Epidemic calculator: a visual calculator for modeling possible paths of COVID19https://t.co/bTnri01Xuk
(powered by a SEIR infection model) pic.twitter.com/GukwEyjT9s
— Gabriel Goh (@gabeeegoooh) March 16, 2020
“Carbon dioxide levels have risen inexorably since the 1700s. Yet despite this, climate sensitive indicators of human and environmental wellbeing that carbon dioxide affects directly, such as crop yields, food production, prevalence of hunger, access to cleaner water and biological productivity, and those that it affects indirectly, such as living standards and life expectancies, have improved virtually everywhere. In most areas they have never been higher, nor do they show any sustained signs of reversing.” ~Freeman Dyson
by Peter Lang and Ken Gregory
A new paper ‘Economic impact of energy consumption change caused by global warming’ finds global warming may be beneficial.
View original post 2,187 more words
Look as hard as you may for a long as you will and with as jaundiced and biased an eye as you please toward facts that justify Western academia’s belief in AGW (human-caused global warming) and still there is no adequate explanation for decades of relative quiescence in every meaningful metric of, weather. These are halcyon days compared to life in the LIA (Little Ice Age).
The height of the Little Ice Age is generally dated as 1650 to 1850 A.D. The American Revolutionary Army under General George Washington shivered at Valley Forge in the winter of 1777-78, and New York harbor was frozen in the winter of 1780. Historic snowstorms struck Lisbon, Portugal in 1665, 1744 and 1886. (P. Ferrara, To The Horror Of Global Warming Alarmists…, Forbes)
Perhaps a cooling Earth and not a warmer planet is the reality that we all must learn to accept, possibly for decades to come… because, we live in the world and not in mathematical models of the globe that are constructed using statistics. It’s happened before and that’s the real problem with the AGW hypothesis: nothing is happening now that hasn’t happened in the past for reasons we all accept as being, entirely natural.
AGW obviously is a Left versus right issue. Predicting a coming cataclysm is what the Left has found useful to take over the economy. The MSM jumped the shark with it’s proven willingness to abandon the scientific method for ideological and political convenience and because, astrology still sells.
The AGW hypothesis is essentially a scientifically untestable prediction of continued global warming, despite historical and future observations of natural climate cycles. Western academics continue to cry wolf to help raise the government revenue needed to fund a metalizing Socialist-Democrat bureaucracy, to be paid for by the hard work of the productive. Nevertheless, everyday reality is a metric we cannot ignore.
How long must we wait before we stop pushing the climate alarm button? How many years of no global warming does it take to be unafraid? Must we wait for seas to recede to have a nice day? Let’s enjoy global warming while it lasts and have a, Happy 21st Century and a very…
Explaining why, “Greens Lost, and Trump Won,” Joel Kotkin abandons political correctness, stating that, “the green movement has morphed into ‘a religion’ sometimes marginally tethered to reality. Rather than engage in vigorous debate, they insist that the ‘science is settled’ meaning not only what the challenges are but also the only acceptable solutions to them. There’s about as much openness about goals and methods within the green lobby today as there was questioning the existence of God in Medieval Europe. With the Judeo-Christian and Asian belief systems in decline, particularly among the young, environmentalism offers ‘science’ as the basis of a new theology.” (See, Daily Beast, 7.22.17)
How did it come to this– the politicization of science and the hoax and scare tactics of global warming alarmism? A paper, published recently in the journal Environment Pollution and Climate Change (by Ned Nikolov and Karl Zeller) explains when and where reason and common sense went off the rails. All of the hullabaloo began as a wildly inaccurate of vision of nature known as the greenhouse metaphor that was simply stuck into science, where it remains today despite its departure from reason, as follows:
For 190 years the atmosphere has been thought to warm Earth by absorbing a portion of the outgoing LW infrared radiation and reemitting it back toward the surface, thus augmenting the incident solar flux. This conceptualized continuous absorption and downward reemission of thermal radiation enabled by certain trace gases known to be transparent to solar rays while opaque to electromagnetic long-wavelengths has been likened to the trapping of heat by glass greenhouses, hence the term ‘atmospheric greenhouse effect’. Of course, we now know that real greenhouses preserve warmth not by trapping infrared radiation but by physically obstructing the convective heat exchange between a greenhouse interior and the exterior environment. Nevertheless, the term ‘greenhouse effect’ stuck in science.
The hypothesis that a freely convective atmosphere could retain (trap) radiant heat due its opacity has remained undisputed since its introduction in the early 1800s even though it was based on a theoretical conjecture that has never been proven experimentally. It is important to note in this regard that the well-documented enhanced absorption of thermal radiation by certain gases does not imply an ability of such gases to trap heat in an open atmospheric environment. This is because, in gaseous systems, heat is primarily transferred (dissipated) by convection (i.e. through fluid motion) rather than radiative exchange. If gases of high LW absorptivity/emissivity such as CO2, methane and water vapor were indeed capable of trapping radiant heat, they could be used as insulators. However, practical experience has taught us that thermal radiation losses can only be reduced by using materials of very low LW absorptivity/emissivity and correspondingly high thermal reflectivity such as aluminum foil. These materials are known among engineers at NASA and in the construction industry as radiant barriers . It is also known that high-emissivity materials promote radiative cooling. Yet, all climate models proposed since 1800s are built on the premise that the atmosphere warms Earth by limiting radiant heat losses of the surface through the action of infrared absorbing gases aloft.
There is a charade going on in the politics of Western science right now and it’s called global warming alarmism. Reality is not a matter of taking a poll and abandoning scientific-skepticism for reasons of political convenience.
It’s all the logical consequence of ‘Climate Hysteria’ since the late 20th century– the hoax and scare tactic of global warming alarmism to marginalize American Exceptionalism gave birth to the nihilism of 21st century Amero-Eurocommunism. Western academia’s role is less an instance of a stab in the back of Julius Caesar by Cassius and Brutus than the betrayal of Jesus and the defilement of ISIS. Science has been sacrificed on the altar of liberal utopian, Leftist ideology. ~Wagathon
Is the Left the New Confederacy?
This is how a hoax dies: a consensus voted for Trump– and, poof! Climate change catastrophism is dead; and, now… global warming alarmism is way passé. In an odd turn of events, the Trump-hating Left is the new Confederacy.
Anti-Trump resistance is not pro-America it’s choosing pro-UN/Eurocommunism, liberty-robbing, pro-bureaucracy, phony-science global warming alarmism. We have today, a palpable glimpse of America-past: the Trump-haters are like the resistance Abraham Lincoln faced. The Left especially is in a fugue state where blue has turned to gray and life has turned into a nightmare from which they may never wake up.
Blue America has become a new ‘Bizarro’ confederacy of compact areas of densely populated urbanites that have ceded personal freedom to overlords of unelected bureaucrats schooled in the European style of communism. These ‘Blues’ cling to a flag-burning, pro-Castro, seas-rising/anti-business ideology and dream about actors sticking knives and putting bullets into the backs of Trump, Conservatives, Tea Partiers, scientific sceptics and everyone casting politically-incorrect ballots for anyone other than Hillary Clinton.
Seeing it all unfold is like watching Salma Hayek’s immigrant character in the movie, ‘Beatriz at Dinner’ fantasize about sticking a knife in the neck of John Lithgow’s character, a California land developer (putative stand-in for Donald Trump) for displacing her and her family from the mangroves in Mexico ~30 years ago. The America that took her in is of course to blame. In reality but not a part of the script, the chopping down of 143 acres of mangrove forest for a development project outside of Cancún is really happening, the work having begun just last year by an Italian developer, all at the behest of the Mexican government (Mexican tourist board). The building plans, all blessed by the Mexican courts pending relocation of crocodiles, lizards, frogs and other animals, are to include the building of a big Catholic church with the tallest cross in South America.
The battleground has gone from human-caused climate change to Trump-Putin election collusion to obstruction of justice to public-funded health care. And, of course, much like their past concerns about global warming, everything is all chop-chop and phony. No one has any doubts that climate changes or that Hillary Clinton caused her own problems of hacked emails or that John Podesta’s emails where phished by scammers. Most people realize that the Democrat party purposefully destroyed the health care system so that it could more easily be taken over down the road by the government– a TSA of medicine.
The big change in politics is that the public now knows the government doesn’t really care what they think. With the overturn of the Obama legacy, beginning with kicking Hillary to the curb, Trump voters slipped the noose of political correctness. In the process, however, voters also freed the liberal MSM from maintaining the pretense that it has a conscience: Dan Rather didn’t invent fake and biased news– it has been with us all along and now we all know it, see it and no longer believe it.
Everything has changed. The Left just knew we had to do something about climate change and that it was better to do something half-assed about it now, even if it meant sacking the economy and spending trillions of dollars we don’t have. The alternative of course was to do whatever might actually be necessary down the road when we had the chance to understand more about it; but, that course of action posed a threat to the Left that we’d discover global warming is not a problem.
As an added twist, the element of catastrophism was introduced into speculations about global warming theory because researchers were seduced by the idea of seeing their speculations being acted on today not later or… never. The tyranny of immediacy was used to stampede the herd into action: the illusion of accomplishing something now, even if it meant acting badly on bad information, was seen as more important than acting better later with better information. The deep state calculus was that the illusion of accomplishing anything now – even if that meant doing the wrong thing – was more important than doing anything later, even if we learned through a better understanding of nature that we should do nothing at all.
Where are we now that no one buys the old charade of a supposed 97% consensus of opinion concerning the impending calamity we face due to human-caused global warming? The Left’s apocalyptic vison of modernity has been dashed. Rational people are prepared to address the reality that the future is always uncertain. What is the fix for the rest of the population? The closest thing we have to a savior is a 250 year old contract we call the Constitution that gave power in the last election to disenfranchised voters in fly-over America. The politics of the electoral college trumped the hoax and scare tactics of global warming alarmism and the illusion of certainty about climate change. With that, everything else came tumbling down like a house of cards.
Michael Mann’s hockey stick science and Al Gore’s vision of Earth-destroying runaway global warming has been thoroughly debunked. It has all been the product of a knowing and purposeful deception– a scientific fraud. A big hoax! There is no need to sift through the ashes and look for further evidence that Western Academia stabbed America in the back and sacrificed scientific integrity and honesty on the alter of Leftist ideology. Gore’s faux-science follow-up to the ’06, An Inconvenient Truth (titled, An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth To Power) will disabuse reasonable people of the notion that anything has changed. [e.g., see: Minister of Unified Earth]
Perhaps science can now fix itself but it will take a while. Western academia now has the credibility of CNN. The bitter pill to swallow is that the golden promise of universal education has become a propaganda campaign against individual liberty, personal responsibility and even free speech on public campuses. An entrenched Leftist bureaucracy in liberal state-run institutions has declared war on Americanism. Tie a bell to these cats and there will be ringing the next time you hear something that sounds fishy.
Living up to his campaign promises concerning government-mandated CO2 restrictions may be the most important thing any US politician has done in our lifetimes. “Since 2009, the US and other governments have undertaken actions with respect to global climate that are not scientifically justified and that already have, and will continue to cause serious social and economic harm—with no environmental benefits,” writes Dr. Richard Lindzen in a petition to President Donald Trump. “While we support effective, affordable, reasonable and direct controls on conventional environmental pollutants, carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. To the contrary, there is clear evidence that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is environmentally helpful to food crops and other plants that nourish all life. It is plant food, not poison… We are now at a crossroads. Candidates Trump and Pence promised not only to keep the US out of a harmful international climate agreement, but also to rollback misdirected, pointless government restrictions of CO2 emissions. My fellow scientists [300 signatories] support you as you seek to keep your campaign promises.”
“The two most important days in your life are the day you are born and the day you find out why.” ~Mark Twain
Hot Stinking Sheepskins
The global warming alarmists believe they are in a battle between good versus evil, fighting on the side of God– a new age urban god. AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) is a belief that activities of us monkeys caused global warming over the last half of the 2oth century. They don’t believe they’re saving lives– saving the world from us is their mission.
The CO2 warm-fighters employ the latest vocabulary to sell their goods. By definition, Anthropogenic means caused by human activity. Paleoanthropology is a the branch of anthropology that concerns itself with hominid fossils and that’s where it all started: archeological evidence suggests hominids’ use of fire goes back as far as 1.5 million years ago. “In addition,” says the University of Waikato, “the controlled use of fire is evidence of the ability to plan ahead, and would also have aided social interactions as people gathered round the hearth.”
How far have we 21st century moderns come as we gather around our gas-fired hearths to contemplate the future? Just look at what us sons and daughters of hominids are planning ahead about now– “climate change, is already distempering the seasons with bounding extremes of heat and cold, and magnifying storms and droughts; increasingly, it will spoil harvests, spread tropical diseases, and drown coastlines. (Less well known is the threat of more frequent earthquakes and volcanic eruptions.)” ~The Capitalocene [link]
It shouldn’t be disappointing that government scientists of AGW alarmism are as biased and narrow-minded as the rest of us monkeys but at the same time, being so contemptuous of mother nature as to believe they can explain it away with statistics is the height of hubris. The alarmists are disappointed when reality isn’t all it’s cracked up to be and instead of seeing the world as it is, they become dedicated to making reality conform to the cribbed expectations of their beliefs and call it science!
AGW is more than a scientific hypothesis. It has become a cult and there is no use arguing with its members who believe what they’re saying. That said, this approach worked out OK for some of Hollywood’s best-known and wealthiest celebrities, in addition to America’s red shirts and green shirts and the entrenched Leftist bureaucracy, which includes the vast, government-funded, Western education complex, not to mention enemies and enviers of America around the world and haters of philosophies of individual liberty and the idea personal responsibility.
Those who despise capitalism have no respect for we anthropoi who believe there is a higher authority than ideologically-motivated establishment politics. For us who are skeptical of official government-blessed knowledge, there are higher authorities: integrity, honor and respect for the scientific method.
Over the years, I have watched a growing intolerance at universities in this country – not intolerance along racial or ethnic or gender lines – there, we have made laudable progress. Rather, a kind of intellectual intolerance, a political one-sidedness, that is the antithesis of what universities should stand for. It manifests itself in many ways: in the intellectual monocultures that have taken over certain disciplines; in the demands to disinvite speakers and outlaw groups whose views we find offensive; in constant calls for the university itself to take political stands. We decry certain news outlets as echo chambers, while we fail to notice the echo chamber we’ve built around ourselves. ~John Etchemendy (‘The threat from within’)
What passes for science in the halls of academia these days has less to do with skill and ability than who are better at marketing fearsome scenarios of certain doom, who are big promoters of big government planning and who are the most enthusiastically eager to allow science to be used as a propaganda tool to usurp the fruits of others’ labors by taxing energy.
Because all human activities, along with all natural and manufactured
objects, represent quantities of energy, a society’s per capita
energy supply, taking into account the efficiency
with which it’s used, is the best proxy for
that society’s standard of life.
~Vaclav Smil’s Energy in Nature… @Capitalocene (Ibid)
“Don’t cut off your nose to spite your face”
Oh the pathos of suffering from normal situations– like, the weather. In the putative Western science of climate change, ‘climate’ is the statistics of weather over 30-year intervals. For those who suffer from climate because it is e.g., dryer, wetter, warmer or hotter, foggier, cloudier, cooler or colder, more stormy or arid than normal (i.e., compared to the last 30-years since the last time it was actually this cold was 300 million years ago), there is but one common sense cure– move!
It is inconvenient for the Left that the Jew-hating, anti-Christian radical Islamic state and its holy warriors around the globe care less about global warming than lopping heads off of Eurocommies, breathless progressive Charlie Hebdo subscribers and Leftist government toadies of climate change alarmism in their neighborhoods and classrooms. No, it’s not possible to just get along with those who are fundamentally certain the way the rest of us must think and act is “settled truth.”
The one field where the science must be “settled,” of course, is global warming. Or is it “climate change,” when clearly no skeptic doubts climate changes? Why the alteration in terminology? Perhaps because, in 2007, the world’s leading experts at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] reported its “central forecast” for long-term warming to be 3 degrees C. Yet, since then its reports have not listed a single central estimate but did reduce its minimal expected warming down from a 1.5-degrees rise to only a 1.0-degree temperature increase… As climatologist Judith Curry testified to Congress, IPCC models have forecast surface temperatures to increase 0.2 degrees C each 21st century decade. But during the first fifteen years, actual temperatures only increased 0.05, four times lower than predicted. And the models cannot explain why more than 40 percent of the temperature increases since 1900 took place between 1910 and 1945, which produced a mere 10 percent of the carbon emissions. ~American Spectator, ‘Treating science with the respect it requires’ [Link]
Scientific skepticism is more prudent than ever considering climate change has become a Left versus right issue; but, why has global warming become more political than scientific? The answer to that may be found in research coming out of Yale University (‘The Cultural Cognition Project’). “That research finds progressives risk averse, biased toward control of their environment, while conservatives tolerate risk, partial toward greater freedom — the recognition of which does not overcome the progressive insistence that relativity explains all motion [despite quantum mechanics] or that global warming is settled science.” (Ibid.)
United as free-thinking, self-actualizing individuals, skeptical of government truths and unhindered by political correctness– we stand exquisitely tall; divided as a collective of intolerant socialist, progressive liberal fascists– Western civilization falls. Even Chinese scientists apparently are a good deal more pragmatic these days than what we have come to expect from what passes for government-funded research coming out of Western universities. Yang and Lu (study) found that global warming during the 1961-2012 period was linked to helping preserve China’s drylands.
This study provides a preliminary estimation of recent climate changes on wind erosion risk in China’s drylands region, indicating an obvious decrease in the wind erosion climatic erosivity…
“Contrary to the progressive hysteria, the fact that President Trump’s Cabinet nominees take a skeptical stance toward what science knows and how to apply it is probably the best reason to have some confidence in them.” ~American Spectator (Ibid.)
Western Academia Isn’t Willing to Use the Scientific
Method to Understand the Real World
Through the lens of Trumpism, Leftist politics looks as threadbare as new jeans with holes in the knees. The old blame game, double standards, demonizing, delay, all without a care to distinguish truth from a pack of lies – according to a dog-eared anti-business, anti-Judeo/Christian, anti-white playbook – has not just lost our interest: we’re disgusted. We now see the Left even used weather as a political tool to hammer capitalism and undermine Americanism.
Do we actually need an executive order from government to restore the scientific method in American classrooms? In the real world, 2016 wasn’t the hottest year on record. Nor have the last 3 years been the hottest years on record. What is a fact is that taxpayer funds are being used to pay American universities to concoct fantastic climate change claims and advocate for the Left’s new religion of global warming.
Evidence of the politicization of AGW science since the ’70s is based on the fact that “global warming” was renamed “climate change” in the ’90s. This is a battle between those who are willing to place their faith in scientists and environmentalists whose speculations the Left finds politically useful and the rest of us who can tell the difference between fact and fiction.
And, of course, the media is part of the problem. No, McDonald’s is not the world’s largest purchaser of cow eyeballs, even if you received the news from someone on Facebook; and, you should not need to Snopes-it to know that it is fake news.
The Left wants to believe we can separate capitalism from liberalism and the now dead Democrat party believes China is proof of that. But, China has done nothing but copy and steal the intellectual property of free people. China’s communist government planners have authority to forcibly relocate centuries-old indigenous societies, who were accustomed to living on a dollar a day, to make way for mega-dams, coal-fired and nuclear power plants and engage in environmental laissez faire, but the citizens of China are unable to question or have a say in anything. Does the Left consider China as a good example of political openness?
“In the Obama era,” says WSJ’s Holman W. Jenkins (see, hockeyshtick), “it was routine for press releases to avoid mentioning any margin of error.” Didn’t we learn all about, margin of error in polls leading up to the Trump vs. Clinton election? Jenkins is more certain about one thing: “Change would be healthy at U.S. climate agencies.”
So, how about researchers who proclaimed 2016 was the warmest year ever? The 0.1° margin of error (uncertainty interval) in their data was 2.5 times larger than the 0.04° of warming above previous highs that researchers initially proclaimed (which was trumpeted in the media); and, 10 times larger compared to the researchers’ subsequently revised results of just 0.01° of warming. So what’s the real story, given the level of uncertainty? Were all previous average global temperatures exceeded in 2016 by a hundredth of a degree or was 2016’s average about a tenth of a degree below previous El Niño years (or e.g., was the 2016 average statistically indistinguishable from 1998– as satellite data reveals)?
The whole point is so crazy because the temperature is always going up or down a little. What is astonishing is that in the last 20 years it hasn’t done much of anything… there has been a big El Nino in 2016 and in recent months the temperature has been dropping back into a zero trend level. ~Richard Lindzen
This isn’t the first time we’ve seen such deceptive scientific high jinks. “NASA’s Goddard Institute, now under Mr. Hansen’s successor Gavin Schmidt,” says Jenkins, “put out a release declaring 2014 the ‘warmest year in the modern record’ when it was statistically indistinguishable from 2005 and 2010.”
Shall we posit a theory about all this? U.S. government agencies stopped mentioning uncertainty ranges because they wanted to engender a steady succession of headlines pronouncing the latest year unambiguously the hottest when it wasn’t necessarily so.
This doesn’t mean you should stop being concerned about a potential human impact on climate. But when government scientists deliberately seek to mislead, it’s a warning to raise your guard. ~H. W. Jenkins, Jr. (Ibid.)
Meanwhile, a major winter storm slams the Northeast, shutting down airports and dumping up to a foot of snow in a day. This we know and what else do we know? The idea of an accurate average global temperature is bogus to begin with. We have no surface temperatures at all for most of Earth’s surface. Modern measurements are systemically biased upward due to the improper siting of official thermometers, in cities and at airports, such that ‘tarmac’ and ‘urban heat island effects’ have corrupted the data. And, it is a joke to pretend that historical land measurements were ever meant to be considered accurate to a hundredth of a degree (more like rounded to the nearest whole degree in the eye of the beholder).
“Scientists measuring oxygen isotopes from ice cores drilled in Greenland and Antarctica… [report] temperatures were significantly warmer than today for most of the past 10,000 years.” ~James Taylor, Forbes (2016)
Western academia became delusional participants in global warming mass hysteria. Everyone hallucinated polar bears floating into oblivion on small chunks of ice, rising seas swallowing up islands and coastlines, punishing storms and droughts leaving a demolished Earth in their wake and all life on the planet in peril.
The government’s schoolteachers believed they had nothing to lose and in fact something to gain from helping the Left wage its war of propaganda against the evils of business and capitalism. It’s all just a part of the evolving job description of the federally-funded public education machine, along with undermining Judeo-Christian ethics, the Constitution and the principles of self-reliance and personal responsibility that stand in the way of the interventionist-redistiributive policies of a secular-socialist establishment.
The 8 November 2016 presidential election result was as much a repudiation of climate change mass hysteria as it was an answer to Trump’s call for a return to exceptionalism. At T-minus-8 (Trump’s inauguration), we see the same group of people who engaged in global warming alarmist propaganda are now indulging in yet another mass psychogenic illness. Welcome to 8 days plus 8 more years of a Bush-style, Trump Derangement Syndrome, showing a clear preponderance of Leftist victims, that will inevitably shape the political economy into the 2020s.
The climate change movement got to the point where its only real argument was to blame every hurricane, tornado and winter snowstorm on oil companies. James Varney [Link] doubts the current gaggle of climate scare scientists will admit lying to us but we can at least stop paying them to lie.
“Even if some of the roughly $2.5 billion in taxpayer dollars currently spent on climate research across 13 different federal agencies now shifts to scientists less invested in the calamitous narrative, [MIT Meteorologist Richard] Lindzen believes groupthink has so corrupted the field that funding should be sharply curtailed rather than redirected.
“‘They should probably cut the funding by 80 to 90 percent until the field cleans up,’ he said. ‘Climate science has been set back two generations…’” ~James Varney
Now we have half of the population who refuse to buy into the electoral process, capitalism, free enterprise and who refuse to value the preeminence of personal liberty over the tyranny of big government (i.e., the proponents of multiculturalism are against the culture of Americanism). Instead, they only wish to engage in fake news, fake science and point to every problem in the real world and even non-problems like global warming as confirmation of the verity of their Leftist-liberal-loony ideas.
The only real driver of economic performance and human development is personal freedom.
Updated 13 January 2017
Climate Is More Inflammatory than Warm
How young scientists are to navigate all this [‘CRAZINESS in the field of climate science’] is beyond me, and it often becomes a battle of scientific integrity versus career suicide… ~Judith Curry
We need rational peoples equivalent of voters in flyover-America seeing through the politics of capitalism-hating Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. The people need to rise up and take umbrage with Al Gore, Western academia, Leftist politicians, overweening government bureaucracies and the radical environmentalism of the climate change movement who blame climate change on Americans who are simply engaged in the business of living, as friends of the secular, socialist Democrat party establishment and the eurocommies get rich off alternative energy and decarbonization schemes.
At this point, the private sector seems like a more ‘honest’ place for a scientist working in a politicized field than universities or government labs — at least when you are your own boss. ~Judith Curry
Meanwhile, supposed fears of global warming demand that the EPA shutter industries with energy-killing regulations that – by their own estimate – “would only reduce sea levels by 2 sheets of paper by 2050.” [Link]
To comprehend the impact of EPA’s proposed new rule [the CCP’s (Clean Power Plan) 32% reduction of CO2 emissions from US power plants by 2030] on America’s poorest, just imagine what it would be like to have to spend three-fourths of your household income on energy, leaving only one-fourth for food, clothing, shelter, transportation, health care, education, and everything else combined. ~E. Calvin Beisner
In their book (‘Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years’), Fred Singer and Dennis Avery ask, “Is there any Power source the Greens will accept?” They answered, beginning with quoted material from Don Thompson (“Environmentalists Sue over Medicine Lake Geothermal Plans,” Associated Press, 20 May 2004), as follows:
“Environmental groups have sued the federal government over geothermal projects it has approved in the remote Medicine Lake Highlands region considered sacred by Indian tribes. The suit, filed Tuesday and announced Wednesday, challenges approval of the first two geothermal power plants proposed by Calpine Corp. Both would be built within the Medicine Lake caldera, the remnant of an ancient volcano 30 miles east of Mt. Shasta… in northeastern California. The four environmental coalitions that filed the suit in Sacramento federal court contend the power projects… would turn an otherwise scenic natural area into ‘an ugly, noisy, stinking industrial wasteland.’”
The proposed geothermal power plants would emit no greenhouse gases nor would they produce radioactive waste. They would even feed into the existing Bonneville power grid without the need to create extensive new transmission lines and rights of way. And even this is unacceptable because it would create a few nine-story power plants on fifteen-acre pads in a remote location where almost no one would have to look at them.
Radical environmentalists who have found a welcome home on the Left are the new Neanderthals of the 21st century. “Don’t be fooled by the fanfare in Paris,” says Mario Loyola (Twilight of the Climate Change Movement): “The climate change movement faces big trouble ahead. Its principal propositions contain two major fallacies that can only become more glaring with time. First, in stark contrast to popular belief and to the public statements of government officials and many scientists, the science on which the dire predictions of manmade climate change is based is nowhere near the level of understanding or certainty that popular discourse commonly ascribes to it. Second, and relatedly, the movement’s embrace of an absolute form of the precautionary principle distorts rational cost-benefit analysis, or throws it out the window altogether.”
The AGW fearmongering business now faces a great danger of we taxpayers coming to understand that, (1) we’ve been lied to by our Leftist Overlords and (2), only we have skin in game and its time we stopped baring our backs to the whip.
The UN-IPCC is seen to be continually revising down the academic community’s estimate of what part of observed global warming is actually due to human activity. Unfortunately, all we can now say with some certainty is that climate fraud is just half of what it used to be and that even global warming alarmists now admit natural causes explain half of it.
Earthly sea levels, for example, have been relatively stable for centuries. We have learned from verifiable satellite information that we do not face an imminent crisis of disastrous sea level rise caused by humanity. We have also learned that the greatly exaggerated threats of sea level rise in particular and global warming in general have become the proselytizing of a false religion by superstitious and ignorant doomsday prophets and worse, are nothing more than Left versus right, ideologically-based fearmongering for political purposes.
Given the degree of politicization of the climate debate, we should not be surprised that even the weather gets politicized. ~Roger Pielke
Cancelled For Lack Of Credibility
Why is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) holding its December 6-9 meeting in Monaco? How different is it from pretending to save the world while sipping margaritas on a veranda in Cancun with Hollywood swells?
Hundreds will gather including about 100 climate experts from 40 countries to scope out what to include in their Sixth Assessment Report due in 2022. And, there will be those Special Reports we can expect to see 2-3 years hence.
Hoesung Lee of the IPCC began by introducing, His Serene Highness Prince Albert (billionaire son of Prince Rainier III and ‘50s American movie star Grace Kelly) the current hereditary reigning monarch who rules the 36,000 population of the Principality of Monaco, which is less than a single square mile in size. Immigrating there is about as easy as becoming a member of your neighbor’s family–e.g., foreign nationals who seek citizenship must prove they’re so wealthy, gainful employment is unnecessary, and deposit the required amount in a bank in Monaco.
What better guarantee of objectivity and transparency could we hope for than dedicated global warming alarmists gathering in Monaco to charter a course that Leftist politicians will approve. Receipts from the gaming industry funds this 700 year old monarchy which has been ruled by the Grimaldi dynasty since 1419. Monaco’s vision of sustainability is being a favored destination for the world’s rich and famous and royals and upper class.
It was never good marketing when Al Gore would fly around the world in his private jet to preach to the rest of us that our use of petroleum products was no better than a heroin addiction. Similarly, it’s a stretch for Prince Albert to say we must, “move away from a society that is obsessed with consumption and consumerism,” and that, “we need to reexamine our lifestyles and consider how our actions and daily life are affecting our world,” from the helm of his French-made 197-foot yacht, Slipstream in Port Hercule, the Port of Monaco, where rich and connected folk aboard glamorous private motor yachts and cruise ships from around the world come to play.
Monaco doesn’t have open borders, its citizens pay no taxes, the state survives on gambling proceeds, and the reining morality there seems to be what we see with all of the Leftists and liberals– e.g., don’t do I do as I am free to do whatever I wish because I give my money and my name and celebrity for good causes and take the time to act like I really care.
You can take with a grain of salt the things that these government-approved scientists (approved by Leftist pols like Gore, Clinton, Obama, Pelosi, Reid) are telling us about the open and frozen oceans of the world warming, acidifying and losing oxygen due to industrialization, about emissions and removal of global greenhouse gases, the threat of climate change, praise of sustainable development, food security and desires to eradicate poverty, desertification, land degradation, marine species being displaced world-wide, coral reefs, molluscs and crustaceans dying, thinning Arctic sea ice, shrinking glaciers, rising seas, the disappearance of snow. Keep in mind that a farmer in Wisconsin is closer to and cares more about the land and does more out of self-interest and the welfare of his family to provide actual value to the world than the IPCC will ever do.
What’s more, farmers in Wisconsin and Iowa and blue-collar voters in Ohio and Michigan and rural voters across the country caught on to the real danger this country faces and it’s not global warming. The people are tired of lifetime professional politicians, tenured academics and government bureaucrats with a sense of entitlement who feel free to use cherry-picked data, phony statistics and fear mongering to push their feel-good, politically-correct, ideologically-driven global warming agenda, no matter what the cost or who gets left out in the cold.
Poor research design and data analysis encourage false-positive ﬁndings. Such poor methods persist despite perennial calls for improvement, suggesting that they result from something more than just misunderstanding. The persistence of poor methods results partly from incentives that favor them, leading to the natural selection of bad science. ~Paul Smaldino and Richard McElreath (“The Natural Selection of Bad Science”)
“The problem with science,” says William A. Wilson (Scientific Regress), “is that so much of it simply isn’t.” The vote from heartland has given the happy heretics of the Left’s global warming religion the opportunity to de-politicize the EPA. “All combined, this would extract from current U.S. energy policy the core of President Obama’s climate agenda and effectively put the Obama climate legacy into hibernation—a legacy that, if elected,” says, David Gattie (‘Pragmatic energy policy recommendations for the Trump administration’), “Hillary Clinton would have likely kept intact and expanded upon. How this projects forward remains in question.”
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.
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:
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