Unfortunately, some misuse science. Some of their intentions, are far from benevolent. They see science as a mechanism for political power and control. There is great danger from those who would use science for political control over us.
How do they do this? They instill, and then continuously magnify, fear. Fear is the most effective instrument of totalitarian control.
Thursday, 10 October 2013
The 'environmental exaggerations' of which he speaks are so mainstream now, and such a distortion of reality, that it would be wonderful if every high school teacher in the world decided to show this, or a subbed /dubbed version, to their senior pupils. Maybe as an antidote to all the eco-guff they will have been exposed to in their schooldays. Maybe as a last chance to steer them towards helping humanity rather than harming it with facile 'environmentalism', and the curse of 'sustainable development' - both examples of what Vegter would call 'excessive risk aversion'. They harm the poor. They harm the planet. They diminish our humanity.
I'm hoping he'll do a sequel on climate alarmism and more of the associated 'solutions' commonly promoted by 'environmentalists'. 'Solutions' which have already caused a great deal of harm. Whether he does or not, this video affirms rationality and that is what will eventually protect us from the CAGW virus.
Hat-tip: Bishop Hill
Wednesday, 9 October 2013
More Climate Junk Launched into the Biosphere: a concerned citizen spots it, but not in time to prevent widespread dispersal
As noted by Dixon, the Guardian did eventually edit both the headline and the offending first sentence to reflect the reality that the source of all this was referring to the rate of acidification. Or, more accurately, to the rate at which the oceans are becoming slightly less alkaline. Whether that rate is really remarkable is another matter, but one thing seems agreed at the source linked to by Dixon (loc cit): the oceans have been appreciably less alkaline for much of the past 300 million years:
And, as illustrated in a well-known graphic reproduced here, CO2 levels were typically over 1,000ppm for much of that time:
Whatever, we now have another piece of climate junk in circulation. Keep an eye out for it coming your way. If you see it being aimed at children or teachers, please let me know and I'll add the details here.
Hat-tip re the Dixon post: Bishop Hill, http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2013/10/7/oceans-are-unprecedentedly-alkaline.html
Wednesday, 25 September 2013
'Climate Models FAIL' is the title of a new book by Bob Tisdale, one which is aimed at a wide range of readers, and in particular those who may be unfamiliar with technicalities:
'Climate Models Fail is intended for readers without technical or scientific backgrounds. There are introductory chapters that provide basic information.'
'Climate Models Fail has been proofread and edited by someone without a technical background. She has taken the content of this book, originally written in my technical/scientific style, and made it much easier to read and understand, while leaving the content intact.'
A preview pdf is available here: http://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/preview-climate-models-fail.pdf The two quotes shown in italics are from this preview, as is this one summarising some of the hopes and fears of the author:
'Growth in climate science has been stunted by the IPCC’s politically-driven addiction to conjectures about anthropogenic climate change. Decades after it began, climate science is still in its infancy. Yet, it is portrayed as a well-established, noble, bastion of solid research, the flawless jewel of Earth sciences that can do no wrong. Worse, climate science has been ruthlessly exploited by environmental groups and politicians and even by many of the scientists themselves.
The primary obstacles for the climate science community in the years and decades to come are: (1) the expectations of government funding agencies, which are obviously tied to political agendas; and (2) the anchoring effect of the fanatical beliefs of those members whose careers and funding skyrocketed as a result of their drum beating for the IPCC.
The people of the world rely on the findings of the climate science community, and in order for climate science to move forward, that community will have to be honest within itself and with the public. Hopefully, that will occur in my lifetime, but I’m not holding my breath.'
The book can be bought as a pdf ($9.99) (here) or as a file for Kindle ($10.29) (here).
I wonder if the 'people of the world' will trust the climate science community much longer? Or will that 'community' be assigned to the dustbin of history where the IPCC itself belongs? Donna Laframboise has studied the IPCC's behaviour and contrasted it with their claims and aspirations, and has found such large discrepancies that her two books on it justify their provocative titles 'The Delinquent Teenager', and 'Into the Dustbin'. Read them to be convinced, like I was, that the IPCC is not to be trusted. I have not yet read Bob Tisdale's new book, but it sure looks like it will not serve to improve my view of that organisation and those scientists who have actively supported the sorry saga of alarm over CO2 that it was formed to promote. An alarm for which computer models of climate have provided the mainstay. The very same computer models that FAIL according to Tisdale, and according to anyone else who chooses to compare their predictions with the observations.
Monday, 23 September 2013
'Climate Change Reconsidered II': a more realistic appraisal than the IPCC will ever be able to provide
Unlike the faith-based tone of the IPCC reports, in which marshalling of evidence to buttress their heartfelt and walletfelt beliefs in CO2 as a major driver of climate variation dominate, the NIPCC is free to be more scientific. That means being sceptical of high-blown claims, being on guard against superficial reasoning, and ready to share counter-examples and failings of current models and theories. The frontiers of science are usually ragged and untidy, and the genuine scientist working there should be willing to follow leads and go where the data takes them. Their job is not to construct palaces in the sky that happen to suit powerful political and financial interests. Their job is not to provide a front of respectability for the disgraceful campaigns of scaremongering that have suited so many individual and organisations in recent decades. Their job is to speculate, to dig into the data, to entertain theories in an objective, semi-detached manner, and to seek new ideas and new observations that look the most promising for clarifying our understanding. But when so many politicians have been misled, or are being misleading, about what is known about the causes of climate variation, some scientists will feel duty-bound to draw their attention to a broader view, and to contrary evidence. Here is how they see themselves:
'The Red Team Reports
A technique frequently used in industry, government, and law when dealing with complex or controversial matters is to deploy competing Green and Red Teams to pursue alternative approaches (e.g., Sandoz, 2001; Nemeth et al.,2001). A Red Team provides a kind of “defense counsel” to verify and counter arguments mounted by the initial Green Team (the “prosecution”) as well as discover and present alternatives the Green Team may have overlooked.
For many years, one team has dominated the global debate over climate change, the Green Team of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In 2003, however, at a meeting in Milan, a Red Team started to emerge composed of independent scientists drawn from universities and private institutions around the world. Since 2008 that team, the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), has been independently evaluating the impacts of rising atmospheric concentrations of CO2 on Earth’s biosphere and evaluating forecasts of future climate effects (Singer, 2008; Idso and Singer, 2009; Idso, Carter, and Singer, 2011).'
Here are their main conclusions as presented in Figure 1 of the Summary for Policy Makers:
'• Atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) is a mild greenhouse gas that exerts a diminishing warming
effect as its concentration increases.
• Doubling the concentration of atmospheric CO2 from its pre-industrial level, in the absence of
other forcings and feedbacks, would likely cause a warming of ~0.3 to 1.1°C, almost 50% of
which must already have occurred.
• A few tenths of a degree of additional warming, should it occur, would not represent a climate
• Model outputs published in successive IPCC reports since 1990 project a doubling of CO2 could
cause warming of up to 6°C by 2100. Instead, global warming ceased around the end of the
twentieth century and was followed (since 1997) by 16 years of stable temperature.
• Over recent geological time, Earth’s temperature has fluctuated naturally between about +4°C
and -6°C with respect to twentieth century temperature. A warming of 2°C above today, should it
occur, falls within the bounds of natural variability.
• Though a future warming of 2°C would cause geographically varied ecological responses, no
evidence exists that those changes would be net harmful to the global environment or to human
• At the current level of ~400 ppm we still live in a CO2-starved world. Atmospheric levels 15 times
greater existed during the Cambrian Period (about 550 million years ago) without known adverse
• The overall warming since about 1860 corresponds to a recovery from the Little Ice Age
modulated by natural multi-decadal cycles driven by ocean-atmosphere oscillations, or by solar
variations at the de Vries (~208 year) and Gleissberg (~80 year) and shorter periodicities.
• Earth has not warmed significantly for the past 16 years despite an 8% increase in atmospheric
CO2, which represents 34% of all extra CO2 added to the atmosphere since the start of the
• CO2 is a vital nutrient used by plants in photosynthesis. Increasing CO2 in the atmosphere
“greens” the planet and helps feed the growing human population.
• No close correlation exists between temperature variation over the past 150 years and human-related CO2 emissions. The parallelism of temperature and CO2 increase between about 1980
and 2000 AD could be due to chance and does not necessarily indicate causation.
• The causes of historic global warming remain uncertain, but significant correlations exist between
climate patterning and multi-decadal variation and solar activity over the past few hundred years.
• Forward projections of solar cyclicity imply the next few decades may be marked by global
cooling rather than warming, despite continuing CO2 emissions.
Source: “Executive Summary,” Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science (Chicago, IL: The Heartland Institute, 2013).'
But whatever you do, don't just take their word for any of these - check them out for yourself. Reproduced below are direct links to the set of pdf-files available in which their evidence is presented. These deserve careful study in their own right, and may also prove to be worth having nearby when studying the next IPCC reports:
Thursday, 5 September 2013
'Oh no! The Snow!' Cool Athletes Tell Kids about their Hot Planet - Snow Getting Harder to Find Say Some.
Here is the sort of thing they are doing:
"Protect Our Winters partners with The North Face and Alliance For Climate Education to visit schools through their Hot Planet/Cool Athletes program. Protect Our Winters educates students about the issue, using an interactive presentation with stories from professional winter athletes to inspire kids to make a difference. Jones says that paying attention to little things in your day-to-day life can help the environment, too. For example, he limits his "carbon footprint" by buying locally grown food. And instead of using snowmobiles and helicopters to get up mountains, he hikes for his snowboarding adventures. "This is the planet you are inheriting" Jones says."
It seems that Jones had a bit of an epiphany: "After seeing resorts closed and areas that once had great jumps for snowboarding shut down due to insufficient snowfall, Jones realized that climate change was a crisis that needed to be addressed."
Here's another one featured in the article sharing her wisdom with the young:
"Gleich says that she's seen how climate change can pose an immediate danger to winter athletes. Over the past two winters, Utah has seen a lot less snow, making the snow pack lower. In turn, this makes mountains more prone to dangerous — and sometimes deadly — avalanches. Additionally, with less snow, there are more rocks that could injure skiers.
Now, here is some data for 1972 to 2016:
I hope that some day, somewhere, a child in some school targeted for one of these Hot Planet/Cool Athletes extravaganzas will circulate this sort of chart ahead of the visitors arriving with their propaganda kits.
Once again, a look at the data is enough.
We can make the rascals go
All it takes is to look, don't you know
For their claims are so unsound.
(to the tune of the Garden Song)
Note added later: readers might find this collection of duff winter-forecasts by those who wish to alarm us about climate quite amusing, if it weren't for the reality that the people behind them have been very influential and therefore harmful to society: http://notrickszone.com/2013/04/04/climate-science-humiliated-earlier-model-prognoses-of-warmer-winters-now-todays-laughingstocks/
Note added 03 April 2014. The C3 site notes
Newest Climate Research: Snow Extent Unaffected By Human CO2 Emissions, Contrary To IPCC "Expert" Predictions
Note added 17 April 2014. Much of North America has been enduring a very cold winter, with record levels of snow. According to this report, for example, 5 of the snowiest winters on record in Detroit have occurred in the last 11 years: http://notrickszone.com/2014/04/16/bastardi-detroit-sets-all-time-record-snowy-winter-5-of-the-snowiest-winters-occurred-in-last-11-years/
Note added 15 September 2014. The foolishness of Jones and Gleich is further illustrated with this plot:
Note added 8 March 2017. The general trend of Northern hemisphere snowfall continues upwards: https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2017/03/07/winter-snow-extent-continues-rising-trend/
Note added 17 March 2017. Another silly 10-year forecast bites the dust re snow in Vermont: http://notrickszone.com/2017/03/17/shumlins-folly-burlington-buried-by-record-30-of-snow-vermont-gov-warned-end-of-skiing-in-2007/
Note added 08 May 2018. More confirmation of the shallow, opportunistic, fatuous, ill-founded, irresponsible snow-alarmism: https://realclimatescience.com/2018/05/climate-scientists-versus-science/ An apt conclusion at the end: 'Most climate science is based around a superstition that CO2 controls the climate. It is one of the stupidest group think episodes in science history.'
Note Added 19 February 2019 The insanity is still with us in snowsports: 'A group of winter-sports athletes and the world’s biggest snowboard maker want the president of the International Ski Federation to resign after he spoke of “so-called climate change” and said he would rather deal with dictators than argue with environmentalists.
Note added 07 June 2019. Snow on snow: https://climatism.blog/2019/06/01/global-warming-fail-record-snow-when-you-were-assured-by-climate-scientists-that-there-would-be-none/