one thing: evidence of… ulterior motives and the grandest con job of all time. Ditto re academia’s likening of the climate change phenomenon to the analogy of a greenhouse (also debunked–see above); and, ditto re academia’s claim of a consensus of opinion among scientists concerning global warming theory (the public has begun to see through the charade and scientists outside the West liken climatology to the ancient science of astrology).

“It is clear from the ease with which Mann lies about things that would not withstand ten minutes of scrutiny in a courtroom,” says Mark Stein (see Amicus brief ), “that he has no intention of proceeding to trial.” The same can be said of the claimed 97% consensus of opinion put forward by the IPCC and the Eurocommunists, the Left and rabid environmentalists – blaming humanity for causing late 20th century global warming – that has been dutifully reported by a nutty liberal mainstream media. The 97% consensus claim is tantamount to a ‘Convert to Islam or Die’ warning from Isis to Iraq Christians, to keep the western scientists in line or face academic and societal ostracism.

Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Myth of Global Warming is Made in the…

Myth of AGW

Are American Tax Dollars Funding a Lie

The medium is the message. ~Marshall McLuhan

We might as well pay bureaucrats bonuses to do nothing. How can continued support of Mann’s hockey stick, long after it was debunked, be seen as anything other than evidence of ulterior motives? With all that has gone on up to now, can anyone see climatology as anything more than Gypsy science, dressed up in the robes of Western academia? There are plenty of strong opinions but that is because only skeptics will engage on the facts –e.g.,

Data necessary to create a viable determination of climate mechanisms and thereby climate change, is completely inadequate. This applies especially to the structure of climate models. There is no data for at least 80 percent of the grids covering the globe, so they guess; it’s called parameterization… ~Tim Ball

Academia’s likening of the climate change phenomenon to the analogy of a greenhouse is further evidence of ulterior motives. It is a gross abuse of science to facilitate demands for the global regulation of all human activities by equating the building of a hothouse to an activity that is warming the globe with disastrous consequences for everyone else on the planet.

The unfortunate reality is that efforts to regulate one risk can create other, often more dangerous risks… Insofar as regulations divert resources away from potentially life-saving or safety-enhancing activities, they make people worse off. At the extreme, regulations that impose substantial costs can even increase overall mortality. Higher economic growth and aggregate wealth strongly correlate with reduced mortality and morbidity. This should be no surprise as the accumulation of wealth is necessary to fund medical research, support markets for advanced life-saving technologies, build infrastructure necessary for better food distribution, and so on. In a phrase, poorer is sicker, and wealthier is healthier. There is no free health. Much the same can be said for environmental protection. ~Jonathan Adler (More Sorry Than Safe: Assessing the Precautionary Principle…)

Yes, we can stop humanity from building greenhouses. The first thing Hamas did when taking over the Gaza strip in 2005 was destroy greenhouses in the area where Jews had lived. Because we can tear down greenhouses, does that mean that by analogy we can stop the climate from changing? Would that it were possible to protect ourselves from the threat of killer weather conditions like abrupt low temperature winds and cold rains by simply increasing atmospheric levels of a greenhouse gas like CO2. So, it may not come as a surprise to learn that the Greenhouse analogy has been busted: a debunked experiment that purported to show the effect of carbon dioxide’s far-infrared absorption properties on global climate only proved Al Gore didn’t know his gas from a hole in a bottle! (Climate change in a shoebox: Right result, wrong physics)

The Left’s view of the Precautionary Principle is simple. To preserve Michael Mann’s right to tenure, we must be willing to destroy free enterprise capitalism and foundational principles such as respect for individual liberty and the need for personal responsibility, even if it means undermining respect for the country’s most basic of all Judeo-Christian values: sincerity and honesty.

“At the extreme,” says Adler, regulations that impose substantial costs can even increase overall mortality.” How many lives have been destroyed by Western academia’s facilitation of the politics of fear? Pseudoscience has been used to fuel irrational alarmism in areas from global warming and tropospheric ozone to biotechnology and population growth. More people, says the bumper sticker, were killed at Chappaquiddick than at Three Mile Island.

California, for example, is a state run entirely by liberals that is choking on job-killing regulations, productivity-sapping lawyer taxes and anti-business Leftist dogma. We have Ayn Rand to thank for pushing through the dogma to warn us about what happens when we let society continue to ignore answering the important questions –e.g., what is riskier, denying freedom to humanity or letting government decide our future?

Looking at the matter pragmatically, do I expose society to an intolerable risk when I raise bees to harvest their honey? Shall our endless capacity for alarm about everything from bad weather to killer bees be used to entitle society to a share in the profits that flow from my investment of my time and my energy in my bee-raising activities? Is society justified in voting themselves a share in the fruits of my labor as rent because it feels it owns the nectar of flowers that my bees will harvest? And, is society entitled to enforce its self-interested vote to my property because their laws are a legitimate precaution given their fear of my freedom?

The presence of uncertainty about a technology, without more, cannot establish a presumption that more regulation is required. ~Jonathan Adler

 

 

Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Climate Change and Burrito Science

Burrito Science

Can 1.8 Millionths of a Pepper…
a Hot Burrito Make?

All warming on Earth comes to us from a sole-provider: nominally, the Sun. A lot of solar energy is simply reflected away, back into space, by the atmosphere, clouds and the Earth’s surface. Still, a lot gets through: about 50 percent of the Sun’s radiated energy warms the oceans and the other 2/5ths of the Earth’s surface. Less than 20% of the solar energy is absorbed by atmospheric gasses and clouds.

Water vapor is the main atmospheric ‘greenhouse’ gas (GHG), making up about 4% of the atmosphere –i.e., 40,000 parts per million (ppm). By comparison, CO2 is 400 ppm (a hundred times smaller –i.e., 4/100ths of 1%); and, the total yearly increase in atmospheric CO2 from all sources (including all that is released into the atmosphere by all humanity) is just 1.8 ppm –e.g., like the hot sauce made from about two jalapeño seeds to spice up a burrito the size of a 32 inch English farmhouse sink.

Even if we assumed that humanity produced all of the yearly CO2 increase, meteorologist Joe Bastardi (Two Simple Questions…) says, “The EPA estimates that the U.S. contributes about 1/5th of the CO2 man emits, which would be .20 x 1.8 ppm, or .36” In other words, we’re talking about an increase of 0.36 ppm of CO2 gas that has 1/100th of the effect of water vaper that together with all GHGs has 1/1000th of the effect of the ocean on Earth’s climate. Bastardi says you should ask Mr. Gore two simple questions:

What is the perfect temperature for the planet? Do you really believe that the U.S.‘ contribution of 0.36 parts per million of CO2 has any provably measurable effect on weather/climate?

Common sense says we’d be insane to help Al Gore hand over the U.S. economy to the Democrat party and the Eurocommies. The evidence for global warming is lacking and despite predictions to the contrary from global warming alarmists, Western academia – that has been far to eager to facilitate fears of climate catastrophism – has failed to show any significant global warming over the last 17-plus years. Reason dictates that if warming and not cooling lies ahead, humanity still will be no more the cause of it than it ever was.

In 1990, the IPCC’s central estimate of near-term warming was higher by two-thirds than it is today. Then it was 2.8 C/century equivalent. Now it is just 1.7 Cº equivalent [Remarkably, even the IPCC’s latest and much reduced near-term global-warming projections are also excessive (Fig. 3)]… and even that is proving to be a substantial exaggeration. ~MoB (on the Great Pause)

Common sense says we shouldn’t recreate our economy based on a Eurocommunist model that we know does not work. Reason dictates we must oppose ideologues who would use the failed science of global warming to continue to grow a government that does nothing more than regulate America out of a job.

“IPCC and EPA have already shown that being wrong or being caught doesn’t matter,” observes Tim Ball (CO2 data might fit the IPCC hypothesis, but it doesn’t fit reality). “The objective is the scary headline, enhanced by the constant claim it is getting worse at an increasing rate, and time is running out.” If a recent NERA study concerning EPA Ozone regulations is correct, it won’t be long before all we can do is engage in urgent debate because — like squabbling Greeks — we’ll be too broke to do anything but debate:

Manufacturing in the United States is making a comeback, and we’re reducing emissions at the same time, but tightening the current ozone standard to near unachievable levels would serve as a self-inflicted wound to the U.S. economy at the worst possible time. This rule would undermine our work to expand manufacturing in the United States, making it almost impossible to increase operations, create new jobs or keep pace internationally. ~CEO Jay Timmons (NAM)

We definitely have a man-made disaster on our hands. We no longer understand how the world works. As government-education factories churn out one AGW-fearing, blue city whacka-a-mole after another, we’re putting our futures into the hands of politicians who will promise anything to get elected and who are good at just one thing: using propaganda and spinning the truth to demonize those who really work to bring us the goods and services we enjoy. “Why has punditry lately overtaken news?” asks Farhad Manjoo (True Enough: Learning To Live In A Post-fact Society). “Why do lies seem to linger so long in the cultural subconscious even after they’ve been thoroughly discredited? And why, when more people than ever before are documenting the truth with laptops and digital cameras, does fact-free spin and propaganda seem to work so well?”

The Great Tragedy of Science – the slaying of a
beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact.
~T.H. Huxley

Updated 5 August 2014
Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Is Global Warming an Ethically Defensible Version of Fact?

Reflect Reflections

Infinitesimally Remote Though It May Be…

Most of the world’s energy is from fossil fuels. Raising prices of oil, coal and natural gas to limit their use would have an obvious result. Climate action through increased energy costs will likely harm the poor the most, both in rich and poor countries. ~Testimony of Bjorn Lomborg

Eliminating the use of cheap energy has a predictable outcome. The more expensive energy becomes the more poverty there will be. Simply put… it is difficult if not impossible to dramatically reduce CO₂ emission growth without also reducing economic growth. (See, ‘Testimony,’ Ibid)

Your taxes and the power of government are being used today to help the Left sow the seeds of poverty around the globe. And, it’s all legal. Would they nuke Africa to eliminate the threat of Ebola in the West?

The Committee’s research demonstrates that oftentimes EPA contributes to the bottom line of green groups through grants. Accordingly, a grant from EPA or another government agency is particularly valuable to a 501(c)(3) as nonprofits are required to obtain one-third of its funding from the public to maintain its tax-exempt status. A grant from EPA contributes to that goal, without limitation.~Left-Wing ‘Billionaire’s Club’ Using Environmentalism to Control Economy

Out in the open what we see is the Left’s attack dog ad hominem warfare against conservatives, ostensibly to limit CO2, which they refer to as climate pollution. But hidden from public view a ‘Billionaires Club’ of geo-Leftists are in secret, trying to take over the American economy.

While it is uncertain why they operate in the shadows and what they are hiding, what is clear is that these individuals and foundations go to tremendous lengths to avoid public association with the far-left environmental movement they so generously fund. (See, ‘Billionaires Club,’ Ibid)

 Using your taxes, fear of global warming is being used to consign humanity’s future to the whims of anti-industrialist, Leftist-inspired liberal Utopians in Ivory Towers. The schoolmarms of climatism, undermine society and the economy as they whistle past the graveyard of their failed global warming doomsday prognostications.

 Sometimes their messages are rational-sounding and are all dressed up in objective-looking graphs and mathematical models as they take public dollars to create a vision of a future world that none of us will ever see. That is the kinder and gentler form of Leftist propaganda. At other times, we’re back to images of polar bears falling from the sky and studies showing it is our health and not that of polar bears that is about to come crashing down in dead heaps on concrete streets as a result of global warming.

These new and improved Climatists are a part of the world we will live in now. The EPA is as hard to escape as the IRS. And, whatever happens to polar bears and our personal health, there is always plenty of room in the Left’s message of climate doom for finger-pointing at every weather-related disaster that comes along. But, no matter what the approach may be, the Left is saying just one thing: we need more not less government in our lives.

The language of us moderns has never been more shrill. Academics, Leftists and liberal Utopians are beginning to sound a lot like priests chanting in ancient tongues at their religious altars. Can it ever make sense to say–e.g., the IPCC’s promotion of academia’s ‘hockey stick’ is a, remotely ethically defensible version of truth? Or, does our trust in Leftist government, academia and the Eurocommies, really require a willing suspension of disbelief?

You could call it a fundamental problem that the government global warming scientists have: lack of trust. But, when did people start trusting the government? That never happened, which points to the real problem: trust has nothing to do with it. We’re dealing with the 47% who out of self-interest support the government irrespective of truth.

Through a series of case studies, this report exposes the most politically active donors, explains how they use loopholes in the tax law to funnel tax deductible contributions to far-left environmental activist, and details how those activists turn the “investments” into political results. Moreover, the report uncovers the shocking lengths wealthy liberal donors are willing to take to hide their involvement in the scheme. Finally, the report shines a light on the alarming reality that unknown foreign investors are financing the environmental movement, using the shady Sea Change Foundation as cover. (See, ‘Billionaires Club,’ Ibid)

Having the courage to do nothing is difficult for those who are paid to look useful. But, the more we learn about the non-problem of global warming the more we also see that those who have been ringing the alarm bell the loudest are the very people we should never look to for guidance. It’s impossible to make good decisions about anything with a bunch of paid-for know-it-alls who make up facts and fly around the globe like chickens with their heads cut off, point fingers and blaming those who provide value to society for burning up the world.

… just by trying to reduce burning fossil fuels–doesn’t mean you’ve got rid of the risk. Merely means you are taking different kinds of risk. They could be worse. It could very well be that the welfare of the planet would be damaged by reducing carbon dioxide. We just don’t know. ~Freeman Dyson

 

 

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

The Missing Hot Spot of Climate Science

Missing Hot Spot

What happens when you can’t find something that’s not there? All of the government-scientists staked their credentials and professional reputations on a no-show. How do we break the news to them that their careers and credibility are shot to shit!

Wasn’t Mulla Nasrudin’s cousin upset when informed too bluntly about the demise of his cat? “Where I live, we give people bad news more tactfully,” the cousin cried. “Instead of just telling me flat out that my cat was dead, you should have let me know little by little. You should have started off by telling me, ‘Your cat is acting strange,’ then later said, ‘Your cat is jumping all over the place,’ then still later told me, ‘Your cat is missing,’ and then finally broken the news and said, ‘Your cat is dead.’ Nasrudin wrote his cousin back a month later and said, “Your mother is acting strange.”

So, I want to be tactful when talking about the HOT SPOT! It’s acting strange. It’s not where we expected to find it; not in the tropics; not anywhere. It’s missing. All of the data gathered by our satellites and balloons say it never was and that flies in the face of claims made by global warming alarmists that water vapor is a positive feedback mechanism that amplifies warming caused by humanity’s C02, which is a key assumption that has been built into all Global Circulation Models (IPCC models). Global warming is dead.

If the IPCC models are right about the feedbacks, we would see a hot spot 10km above the tropics. The theory is that with more heat, more water will evaporate and rise, keeping relative humidity constant at all heights in the troposphere. The point has been conclusively tested with 28 million weather balloons since 1959. […assumptions wrong–the hot spot is missing]

As it turns out, a hypothesized ‘hot spot’ gone missing means the jig is up! The cat is dead: everyone knew by the mid ’90s that the continued claim by the Left about a consensus opinion on the validity of AGW theory was only evidence of the existence an ideologically-motivated pathological science being put forward as mainstream thought.

At this point, official ‘climate science’ stopped being a science. In science, empirical evidence always trumps theory, no matter how much you are in love with the theory. If theory and evidence disagree, real scientists scrap the theory. But official climate science ignored the crucial weather balloon evidence, and other subsequent evidence that backs it up, and instead clung to their carbon dioxide theory – that just happens to keep them in well-paying jobs with lavish research grants, and gives great political power to their government masters.

There are now several independent pieces of evidence showing that the earth responds to the warming due to extra carbon dioxide by dampening the warming. Every long-lived natural system behaves this way, counteracting any disturbance. Otherwise the system would be unstable. The climate system is no exception, and now we can prove it. ~David Evans

After not showing up – which shoots a big hole in AGW theory (the theory that human CO2 was causing global warming) – alarmists stopped talking about a Hot Spot and began to make excuses for why it was missing. It’s too late though: the rest of the world no longer cares about what the witchdoctors of Western academia are going to say next about global warming and climate change. Even those who hate America know that if the Leftists will stab their fellow citizens in the back they’re certainly not to be trusted about anything else. “Climate science is incredibly more complex than [developed countries] negotiators make it out to be… Climate science should not be driven by the West. We should not always be dependent on outside reports.” ~Jairam Ramesh (India)

The folks have noticed that the Leftists no longer even bother to pretend they have anything of value to offer society – at least not anything anyone voluntarily wishes to buy. Rather than a positive feedback we’ve learned in the meantime that water vapor is a net-negative feedback mechanism because the clouds that are comprised of water vapor, increase the Earth’s albedo and that reflects the suns energy away. But, unionist school teachers in the public education disinformation machine don’t care. They’re perfectly willing to continue supporting AGW lies if it helps them keep stuffing the government pig with the blood of the productive, no matter what the cost is to the culture and to society and no matter what that does to the economy and the future of all Americans. Otherwise, you have to believe that increasing tax revenues at the expense of consumers and transferring a huge percentage of wealth from the productive to non-earners and deceivers is actually providing value to society.

Let’s get real: giving blood is a lot like paying taxes. Not everyone gives blood. Some can’t. Some shouldn’t or just don’t want to. But what of those who can and let us say, should pay taxes. Should those with more blood be forced to give more blood? Whether we say the productive are giving taxes or their money is simply being taken we all should agree that Leftists are bleeding the nation and taking all they can take without giving anything of value in return. There’s no productivity in bleeding an economy like the ritual blood-letting of a sacrificial animal; and, the Left will continue using global warming as a means to achieve their political ends until the productive are dragged down and drained.

We all know now that those who engage in climate change
 doomsday scare tactics are hanging onto the AGW hoax 
 for personal and not scientific reasons.

 

QUIZ:

They did all they possibly could do – more than anyone has ever done – to diminish government. That is their legacy and it is that legacy that still has our backs.

Who are they in the sentence above:
(a) Public school teachers
(b) Scientists
(c) The Founding Fathers

 

 

Answer: The Founding Fathers

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

Global Warming Battleskies

Hurry chop-chop

Arrest Climate Change Chop-Chop!

Official simplicity is killing the economy. Righteousness simplifies but it doesn’t try to understand, says Thomas Wells (Debating Climate Change: The Need for Economic Reasoning). They ['environmentalists'] are wrong to see the development of human freedoms and well-being (prosperity) as a distraction or even a threat to the world. They are wrong to fixate on an abstract and impossible problem…  without reference to wider ethical issues, and political and practical feasibility. They are wrong to give up on the potential of democratic politics and human ingenuity and settle for Malthusian doom mongering and moralizing.

When it comes to the government science of climate change, global warming alarmists are dealing us a deadly abuse of their ‘pragmatic’ truth as it was described by philosopher and psychologist, William James. The government version of truth is based solely on its utility in creating a sense of alarm about America’s release of CO2 into the atmosphere. Official global warming science is all about urgency –i.e., the world community must act quickly to stop America from emitting any more globe-destroying climate pollution.

Thanks to Dr. Roy Spencer (Spencer’s AGW Trend Calculator: T = s[L x D x I x ƒ]) we now have a quick way to calculate the Earth’s Global Temperature Trend (T). Simply multiply the number of Liberal politicians (L) times the Dollars they’ll throw at global warming research (D) times whatever the imagined problem is to be linked to global warming, like dying polar bears (I) times an alleged frequency of the imagined problem (ƒ) and depending on the gullibility of the audience, apply freely a scaling factor (s) that can be changed at will to magnify the results of the calculation.

Scientists should be interested only in objective truth. We’re all capable of indulging in pragmatic truth. If they’re competent to provide any value to society at all, what we need from scientists is the sort of truth we associate with the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake. The bank is closed: we have no money to pay for plastic truths that can be pushed and pulled to fit Leftists’ biased and superstitious preconceived notions about over-population and the price of fossil fuels. What we need is for scientists to stop manufacturing truth simply to help Leftists achieve political objectives like raising more taxes to pay for more government bureaucrats to run a Eurocommunist-style economy.

The single most pragmatic thing we can do is first ask if it makes sense that a global average temperature even exists. Let’s accept that an average global temperature actually exists, and it goes up and then down and then up, etc. And, let’s assume changes in climate are due to humanity’s release of CO2 (a silly assumption for sure: the entire world only adds 1.8 ppm of CO2 in a year ~Joe Bastardi). We still must then answer the question that was put forward by C. Essex et al. –e.g., are there physical or pragmatic grounds for choosing one over another? [See, ‘Does a Global Temperature Exist,’ J. Non-Equilib. Thermodyn, V32:1 (2007)]:

If there are no rational grounds for choosing increasing over decreasing averages, there is no basis for concluding that the atmosphere as a whole is either warming or cooling. A pragmatist should, however, believe global warming has actually been good for humanity. No one is actually clamoring for a colder Earth. That Leftists in the Western government-education complex wish to shame the successful and stand in the way of those who also want better lives is kabuki theater.

The moralization approach undermines itself… poor country governments have a clear and over-riding moral duty to help their citizens achieve the quality of life and prosperity which the West takes for granted, and which is inevitably energy (i.e. carbon) intensive. And then there is the practical economics: the world still has lots of coal, a lot of it in poor countries like India, that can produce electricity very cheaply. Not even the strongest moral rhetoric can make renewables competitive without radical technological (i.e. price) breakthroughs. ~Thomas Wells 

Let’s all get pragmatic for a moment. Does anyone truly believe Western academics have the ability to stop climate from changing? Who among us is so idealistic as to believe government scientists who are less sensible and practical than your third grade school teacher can by a popular vote control what the weather shall be, determine how our earnings shall be spent, dictate how our economy shall run and decide what we will want?

Few will be more guilty than Al Gore even if their
carbon footprints are labeled a moral crime.

 

Jump to these recent articles for more information:

►  The Science of Global Warming Fear
►  Soulless Gods of Global Warming
►  Climate Change and (Political) Science
►  Reality Topples the Global Warming Rice Bowl!
►  Turning Unaccountabe Global Warming Science Around

…and, check out some of these popular articles:

•   Math, Common Sense and Book Cooking
•   Americagenically-Caused Global Warming
•   Our Neighbors are Fundamentally Dishonest
•   AGW the Penny Dreadful of Climate Science
•   It’s the Economy Not Global Warming Stupid
•   Global Warming is Over… Ready for It?
•   A Propaganda Machine that Actually Runs on Global Warming

 

 

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

The Science of Global Warming Fear

Here-Now-Way-Out

Al Gore’s bizarre Nobel Prize for An Inconvenient Truth… shows that the forces of reason and common sense are barreling out of control here. (Ethics Scoreboard)

There’s a battle for the culture afoot. On one side we have academia and the rest of the secular, socialist government bureaucracy, supported by the media and all of the thankless Eurocommunist governments in dead and dying Old Europe. Their opponents are mostly those who work for a living, who pay all of the bills and who essentially do all the heavy lifting for everyone else –i.e., the realists!

Examples of those who refuse to get real are the school teachers of global warming alarmism. “A professor,” says Tim Ball, “is a person whose job is to tell students how to solve problems of life which they have tried to avoid by becoming a professor.” In their zeal to save the world they refer to CO2 as a climate pollutant and help government drive Western society off a moral and economic cliff.

A war against the productive has been going on since the mid-’70s. Al Gore, for example, was elected to Tennessee public office in 1977. The growing secular, socialist government bureaucracy decided back then that the public (the risk-taking taxpayer) was the enemy. That is when the language pollution began–e.g., anthropogenic global warming and the role of the Sun and other natural factors became inconvenient truths that the Left had to ignore to achieve their political purposes. Contemptuous of the old maxim – he who has the risk has the dominion or advantage – the government also decided its true purpose was staying in power and to do that it had to strike fear in the hearts of its enemy.

Waiving the flag of liberal Utopianism the Left has taken over academia, the media and all public offices. The Left is now the mainstream that the public must learn to fear. And, the public now fears everything: even, changes in the climate. The public is a slave to the mainstream and it’s all legal because of another old maxim: a slave is not a person.

Blood is in the water: we’re swimming in it and being dragged down by Leftist and liberal Utopianism. If we don’t change we will be too poor to weather the next catastrophe–e.g. a global food fight waged with water pistols.

Everything is linked [e.g., climate change and the Arab Spring]: Chinese drought and Russian bushfires produced wheat shortages leading to higher bread prices fueling protests in Tahrir Square [Egypt]… Ditto in Syria and Libya. In their essay, the study’s co-editors, Francesco Femia and Caitlin Werrell, note that from 2006 to 2011, up to 60 percent of Syria’s land experienced the worst drought ever recorded there — at a time when Syria’s population was exploding and its corrupt and inefficient regime was proving incapable… 800,000 Syrians lost their entire livelihoods as a result of the great drought, which led to “a massive exodus of farmers, herders, and agriculturally dependent rural families from the Syrian countryside to the cities,” fueling unrest. The future does not look much brighter… (Thomas L. Friedman, NYT, ‘The Scary Hidden Stressor’)

Shall we hand our individual liberties over to government bureaucrats today based on government scientists’ fears about climate change tomorrow? And, haven’t we learned that bringing stability to the world outside our borders is a thankless task? Can the new mainstream in academia and government – dedicated only maintain political power over the masses – ever be expected to heed traditional maxims that it rebelled against and prevailed over, such as: abundant caution causes no harm; and, when in doubt do not act. Phillip Stott warns us that actually attempting to bring stability to the world’s complex, coupled and chaotic climate system by singling out a single factor like atmospheric CO2 levels, “may even trigger unexpected consequences.”

Even if we closed down every factory, crushed every car and aeroplane, turned off all energy production, and threw 4 billion people worldwide out of work, climate would still change, and often dramatically. Unfortunately, we would all be too poor to do anything about it. ~Philip Stott

It does not take a government scientist to tell us it’s our economic climate that’s changing and for the worse. The Left’s refusal to take responsibility does not change reality: now we’re broke; and, society is broken too. But, we can change if we have the courage to do something about it. When it comes to government, less is more: more individual liberty and more personal responsibility and that means more opportunity and a healthier society. And, it’s possible–e.g., on Thursday Australia repealed its carbon tax bills by a vote of 39 to 32 in the Senate.

Realists do not fear the results of their study. ~Dostoevsky

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