When Academia’s Weathertellers Lost Credibility

monuments

What Happens When Establishment Institutions Make a Business of Trading in Fear and Favor for Power?

“As we [The New York Times] reflect on this week’s momentous result, and the months of reporting and polling, that preceded it,” publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and executive editor Dean Baquet now promise readers the NYT will begin reporting “America and the world honestly.” Really?

No one believes they can rely on the NYT to be impartial or report fairly or that it would have held a Clinton administration to the same level of scrutiny that a Trump administration will receive. Climatologists of Western Academia face a similar situation: they no longer have credibility.

The election forecast models were wildly wrong. Climate prediction models share one thing in common with them: even if they could be right, their creators will not want to believe them if predicted results do not correspond to politically correct preconceived notions of the establishment about how they should be…

Still, no matter what the consensus of establishment opinion may be, “CO2 is not a pollutant, like black carbon aerosol and mercury” (Judith Curry). And, what of the models that would indict CO2 as an evil chemical, making us all criminals for releasing it into Earth’s atmosphere?

The “relatively coarse spatial and temporal resolutions of the models” says Curry, fail to capture, “many important processes that occur on scales that are smaller than the model resolution (such as clouds and rainfall).” But, do we bring everything into sharper focus by using ‘parameterizations’ as substitutes for reality? “Parameterizations of subgrid-scale processes,” says Curry, “are simple formulas based on observations or derivations from more detailed process models,” that must then be, “‘calibrated’ or ‘tuned’ so that the climate models perform adequately when compared with historical observations.”

And, given all of this massaging of, physical processes, that Curry says are, “either poorly understood or too complex to include in the model given the constraints of the computer system,” if we look to science to fill in the gaps in our knowledge, we must then rely on the integrity of the creators of the models and their knowledge of statistics.

If climatology is to be considered a real science and not just an exercise in numerology that should be given the seriousness we accord to the ancient science of astrology, we must trust climatologists. There’s the rub: we don’t. Politically approved, establishment science has proven itself to be nothing more than a useful hoax and scare tactic – a soapbox – that helps Leftists advance an ideology that Americanism is evil.

Trump’s upset victory proves that enough voters learned again what all of our parents knew so well: politicians are not trustworthy. Unfortunately, Western academia also has earned the public’s mistrust. The electorate gave Republicans 2 years to help Trump drain the swamp.

I love this country. ~Donald Trump (acceptance speech)

The outgoing Democrat leadership does not love the country and their vision of America was rejected. With whom will Western academia stand now? Hopefully, a pause in the permanent campaign of Clinton, Inc. will help change education for the better and help make Climatology something better than a politically-motivated car-chase science: Donald Trump’s winning of the presidency hopefully will help crack the glass ceiling of global warming alarmism.

As a result of US elections last week, Leftists’ headlock on the spoils system was slipped, the Clinton money train has been sidelined and the Democrat party now lies exposed and naked. We now look for change in the economy and how the wealth that is generated by the productive will be spent; and, we don’t want more faceless and unaccountable bureaucrats to throw millions of dollars at us without leaving a trace.

We also need a change when it comes to dealing with the weather and how we think about climate. When it comes to the science of climate, the huge ‘cone of uncertainty’ tells us that despite spending billions of dollars we still don’t have a handle on the ‘God factor.’

“In short,” says Bjorn Lomborg (The Wall Street Journal), “climate change is not worse than we thought.” The only alarming thing about climate change has been bad policy decisions based on, “exaggerated, worst-case claims,” that according to Lomborg, “ignore a wealth of encouraging data.”

It is an indisputable fact that carbon emissions are rising—and faster than most scientists predicted. But many climate-change alarmists seem to claim that all climate change is worse than expected. This ignores that much of the data are actually encouraging. The latest study from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found that in the previous 15 years temperatures had risen 0.09 degrees Fahrenheit. The average of all models expected 0.8 degrees. So we’re seeing about 90% less temperature rise than expected. ~Bjorn Lomborg

In any event, the endless climate summits promulgated by the progressive movement cannot stop the continuing rise in carbon emissions coming from Brazil, Russia, India, China and the African continent. Subsidizing solar power and windmills is simply flushing the wealth of the country down the toilet–i.e., “simply expensive, feel-good measures,” says Lomborg, “that will have an imperceptible climate impact.”

The election reality show gone mainstream is now over. The country voted against a global warming alarmist and voted for a more sensible climate policy by putting a climate change realist into the White House.

 

 

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

Global Warming– Mamma’s Gonna Need a Brand New Bag!

Crooked Hillary La Bomba

We jetted through the Space Age,
grew up in the Information Age,
got lost in the Propaganda Age and next up,
we soon will land in…
the Inflation Age!

Alarmism about human-caused climate change has been a gift to the Left that keeps on giving. What will the Left do in its quest to nationalize the economy when the well runs dry? We’re seeing that now in the behavior of the anarchists to squelch free speech at political rallies, much like the Left has done to the Tea Party over the last dozen years.

If Earth’s climate is less sensitive than predicted to rising levels of atmospheric CO2 levels – as the latest research indicates – Mamma’s gonna need a brand new bag, which is why so many citizens are voting for Trump this election season: because, the political class is riding the gravy train at the public’s expense. Dr. Lindzen spells out the reasons why the establishment continues to push the global warming agenda:

The current issue of global warming/climate change is extreme in terms of the number of special interests that opportunistically have strong motivations for believing in the claims of catastrophe despite the lack of evidence. In no particular order, there are the
• Leftist economists for whom global warming represents a supreme example of market failure (as well as a wonderful opportunity to suggest correctives),
• UN apparatchiks for whom global warming is the route to global governance,
• Third world dictators who see guilt over global warming as providing a convenient claim on aid (ie, the transfer of wealth from the poor in rich countries to the wealthy in poor countries),
• Environmental activists who love any issue that has the capacity to frighten the gullible into making hefty contributions to their numerous NGOs,
• Crony capitalists who see the immense sums being made available for ‘sustainable’ energy,
• Government regulators for whom the control of a natural product of breathing is a dream come true,
• Newly minted billionaires who find the issue of ‘saving the planet’ appropriately suitable to their grandiose pretensions,
• Politicians who can fasten on to CAGW as a signature issue where they can act as demagogues without fear of contradiction from reality or complaint from the purported beneficiaries of their actions. (The wildly successful London run of “Yes, Prime Minister” dealt with this.)

etc., etc.

All of the above special interests, quite naturally, join the chorus of advocates.

Strange as it may seem, even the fossil fuel industry is generally willing to go along. After all, they realize better than most, that there is no current replacement for fossil fuels. The closest possibilities, nuclear and hydro, are despised by the environmentalists. As long as fossil fuel companies have a level playing field, and can pass expenses to the consumers, they are satisfied. Given the nature of corporate overhead, the latter can even form a profit center.

We can’t expect to ever get any measure of satisfaction when it comes to the science of climate. Communication, as it is now, is in a never-ending state of contention. In politics the established state of being has become known as, “The Permanent Campaign.”

If ever there was a strategy behind, the permanent campaign, the reality of it now is that all of the participants are constantly looking for something (anything) attention-getting that can be sensationalized. Climatology has become nothing but car-chase science.

Just as the Clintons can be referred to as the “permanent election,” climate science has become the permanent catastrophe. Faster, better computers will change nothing except to facilitate the next computer-driven hoax and scare tactic.

Just as American politics has changed, so to has the Western science of climate change. Global warming has become nothing more than a media-driven frenzy of experts, consultants, polls, political parties and patronage.

Meanwhile, “Mars is warming so rapidly the entire planet is emerging from an ice age, according to new research published Friday in the journal Science.” Is an increase in Earthly atmospheric CO2 the cause of Martian global warming? Obviously, other factors are at work. Tibetan ice cores going back to more than 500 million years ago indicate that, “the slow wobbling of Earth’s rotational axis,” according to glaciologist, Lonnie Thompson, “drives tropical rainfall in 21,000-year cycles. We also identified periods when average temperatures in Tibet went up and down by several degrees Celsius in roughly 200-year cycles. It’s still a mystery why that was the case, but we suspect this may be related to the 205-year cycle of solar activity. (Scientific American [Link])

Science is pretty unscientific these days and, “once an entire field has been created — with careers, funding, appointments, and prestige all premised upon an experimental result which was utterly false due either to fraud or to plain bad luck — pointing this fact out is not likely to be very popular.” (See, e.g., Scientific regress [Link])

The real takeaway is that, following the discovery of the ozone hole in 1986, 30 years later we learn it ain’t so scary– the latest news is that the ozone hole is healing itself. And, 30 years from now, the Leftists of Western academia will still hate free enterprise capitalism and business and push fear of climate change to stab America in the back but AGW will be a lot less scary.

 

The universe is wider than our views of it. ~Thoreau

 

 

Updated: 3 July 2016

 

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

Global Cooling is Real

Asi Sea!-BW

We are actually living in an ice age…

The climate summit bambizzle in Paris at the close of 2015, the infamous if not notorious James Hansen (former official NASA government global warming alarmist) readily admitted, was “half-assed and half-baked,” a “fake,” and a “fraud.” Mario Loyola [link] observed that we are now in the twilight years of the climate change movement. The realization dawns on us that it’s only we taxpayers who have any skin in the game and we’ve been lied to by our Leftist overlords like commie authoritarians who lecture Chinese peasants on how to live while waiving Chairman Mao’s Little Red Book overhead like a whip.

Meanwhile, despite fears of global warming, “technically,” as Loyola informs us, we humans are living in an ice age (the Pleistocene Ice Age), “which began about 2.6 million years ago.” The climate agreement in Paris is a harbinger of the sorts of political charades we must avoid in the future. “Any attempt to impose command-economy solutions on a global scale will fall far short or outright fail,” observed Loyola. “The right strategy for confronting environmental challenges will have to be based on rational market incentives, rational cost-benefit analysis, and a broad-based consensus about the vital importance of efficient markets. Strategies that distort rational cost-benefit analysis (or the science on which it is based) to suit an anti-market agenda will not work and can only maintain the illusion of legitimacy for so long before they are discredited.”

A geological “ice age” typically lasts millions of years and is characterized by cycles of glaciation, during which glaciers grow and oceans recede, punctuated by warmer interglacial periods, in which glaciers recede and oceans rise—such as the current Holocene interglacial, in which human civilization has flourished.

During glacial periods, the northern hemisphere becomes substantially covered in glaciers, typically several kilometers thick. An abundance of data (from isotopes in ice sheets and the ocean floor, to the fossil record) enables us to reconstruct much of its history. During glaciations, average temperatures typically drop about 20 degrees Celsius below today’s, and sea levels drop about 400 feet below where they are now. During the coldest points in those glacial periods, an adventurous animal can walk from England across Europe and Asia to North America without getting its feet wet. This almost certainly explains the Asian origins of native American populations, which are thought to have crossed the current Bering Strait on foot in repeated waves between 80,000 and 12,000 years ago.

The last glacial period ended starting about 18,000 years ago, the height of the Wisconsonian glaciation, when the first of several dramatic warming trends began. Average temperatures rose and fell and rose again by 20 degrees Celsius in barely 5,000 years, less than the time between Sumerian civilization and the present day. Sea levels, which lag temperature swings by long periods of time, rose 300 feet between 15,000 and 8,000 years ago. That’s an average of more than one meter per century. Among humans, sedentary agriculture first arose when temperatures stabilized near current levels about 12,000 years ago. There was at least one settled community that reached a population of 8,000 inhabitants in Turkey some 9,500 years ago. At the dawn of civilization, man would have experienced floods on a biblical scale.

In fact, major environmental changes have happened in time scales that are readily understandable in terms of human history. The Baltic Sea, for example is typically a freshwater glacial-runoff lake that disappears completely during glacial periods. When the North Sea finally rose high enough to breach the land bridge between Denmark and Sweden there were already large settled communities practicing agriculture. The saltwater ecology along the western edge of the Baltic Sea is not much older than the first pyramids.

Before the interglacial period began 18,000 years ago, most of North America was buried under a vast sheet of ice. That glacial period (“ice age” in common parlance) lasted more than 100,000 years, though with significant variations in temperature, glacier cover, and sea levels—mini-cycles referred to as “stadials” and “interstadials.” During that time, anatomically modern humans spread throughout the world across land bridges that connected most of the continents. Our ancestors dominated the warmer climes and competed with Neanderthals for food across the tundra and ice of Europe.

The warm interglacial period before that glacial period only lasted from 145,000 to 127,000 years ago. At their maximum, temperatures were significantly warmer than today, with ocean levels about thirty feet higher. Evidence in the form of algae fossils suggests that during at least some part of this period, the Arctic Ocean was completely free of ice cover, during the summer months if not year round. Only Antarctica retained its vast ice sheets and glaciers.

This repeating cycle of 100,000-year glaciations and 10,000 to 20,000 year interglacials has been fairly consistent over the past 2.6 million years. The planet has trundled through the entire cycle dozens of times. If the pattern holds, we are due for another major glaciation sometime in the next several thousand years: The northern hemisphere will again become substantially covered in glaciers, ocean levels will fall hundreds of feet, and the earth’s overall production of plant biomass will fall substantially below what the current human population needs to feed itself. That will pose some ticklish technological challenges even for our hyper-adaptable species. Hopefully, such changes will be incremental enough to allow for adaptation.

It’s impossible to say when (or even whether) this next “ice age” will come, partly because the scientific theories of what drives these epochal glacial cycles are all underdetermined—that is, theories explain part of the climate variation but not all of it. For example, the start of interglacial periods seems correlated to variations in the earth’s orbit. But the extent of orbital “eccentricity” does not fully explain the amount of warming that occurs, implying that other factors and feedback amplifiers are also involved.

It is true, and at least somewhat alarming, that the current atmospheric carbon dioxide level of 400 parts per million (ppm) is far higher than at any time in the past 800,000 years, almost entirely as a result of humans burning fossil fuels. What we hear less often, however, is that during the first 1.8 million years of the Pleistocene Ice Age, carbon dioxide levels were significantly higher than that. Major glaciation occurred a dozen or more times, without taking much notice at all of what should have been a much stronger greenhouse effect. And for 245 million years before that, carbon dioxide levels were vastly higher… Compared with that 245 million-year record, pre-industrial carbon dioxide concentrations of 280 ppm were perhaps perilously close to the level, around 150 ppm, below which plants cannot grow. (See, “Twilight of the Climate Change Movement” by Mario Loyola, Ibid.)

We recently learned that the Canadian government has determined yet again that, polar bears are doing just fine. Who and what of God’s creatures will the Left choose to spotlight next as being in the crosshairs of modernity, unicorns and leprechauns? On the bright side, with creatures like Al Gore and James Hansen headed for extinction there is at least a chance that unbiased scientific inquiry will survive pervasive politicization, common sense will flourish, a new age of reason will prevail and the productive can get back to making America great again.

Imposition of command-economy solutions to the non-problem of global warming, handed down by official government experts from their ivory towers and enforced by unelected authoritarian bureaucrats, is what the dispiriting hand of socialism brings to the table. No amount of Leftist propaganda about stopping the seas from rising will turn that sow’s ear into a silk purse!

Every year produces more raw data than the year before,
and the discrepancies between the new data and the
simple climate models are increasing. ~Mario Loyola

 

 

 

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

Science of Consensus, Global Warming, Menudo and Sex

Menudo-yo-yo

Generally, when people in the post-modern industrialized world talk about climate change and ruminate about risks, threats and responsibility for global warming, they are not actually speaking, literally. They all are mostly speaking figuratively, metaphorically and politically about something else altogether

For example, figuratively, CO2 is bad–i.e., . The “C” word is destroying the planet, figuratively! Literally, however, it’s only America’s CO2 that is really bad. Even so, by bad we don’t mean that CO2 is literally, bad. When we say CO2 is bad we actually are only saying that too much CO2 is bad when what we really mean is that America produces too much CO2 and because it does America is causing, global warming.

However, we don’t literally mean that global warming is actually bad– global warming has always been good for humanity. It’s cold that kills! Rather, what we really mean is an idea: that a certain bunch of humans should not be allowed to cause global warming without the permission of the rest of us.

So, when we say global warming is bad we’re actually speaking metaphorically. We are not actually saying WE are bad because WE are making too much CO2 and by extension, causing global warming. What we really mean is that America and capitalism are responsible because they’re causing us to produce too much CO2 without our permission.

In other words, the consensus that humans cause global warming is not really about anything that is being talked about figuratively and metaphorically. Rather, it is a consensus of the Eurocommies and Democrat party, Western academia, government bureaucrats, United Nations, radical Islam, anarchists and every coffee klatch Hollywood, drug-addled, drama queen and self-defeating soupy malcontent. In other words, it’s how a ‘weird mob’ on the Left feels–i.e., they believe America is responsible for all the world’s problems and want to grind our way of life under their collective liberal fascist heels.

The consensus science of global warming is a lot like menudo soup. Literally, menudo is beef tripe and hominy in a seasoned broth of boiled bones. Metaphorically and figuratively, menudo may conjure up notions of something offal and nasty in the opinion of some– but, their prejudice is not the reality of all–e.g., for others, menudo is steeped in cultural significance.

Since menudo is time and labor-intensive to prepare as the tripe takes hours to cook (or else it is extremely tough)… the dish is often prepared communally and eaten at a feast. Documents from the Works Progress Administration indicate that in the 1930s, among migrant workers in Arizona, menudo parties were held regularly to celebrate births, Christmas, and other occasions. ~wiki

“Finally,” Michael Crichton would remind us to notice, “where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E = mc². Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.”

Fortunately, while speech may not be so free on college campuses where academia is paid by the government to support global warming propaganda and political correctness is used to crush diversity of viewpoints, in other places speech has never been more free–e.g., Newt Gingrich observed that Obama was the first anti-American president. Rudy Giuliani said Hillary Clinton, ‘could be considered a founding member of ISIS.’ Ted Cruz called Trump a “sniveling coward,” as National Enquirer magazine reported that Ted Cruz is now on its infamous sex scandal list among others like, John Edwards, Tiger Woods, Jessie Jackson and Gary Hart– all lying cheaters who the magazine ‘outed’ years ago.

John Kerry is the second anti-American Secretary of State and we recently learned from terrorist events in Europe why Belgium has been labeled as a country that has lost control of its national identity. We may be getting closer to the time when people are free to say that socialists have been at war with America long before ISIS; and, the Left’s use of global warming has been just one of many useful tools they use to divide the people.

This is how the global warming alarmist community thinks. It wants to frighten, intimidate and then assume command. It needs a “crisis” to take advantage of, a hobgoblin to menace the people, so that they will beg for protection from the imaginary threat. The alarmists’ “better world” is one in which they rule a global welfare state. They’ve admitted this themselves. (Link)

 

The only “consensus” demonstrated to date
is that the global-warming community
is a weird mob. ~Tony Thomas

 

 

 

 

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

Oh Be Still My Beating Heart– as the Globe Warms

Strings of angles

These Are The Days Of Our Lives.

Holy politics Batman. Hillary Clinton actually still gets votes after going all climate change BAZINGA! on us, promising a solar panel on every roof. Yahoo, another 8 years of Maroon-in-Chief. 

There is no debate. Tu quoque or not tu quoque– that is the question: Nature gives us pause; nearly two decades of the fair Hiatus! A global warming slowdown that global warming alarmists could not predict and must now deny; a quietus the Left must whip, scorn, spurn, ignore. The recent March equinox is just the beginning. We are about to witness one of the most awesome global warming phenomena ever seen: summer! No one can stop it.

There surely is unanimous agreement that climate change has been occurring without interruption for more than a million years and based on that alone, I would be skeptical of beliefs that climate has ever stopped changing. As for what may be the cause of climate change, a belief that humans are the cause of it is inherently political, typically involving self-serving half-truths, intentionally deceptive pseudoscience (e.g., phony statistics), faked expertise and exaggerated concerns to take advantage of the superstition and ignorance of others to achieve a hidden agenda. Mostly, the real motive is to rob the productive of the fruits of their blood, sweat and investment.

The allocation of scarce resources for the maximization of net present wealth requires personal freedom. Instead of the populist vision, a thousand points of light (popularized by former US president H. W. Bush), global warming is being used to extinguish human rights. AGW (the theory that humanity causes climate change) is no longer about science: it’s about the individual vs. the state. Global warming is a battle between the Left and right to determine who shall decide our future. Personal freedom is making personal decisions about how we choose to lead our own lives; and, it is not about what we will be permitted to do – and to have and enjoy by dent of our physical and creative endeavors – by a remote government elite.

Donald Trump is taking a lot of heat but not for what he says. Trump’s big sin is giving us a choice. Votes for Trump are essentially a public referendum about if it will continue to be acceptable for the Left to use political correctness as a tool for the high tech lynching of opponents of their ideology. Social waterboarding of skeptics of the Left’s initiatives and of academia’s fevered claims about climate change are only in the best interests of people who believe in the sacrifice of the individual on the altar of good intentions.

Why do we still have troops in Germany? We gave over Subic Bay in the Philippines and abandoned Iraq but we are still in Japan and Korea? If they don’t want us there why should we pay for it and if they do why shouldn’t they pay for it? And, it’s time the Eurocommies either started paying their own way to prop up the Western world or roll over and die off instead of trying to pick our next president, again…

It is time we abandon the silly notion that soldiers are willing die for NATO. We should know by now that the United Nations is anti-American and politely demand that they move their headquarters out of NY. Let the UN move to the impoverished-shores of energy-deprived Africa where their beneficence can be tested and more surely realized since they will be serving their own needs as well.

Even California has a vote this time around: Trump or tripe in the classrooms? That’s the big Left vs. right issue that no one in the media is talking about. Nevertheless, the politically-motivated inculcation of global warming alarmism shines a spotlight on the dangers of ‘Common Core’ and a centralized, entrenched and too-big-to-fail government-education complex that determines what is written on the blackboard.

That’s the way the children of ISIS are
raised– What could go wrong?

 

 

 

 

Updated 24-March-2016
Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Art of Global Warming

Pepper Hot Weather

Western governments call on academia’s climatologists to halt climate change and stop seas from rising. Big job!

Once viewed as simple school teachers, climatologists with their computers and binders of temperatures from around the world have been given the job of proving government must be given power over the people to mitigate the combined effects of humanity, evil business, out-of-control capitalism and excesses of modernity that together are producing too much CO2. They believe this excess CO2 is more than nature can handle and that it causes global warming. Leftists, liberals and environmentalists agree and believe we must be very concerned; and, we all should be fearful enough of the consequences of global warming to do whatever we can to stop it.

Western climatologists in particular have studied slices of trees that have been gathered from remote areas. They count rings and concoct sacred formulas to learn the secret truths embedded within the rings. As the Western climatologists attempt to divine miracles within the rings of trees, environmentalists blame business for cutting down trees, liberals moan about us humans using too many trees and Leftists want government to stop us.

Perhaps even worse than global warming, nothing terrifies liberal fascists more than people who are free to make choices for themselves. The real miracle is that enterprising individuals working in a dynamic capitalistic economy, also live in the beauty of the real world and have been able to cut through all of the superstition, ignorance and government fearmongering.

Using less wood is logically inconsistent with reducing C02 emissions on this planet. So the solution is to grow more trees and use more wood. And the public is being told, unfortunately, the opposite by many people — and they’re getting the impression that by using less wood we can save the trees. 80% of all the timber produced in the United States, for example, is from private land. Why is that? Because private landowners can make money growing trees, because people want wood. If those private landowners had no market for wood, they’d clear the forest away and grow something else that they could make money from instead. When you go into a lumber yard, you’re given the impression that by buying wood you’re causing the forest to be lost, when in fact what you’re doing is sending a signal into the market to plant more trees. That’s why there’s just about the same area of forest in the United States today as there was a hundred years ago. And that’s why there’s no more land being used for agriculture today than there was a hundred years ago. It’s because of high-yield agriculture. ~Patrick Moore (cofounder of Greenpeace, renegade environmentalist and global warming heretic)

Kneeling 0n the bank of an ancient river and peering into the mud, there isn’t much there in the waters and mummified remains of petrified herbs upon which the modern-day sorcerers of global warming can work their magic. Rather, it is what they cannot see and what they feel from head to toe that provides most of the information that they know will ultimately guide us to the truth, their truth.

The ancient sacred rituals have given way to a more scientific interpretation of information, which is no less sacred. Like any ritual art the methods of transforming disturbances into predictions must be nurtured and protected from skeptics and unbelievers.

The ritual is not complete until computers complete their job of churning the last bit of data. Only then can the sorcerers share the precious results of all these machinations with their elders and peers; and, then they must disseminate their precious forecasts of the future to the teachers and a waiting public along with the explanations that must be concocted to help us understand what computers are telling us.

Legend days are over. This is a new science that cannot be ignored. And, so we must pay tribute to them for their knowledge and new roll in society through ever higher taxes and other burdens they say we must assume for the benefit of future generations. This is truth at its most profound level because most of what the witchdoctors of doom have predicted cannot actually be observed in nature by the old science.

So far, only Westerners have mastery over the skills that are required to accurately foretell the climate. Only climatologists have felt the immensity of impending doom in their blood: the demise of species and indigenous races, the record heat, boiling waters, rising seas, extreme storms, relentless snow then no snow and no more rain, followed by searing drought, starvation, death. We are responsible for all of the bad that has not yet happened and someone must warn the congregation of the coming disaster and stop the evildoers.

Is climatology the product of modern-day technology or insanity? Are the sorcerers of global warming spreading hidden truths about climate change and saving humanity from itself or are they new-age charlatans and doom-makers engaged only on serving their own interests and needs?

On a positive note, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, using twin satellites orbiting Earth in tandem to measure changes in Earth’s gravity, figured out that the seas are not actually rising as fast as global warming alarmists predicted. The rate of sea level rise slowed by about 20%, or about 1 millimeter per year, according to a study published in Science.

“In many other respects, the ill effects of warming are overblown,” says Prof. Lindzen. “Sea levels, for example, have been increasing since the end of the last ice age. When you look at recent centuries in perspective, ignoring short-term fluctuations, the rate of sea-level rise has been relatively uniform (less than a couple of millimeters a year). There’s even some evidence that the rate was higher in the first half of the twentieth century than in the second half.”

According to old school statisticians McShane and Wyner on the reliability of least squares reconstructions of proxy-based historical temperatures, “the long flat handle of the hockey stick [referring to a graph adopted by the UN-IPCC purporting to be an accurate record of Earth’s global mean temperature over the last 1000 years] is best understood to be a feature of regression and less a reflection of our knowledge of the truth.” But, the new science of global warming does not want to hear that truth.

If we do nothing to stop this insanity, science will rightly be regarded as just another racket. ~Richard S. Lindzen

 

 

 

Updated, 11 March 2016
Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Portable Essay Technique – Too Much Global Warming

Amazing Portable Essay Writer

Is it Safe?

I had just moved to a new neighborhood. I knew no one or anything really and was only eleven when I made a great discovery that changed my life. I was going nowhere with this paper route and thought my best days obviously were over – especially early in the morning, every weekend when the Sunday edition was so heavy. I just shook my head as I folded papers and wondered, “Why the hell do I do this while everyone else sleeps?”

About then a junk insert that fell out of the paper, inauspicious as it was, nearly went unnoticed. The crafty headline went something like this: Make money writing about anything or even nothing. With your very own all-purpose essay format even you can be a government expert!

That is when I learned that there is too much bullshit in the world. Are you worried about too much fat or meat or SALT or diet Coke in your diet or too many parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere, etc.? I will prove it is all BS right here and now by using the article above about the reasons why the ‘Scientists can’t agree whether salt is killing us’ to expose below the reasons why global warming is nothing but a hoax (it is simply a Leftist scare tactic to take over the economy). And, proving it is BS is as simple as exchanging the word ‘salt’ in the article above with CO2 or global warming, to wit:

For years, the federal government has advised Americans that humanity must stop using fossil fuel, and that this consumption is warming the planet with disastrous consequences for the Earth and all living things on the Earth.

However, unknown to many consumers urged to buy electric cars and pay higher taxes to subsidize more expensive alternative fuels, this longstanding warning about too much warming has come under assault by scientists who say that a higher concentration of atmospheric CO2 is without risk.

Moreover, according to studies published in recent years by pillars of the academic community, the lower utilization of fossil fuel recommended by the government might actually be dangerous. “There is no longer any valid basis for the current warnings about releasing too much CO2,” said Wagathon, a blog contributor at ‘Climate Etc.’ and one of many non-government scientists involved in exposing the global warming hoax. “So why are we still scaring people about global warming?”

Nevertheless, the debate over CO2 is among the most contentious in the field of climate, and other scientists, including the leadership of Western academia and Western governments continue to support the decades-old warning about too much CO2 in the air.  The result is that as the federal government prepares its influential EPA Guidelines and crafts new energy policies for the rest of us to live by, bureaucrats confront a quandary: They must either retract one of their oldest climate change commandments or overlook prominent new doubts about the global warming hypothesis.

The EPA Guidelines cover an array of power plant energy generation issues including the use of coal, oil, natural gas and ethanol. They have broad effects on the wellbeing of all Americans, shape the utilization of scarce resources in the economy, increase the costs of basic goods and services enjoyed by all, guide advertisers and serve as a touchstone for reams of global warming research.

Wagathon said that as a scientific skeptic who has been branded by the global warming establishment as a denier, he has been trying to stay neutral in what he considers the “hot buttonest” of topics.

“When you are making recommendations for 300 million people, you have to be concerned about any data that suggests harm,” Wagathon said. Climate change has become a Left versus right issue and some politicians on the right said that the federal guidelines would consider comments from the public and scientific skeptics who question the advice of government scientists. Unfortunately, known mostly for their general incompetence, modern-day politicians on both sides of every issue generally are expected only to reaffirm the status quo such as the current convenient belief in global warming, despite the obvious ideological biases that exist, if it serves their own personal agenda.

No matter what the government comes up with on global warming, however, Americans may be left confused. The scientific question remains: How much is too much?

There is one area of consensus: Both sides agree that too much fossil fuel, especially for people who are concerned about pollution, can be dangerous. The critical disagreement concerns how to define “too much.”

Under the current government guidelines, too much is more than 400 ppm of atmospheric CO2 – the current amount of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. For people in the developed world and especially in US (the most prosperous nation on Earth), the current level of fossil-fuel use should be zero per day.

If the official government CO2 warnings are correct, Americans are indeed endangering themselves on a massive scale. Americans typically go way over the limit, meeting around 82 percent of US daily energy demands using fossil fuels.

If the skeptics are correct, on the other hand, most Americans are fine. In their view, a typical healthy economy requires more energy for continued wellbeing and to raise  the general standard of living for everyone whereas using less energy is not without significantly raising health risks.

To understand how divided scientists are on global warming consider that even authorities within the UN-IPCC, one of the organizations promoting global warming alarmism worldwide and the use of more expensive alternative fuels, don’t agree.

“The totality of the evidence strongly suggests that Americans should be lowering their fossil fuel use,” say Leftist politicians and government scientists. “Everyone agrees that current fossil fuel use is too high.”

This is the long-established view. It is based on the observation that, for some people, reducing fossil fuel consumption can actually lower utility bills. Because high utility bills is common and raises the risk of being unable to afford the basic necessities, strict fossil fuel limits will benefit society, according to this view.

None of this is persuasive to people like Wagathon, a taxpayer who is being fleeced to underwrite expensive subsidies to pay for the alternative fuels that few of us use.

For one thing, the lower utility bills that come from abstaining from fossil fuel-produced energy are relatively small on average, because individuals vary widely in their desire to place solar cells made in China on their Mexican-made roof tiles or buying shares in a windmill on a hill in the desert for a tax write-off.

Moreover, while a person could reduce his or her fossil fuel use by driving a battery-powered Tesla as the US government recommends and thereby see a drop in gasoline expenses, that also means he or she also will pay nothing toward maintaining the roads they’re driving on, which are paid for by gas taxes. He or she also will be using electricity generated from legacy facilities like dams on rivers and coal-fired power plants which were built to provide taxpayers with light, heat, clean water to their homes, and to treat sewage and provide energy to their employers. This legacy energy was not built and priced with the intention of enabling millionaires to drive expensive tax-subsidized electric cars to the golf course while workers wait in gas lines.

“The current EPA guidelines are based on almost nothing,” said Wagathon. “Some people really want to hang onto this belief system about global warming. But they are ignoring the evidence.”

How could something as simple as CO2 stymie scientists for so long? The answer is that, despite the global warming claims and hazards of too much CO2, actually substantiating how increased atmospheric CO2 influences global temperatures is notoriously difficult.

While the energy use of test animals are easily controlled, humans and their whims introduce an array of murky variables, making people less-than-ideal subjects for what scientists call randomized controlled trials, their preferred form of research. This is especially true when these experiments go on for years, as global warming research often does.

In the absence of such experiments, scientists are forced to consider lesser types of evidence. And in recent years, the debate appears to have tilted in the skeptics’ favor.

Based on our most accurate data, collected by satellites, there has been no global warming for nearly 2 decades. There is no evidence connecting CO2 and higher average global temperatures. There has always been insufficient proof that heeding UN-IPCC recommended limits on fossil fuel use improved health outcomes.

It does not require published results from a massive research effort to know what is going on. Accurate findings do not take much study: people who have less energy actually have poor health outcomes.

To explain this finding, researchers need only point to Third World and developing nations. Their experiences suggests that lower energy use may have harmful effects on health and survival and increasing access to low-cost energy creates more health, wealth and wellbeing.

While many studies are often financed by interested industries, Western government funds global warming alarmism studies. Politics and science have become intertwined and a lot more tribal!

From the beginning, global warming alarmism has drawn criticism. Some of the earliest notions that Americans were using too much fossil fuel arose from international comparisons and mostly were based on envy.

It turned out that some cultures, especially Europe, consumed less energy and had lower economic growth and a lower standard of living as a result.

In one influential paper, researchers learned that based on GDP European countries would rank among the 5 lowest states in the US if they were states instead of envious sovereign nations full of envious, holier-than-thou, secular, socialist bigots. It is certain that averring to the lifestyles of different populations, whether they are African Bushmen, the Chimbu of New Guinea, the Caraja of Brazil or Eskimos, all of whom consume exceptionally low levels of fossil fuel, is irrelevant as those remote peoples are too different from modern populations to make sound comparisons.

Moreover, none of the well-recognized global warming alarmists – like Al Gore and all of the corn-fed lifetime-tenured professors of doom  in America– has the slightest desire to adapt to a lower standard of living than is afforded by life in a modern society.

Looking at the example of life in the Western world, it is better to be poor in a rich country than poor in a poor country. People used much less energy in prehistoric times and they had shorter lifespans than is now available to us.

In a free country, people should have the option to live a simpler life if they wish. “I have ‘green’ friends who will only ride a bicycle and won’t ever drive a car,” Wagathon said. “I do not tell them they’re foolish.” However, are Americans driving too much? That is a matter of dispute. Like delivering heavy newspapers on a Sunday morning while others sleep, many people drive to work where they toil to provide the goods and services others take for granted and out of these workers’ wages the government takes a share in taxes that it uses to enable others to live their ‘green’ lifestyles in relative comfort and security.

“There is no doubt that unfettered use of fossil fuel can produce pollution in specific populations. The problem is demonstrating the efficacy of lowering energy use in a fun-loving, American free-living population,” says Wagathon. “In America, we have the technology to combat pollution and we use it but that takes more not less energy. It is poor countries that lack energy that pollute the most.”

Despite the uncertainty, no matter what the West claims everyone else should do, people living in the Third World and developing countries want to live more like us. They do not appreciate being told that they must live poorer than we do. Western academia’s restrictive energy use recommendations will not last long there.

The global warming alarmists set a poor example. Their argument for restrictions on energy use fails when no one on that side of the argument will declare victory when more people live more poorly and die sooner due to the adoption of their recommendations.

The carbon footprint of Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio – both strong activists/advocates for fossil fuel reductions – apparently have colossally large personal carbon footprints. Their hypocrisy is not lost on the public.

Climate scientists, with their much more modest life styles, can’t match Gore and DiCaprio in the carbon footprint department, but nevertheless their carbon footprints are much greater than the average middle class individual owing to their colossal amount of air travel. ~Judith Curry, Walking the climate talk

Let’s get real: in no other aspect of human interaction is the measure of success considered to be the reasonableness of behaviors today based on statistical predictions about what the world may be like 100 years later. Gore and DiCaprio are living for today not tomorrow; and, the rest of us will always have more to worry about than what the weather will be like in 2116.

 

 

 

 

 

Updated 21 February 2016
Posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Great California Flood of 2016

Great Flood Sacramento CA 1862

Extreme Atmospheric River Storms Bring Devastation

January 5, 1916 marked the 100 year anniversary of the Hatfield Flood that swept through San Diego, California. An eight-lane freeway flows through Mission Valley now, around office towers, shopping centers, condos and restaurants. The river that runs through Mission Valley in earlier days flowed past Indian villages, the home of Father Serra and his first mission in California and the Presidio which was garrisoned by Spaniards about 200 years ago. But, cloud-bursting torrents of rain in the Cuyamaca and Laguna Mountains filled the San Diego River to overflowing 100 years ago, leaving disaster in its wake.

The 1916 flood may have been caused by the worst rain ever in San Diego but it wasn’t the worst rain in California history. That distinction belongs to an earlier time. “The Great Flood of 1862,” says wiki, “was the largest flood in the recorded history of Oregon, Nevada, and California” (which began at the end of 1861).

We have geologic evidence through flood deposits that even bigger storms than 1861 happened about once every 300 years. We have six events in 1,800 years of geologic record. So we think this event happens, you know, once every hundred, 200 years or so, which puts it in the category as our big San Andreas earthquakes. ~Lucy Jones, USGS

The big one could be coming now – a Great Flood – heading our way. It’s happened before. It will happen again. But, one thing is different this time: if it happens now, the official government scientists of global warming will claim humanity’s CO2 caused it. The bigger problem is that we no longer believe what scientists say. Our government pays Western academia to create models that are worse than any looming natural disaster because without a belief in truth we have nothing.

The scientific failure here isn’t that models are inaccurate – it’s that the models are presented as undebatable apocalyptic predictors, harbingers of certain future catastrophe. Omens that compel us to rethink our lives. If we take issue with that, we’re heretics. (~Tom Hartsfield, Climate Models Botch Another Prediction)

Happy Isle Feb 18, 2016

 

 

 

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

It’s Time to Deny Everything You Think

Existence of God all Hashedf Out here

Your government wants so badly for you to believe in global warming. For your own good, and the good of others, don’t be a denier! Put aside any reservations you may have and immediately signify you understand; and, do not worry about it if you feel you perhaps should not trust the government. Your agreement is unnecessary.

…the president of the United States found himself negotiating with He Yafei, a Chinese deputy foreign minister well known for his exceptional command of English and his willingness to use it to advance his country’s worldview—with sometimes provocative arguments. German chancellor Angela Merkel and French president Nicolas Sarkozy pressed China and India to commit to binding targets on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. China and India announced they could not support a document that imposed specific numerical targets, even on the Americans and Europeans. Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg asked Indian officials how they could renounce the very plan they had proposed just a few hours earlier. President Mohamed Nasheed of the Maldives, an island chain that lies in the Indian Ocean about seven feet above sea level, demanded that the Chinese delegation explain how it could ask his country to “go extinct.” Sarkozy accused the Chinese of “hypocrisy,” He Yafei lectured the group on environmental damage from the Industrial Revolution, several NGOs accused Western officials of blocking a deal, and a few journalists accused Obama of selling out Europe by letting China off the hook. Not to be ignored, Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez called Obama the devil. A gathering that then – British Prime Minister Gordon Brown had hyped as “the most important conference since the Second World War” ended in acrimony and conflicting accounts of what had happened, and with no progress toward any meaningful agreement. ~Ian Bremmer, Every Nation for Itself: What Happens When No One Leads the World (2012)

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

Global Warming’s Climate of Fear

Climate of Fear denied

After twenty years of relentless propaganda and headline after headline… truth is that 57% of people just don’t believe that climate experts know what they are talking about. ~JoNova

“Nobel prize-winning scientist David Karoly,” reported ABC News in 2010, “says Australia’s current extreme weather is evidence of climate change.” Pioneer coral reef explorer and marine biologist, Walter Starck responds, “to attribute these floods to global warming is only a rerun of a similar attempt with tropical cyclones after hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. Since then several years of below average storm activity plus statistical studies showing no recent trend of increase have left the warmists looking for a new alarm.”

You probably have heard of El Niño and La Niña, describing warming and cooling phases that occur in the Pacific Ocean and its overlying atmosphere in cycles, and are associated with flooding and drought conditions over the land. But, have you heard about, La Nada? We’ve learned over the years that the land-based temperature record is bogus because official temperature measuring stations are improperly located with the result that the temperature readings are corrupted with a warming bias due to the Urban Heat Island effect (UHI). Once we adjust the record to account for a UHI systemic warming bias due to faulty station siting, such as locating official thermometers next to buildings, air conditioning ducts, asphalt parking lots and at busy airports, the amount of global warming supposedly caused by human CO2 is, nada.

Facts are facts: whether it’s caused by natural changes in the North Atlantic circulation patterns or solar activity, there has been no global warming for a while now, going on 20 years. Rather than warming alarmists’ predictions that our children would never know snow, we may actually be headed towards, as many outside Western academia predict, decades of global cooling.

Climate change is complex and its impacts more so. We have limited knowledge of the consequences of the modest change that has occurred in the past. There is even more uncertainty about the effects of the rapid change expected in the future. ~Richard Tol (Bogus prophecies of doom will not fix the climate)

It is continuing to allow fears of global warming to take our attention off the real crisis at hand that may spell, D·O·O·M! Tol pointed out that the Greek’s meltdown during the Eurocrisis in 2014 resulted in a 20% drop in income. None of the drop in the income of the average Greek was the result of climate change. It is Leftist, Eurocommunist thinking and government policies that brings their economy to the brink.

Being a card-carrying global warming, climate change alarmist is simple and can be very lucrative too. Simply bide your time, let natural oscillations take their course, and then blame any bad weather on humanity’s CO2. For example, the bi-monthly Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO is associated with variations in mid-latitude tropical thunderstorm activity) may interact with an Arctic Oscillation (AO is characterized by a counter-clockwise Arctic wind pattern) and a North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO is described as a blocking of the jet stream over the North Atlantic), and combine with an El Niño-Southern Oscillation. ENSO currently is in the phase of a peaking El Niño and a likely outcome of all these weather activities is a torrential rain event somewhere in Florida. When that happens a Nobel prize-winning climate scientist probably will point and proclaim the flood is an example of extreme weather and evidence of climate change.

Fact is, as yo wise Moma might tell ya’
weather is like a box of chocolates.
You never know what you’re gonna get.

 

 

 

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