All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter

Whenever someone asserts that a scientific question is “settled,” they tell me immediately that they don’t understand the first thing about science. Science is never settled. Dr David Deming

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis ~Professor Stewart Franks

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf

Thursday, 31 July 2014

Cash for Clunkers - Russian Style


Four Years ago Australian PM Gillard launched a policy that was supposed to take older cars off the road for more fuel-efficient newer cars:

Julia Gillard unveils a cash for clunkers policy 

The "cash for Clunkers" was doomed for failure from the outset.

Cash for clunkers is pink batts on wheels

Gillard says the scheme will cost $394 million over four years and take 200,000 clunkers off the road in that period. 
It will not achieve either goal. 

Tuesday, 29 July 2014

Quotable Warming Hiatus Quotes


Dr. Phil Jones – CRU emails – 5th July, 2005
The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998. OK it has but it is only 7 years of data and it isn’t statistically significant….”

Dr. Phil Jones – CRU emails – 7th May, 2009
‘Bottom line: the ‘no upward trend’ has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.’
__________________
Dr. Judith L. Lean – Geophysical Research Letters – 15 Aug 2009
“…This lack of overall warming is analogous to the period from 2002 to 2008 when decreasing solar irradiance also countered much of the anthropogenic warming…”
__________________
Dr. Kevin Trenberth – CRU emails – 12 Oct. 2009
“Well, I have my own article on where the heck is global warming…..The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”
__________________
Dr. Mojib Latif – Spiegel – 19th November 2009
“At present, however, the warming is taking a break,”…….”There can be no argument about that,”
__________________
Dr. Jochem Marotzke – Spiegel – 19th November 2009
“It cannot be denied that this is one of the hottest issues in the scientific community,”….”We don’t really know why this stagnation is taking place at this point.”
__________________
Dr. Phil Jones – BBC – 13th February 2010

Alarmists' Battering Ram, their Sham Scam


It's nice to see a media report taking the mickey out of the Global Warming Nazi's great global warming swindle (See below).

John Ransom, writing for Town Hall Daily:

The Devil in Global Warming Details

Ransom re-exposed the sham scam 97% consensus. Definitely part of the Global Warming Nazi's Swindle that has been exposed so many times it is amazing that they have the nerve, the sheer gall to keep repeating it. It has been exposed, inter alia, herehere, here, here, here etc etc etc.
Ransom writes:

Friday, 25 July 2014

The Sky isn't falling or warming.

"The Sky is Falling": Cried Chicken Little.

But it really was an acorn that fell on Chicken Little's head. Although Chicken Little had the best of intentions, the poor little yellow chick dragged Henny Penny and Ducky (UN)Lucky to the fox's lair and they were never seen again.

Surely the Global Warming Hoax, the falsified AGW hypothesis started out with the best of intentions but people have been dragged into the lair of the Global Warming Nazis.

Anyone paying the least bit of attention to the supposed threat of anthropogenic (man made) global warming [AGW] would know that

  • rise in temperature precedes rise in atmospheric CO2; and
  • there has been no global warming for 18 years.

Tuesday, 22 July 2014

If Lewandowsky is a climate scientist then so am I.

Anthony Cox

Shag on Rock
Apologies to Josh
You can’t keep Lew down and he has just co-authored a paper proving the temperature is rising. Lew’s idea is that statements about the temperature pause, including by the IPCC, simply don’t take into account natural variation which in a cooling phase will suppress the AGW warming.

This idea has been around for yonks. Cohenite looked at the idea in 2008. Basically the technique is detrend for all natural factors by removing the estimate of their temperature effect and what is left should be the pure AGW signal.

Lots of people have done this; the original paper was Keenlyside et al in 2008. Easterling and Wehner in 2009 extended this concept to the usual grotesque AGW exaggeration. The previous Keenlyside et al effort predicted masking of underlying AGW due to SST driven natural variation. Unfortunately, when the ENSO is removed from temperature trends there is no post 2000 underlying AGW. Easterling and Wehner revisit this trainwreck of an idea to prove that future cooling will still have underlying AGW. Their null hypothesis [NH] really settles the matter. The NH is that there will be an “equal percentage of statistically significant positive and negative trends” [p6]. This is high order virtual reality; the concept of the 100 year flood explains why. Pacific Decadal Oscillation [PDO] climate phases have greater probability of floods during a negative phase during which time [about 30 years] there may be several 1 in 100 year floods. During the positive, El Nino dominated PDO phase there will most likely be no 1 in 100 year flood.

How Wrong Can The Age be? The Age's Dementia.

The Age, a consistent pusher of the falsified Man Made Global Warming Hypothesis, has shown some lack of journalistic integrity in their recent editorial

Repeal of carbon tax shames our nation

Take their opening sentence:-
The overwhelming majority of the world's climate scientists concur: the emission of greenhouse gasses as a result of human activity is contributing to a rise in temperate and to the resulting climate change that poses nothing short of an existential threat.
Three thoughts out of three wrong. Whatever happened to Journalistc Integrity? Whatever happened to Sceptical Journalism?

NewsTrust is a guide to good journalism: They write that "the best way to learn news literacy is to think like a journalist." (link)
The four Ds of thinking like a journalist exemplify these qualities. They are:
1. Doubt — a healthy skepticism that questions everything.
2. Detect — a “nose for news” and relentless pursuit of the truth.
3. Discern — a priority for fairness, balance and objectivity in reporting.
4. Demand — a focus on free access to information and freedom of speech.
Looking at the Age and their support for the global warming hoax, they have completely failed in every respect to think like good journalists.

Applying the four Ds to the above opening sentence.
"The overwhelming majority of the world's climate scientists"
The consensus notion has been pushed by three flawed yet peer-reviewed papers:

Sunday, 20 July 2014

Green Grubs (Weekend Humour)

After the repeal of the despised tax on vital to life carbon dioxide, the tax that, according to IPCC Scientist Professor Roger Jones (link), would reduce, by 2100,  global temperature by four thousands of a degree, Sarah Hanson-Young(@SarahinSen8) tweeted: "climate sceptic grubs."

This got me thinking.......what colour are most grubs?

Now, I am probably wrong, but I get a strong image in my mind and that image is Green.

When I worked in the pottery industry, I worked with a marvellous industrial chemist who was great at creating and naming glazes;  Great Keppel Blue is one that comes to mind.

Perhaps, if Tom was still with us, he could create a new colour called Sarah Hansen's Grub Green.

He could also create some colours for some of SHY's fantasies, like Sea Patrol red (the colour her

Saturday, 19 July 2014

All Quiet except for hammering on the AGW coffin

spaceweather.com reports




THE "ALL QUIET EVENT": For the 4th day in a row, solar activity is extremely low. Compared to the beginning of July, when sunspots were abundant, the sun's global X-ray output has dropped by a factor of ten. Moreover, on July 17th the sunspot number fell all the way to zero. We call it "the All Quiet Event."

As July 19th unfolds, the sun is no longer completely blank. Three small sunspots are emerging, circled in this image (above) from NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory.

A small but significant battle win in the war against the AGW hoax.

Headlines from around the world are noting the Abbott Government's win in reversing the useless economy destroying carbon dioxide tax; some looking on with praise but more with disdain, eg
Today's reversal of our carbon laws represents a tragedy for our politics, a travesty for public policy and a train wreck for climate action. (link)
The simple facts are that
  • there has been no global warming for 18 years; (link)
  • the man-made global warming (AGW) hypothesis has been falsified. (link)
Even so, the Abbott Government still pays obeisance to the AGW hoax. There are true believers of AGW in Abbott's front bench, the Minister for the Environment Greg Hunt included.

Friday, 18 July 2014

Death by Delay

Another Issue of "Carbon Sense” prepared by Viv Forbes 

and  The Carbon Sense Coalition.

Please pass on. We rely on our supporters to spread the word.
TO DOWNLOAD THIS NEWSLETTER WITH ALL FIGURES INTACT, CLICK THE FOLLOWING LINK:
http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/death-by-delay.pdf
http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/death-by-delay.pdf


www.carbon-sense.com
18 July 2014

Death by Delay - the New Green Weapon.


“The difference between taking a part of my life,
and taking my whole life, is just a matter of degree.” Anon
Special thanks to Mr. Larry Pickering for permission to
reproduce this cartoon. If you like, you can follow him on 
facebook or
visit him at 
pickeringpost.com/ Copyright L Pickering 2014


There was a time, before the baby-boom generation took over, when we took pride in the achievements of our builders, producers and innovators. There was always great celebration when settler families got a phone, a tractor, a bitumen road or electric power. An oil strike or a gold discovery made headlines, and people welcomed new businesses, new railways and new inventions. Science and engineering were revered and the wealth delivered by these human achievements enabled the builders and their children to live more rewarding lives, with more leisure, more time for culture and crusades, and greater interest in taking more care of their environment.

Then a green snake entered the Garden of Eden.

Many of the genuine conservationists from the original environmental societies were replaced by political extremists who felt lost after the Comrade Societies collapsed and China joined the trading world.

These zealots were mainly interested in promoting environmental alarms in order to push a consistent agenda of world control of production, distribution and exchange – a new global utopia run by unelected all-knowing people just like them.

Michael Gorbachev is a prominent example. Consistent open and covert support came from Hollywood, government media organisations and the bureaucracy.

The old Reds became the new Greens.

Tuesday, 15 July 2014

More Heat about Ocean Heat - another nail in the AGW coffin

Anthony Cox

I have previously written about the fact that the heat in the ocean isn’t there. A Facebook commentator produced some excellent graphs based on the ARGO data which showed NO heat accumulation at any level in the world’s oceans. This lack of warming contradicts completely  (Anthropogenic Global Warming) AGW theory as put forward by such AGW stalwarts as Trenberth and England. It also has Hansen scrambling for weird and whacky explanations.

So it is plain in the ARGO era that the oceans are not warming and this contradicts AGW.

In my articles I noted that NODC graphs were shown in joules which allowed a steeper slope compared to a temperature trend. Mischievously I suggested an ulterior motive for this. Alarmism.

Another blogger has taken me to task. Rob Ryan has defended the NODC graphs and pointed out that they do indeed have temperature graphs. Indeed they do:

Monday, 14 July 2014

Carbon Dioxide Tax: Useful? Useless?

Shadow Minister for Environment, Climate Change and Water Mark Butler today said that if the carbon dioxide tax is reversed, Australia would be without any "useful" climate change policy.

Note the word useful.

Remember that his party, the Australian Labor Party, introduced a useless carbon dioxide tax.

Useless. you ask?

Well, what would you call a tax that would cut global temperatures by four thousands of one degree by the end of the century?



During an interview on the Bolt Report, 13 April 2014, (LINK) Anthony Albanese told Andrew Bolt that “We are not Climate Sceptics....”

Andrew Bolt then said: 

Sunday, 13 July 2014

CARBON CAPERS in Australia

On ABC's Insiders July 13th, Bill Shorten claimed that the ALP was the only party that had maintained a position on taxing Anthopogenic Global Warming ie taxing the man made global warming hoax. (link)
We've got a strong amendment which is based on consistent views over a number of years from Labor about emissions trading.
Can he be serious? Let's examine the party's positions.

LABOR POSITIONS

Labor knows that to propose/support a carbon tax going into an election would lose votes and probably lose the election so we have seen Labor's position about face post elections.

2007 Rudd:
Climate change is not just an environmental challenge. It is so great we should be at the stage now in this country where climate change is beyond politics.

Saturday, 12 July 2014

Twelve Urban Myths of Climate Change




1."Global warming is happening.”

No: According to the RSS satellite record, there has been none for 17 years 10 months.

2. "Warming is faster than we thought.”

No: In 1990 the climate models predicted that global warming would happen twice as fast as it has.

3. "There’s a 97 percent consensus.”

No: Only 0.5 percent of the authors of 11,944 scientific papers on climate and related topics over the past 21 years said they agreed that most of the warming since 1950 was man-made.

4. "Droughts are getting worse.”

No: A recent paper in the learned journals shows the fraction of the world’s land under drought has fallen for 30 years.

5. "Floods are getting worse.”

No: The U.N.’s panel has said in two recent reports that there has been no particular change in the frequency or severity of floods worldwide.

6. "Sea ice is melting.” 

No: It has grown to a new record high in the Antarctic, though the Arctic icecap has been shrinking a little in summer.

7. "Sea level is rising dangerously.”

No: Some satellites show it as rising a little, while others show it as falling.

8. "Hurricanes are getting worse.”

No: Their combined frequency, severity and duration has been at or near the lowest in the 35-year satellite record.

9. "Global warming caused recent extreme weather.”

No: There has been no warming recently, so it cannot have caused any extreme weather in recent years.

10. "Global warming will reduce the number of redheads.”

No: This is one of many scare stories about imaginary effects of warmer weather.

11 ."The ocean is acidifying.”

No: The ocean remains decidedly alkaline, and there cannot be much change in its acid-base balance because it is buffered by the basalt rocks in which it lies.

12. "It’s cheaper to act now, just in case.”

No: It is 10-100 times costlier to try to prevent global warming today than to let it happen and pay the cost of adapting to it the day after tomorrow.


From the Heartland Conference presentation by Lord Monckton. Note this is an excerpt Andrew Bolt edited into 12 points for presentation on his blog

Thursday, 10 July 2014

Employment Grows –But Faster Growth in Drop Outs



PRESS RELEASE

10 July 2014

Employment Grows –But Faster Growth in Drop Outs

The June ABS Labour Force figures show  employment continuing to grow but at a much slower rate than the growth in the working age population (WAP) – over the past 12 months employment rose by only 0.9% while the WAP increased at double that rate (1.8%).

This indicates further large increases in those who have given up actively looking for work. And these partly reflect the adverse effects of the regulatory system.

Labour Force – Increases Since June 2013

                                                                     000s             Percent
Employment                                                  1,042                0.9
Working Age Population                               3,774               1.8
Unemployed                                                       51               7.5        

Although the unemployment rate is up only 0.1 percentage point to 6.0% (Seasonally Adjusted), the labour market is much weaker than this suggests. The failure of the growth in employment to keep up with the working age population increase means continuing high drop outs of the labour force. Before the Fair Work legislation employment was growing faster than the WAP.

Unless there is a major improvement in labour demand the Abbott Government will not achieve the budget forecast employment growth of 1.5% in 2014-15. And Abbott’s pre-election jobs target of a one million increase within five years will fall well short.

The revelations at the Royal Commission show that urgent changes must be made to the existing regulatory legislation, and the administration of it,  to remove the bias evident in the existing arrangements and stop  militant unionism. The proposals to reform the ABBC and other minor reforms are welcome but have yet to be implemented and will not themselves change union behaviour.


Publicity Officer: Des Moore (03 9867 1235)

Tuesday, 8 July 2014

Note to Alarmists.

Image: I'm 41
From what I see:
  • Storms have decreased
  • Polar bear are on the increase.
  • Antarctic sea ice is the greatest recorded. (Remember the trapped ships?)
  • Global temperatures have slightly decreased in over 18 years.
  • Sea levels have risen normally at about 3mm/yr.
  • None of Al Gore's worries have come to fruition.
  • Promises of endless droughts have been broken

The Falsified Man-Made Global Warming hypothesis theory leads to
  • Increased taxes
  • More government control
  • Much higher power bills


Is there something I am missing???

H/t Dr Irv

Friday, 4 July 2014

Facebook and the temperature Pause.

by Anthony Cox

In another post I had referred to some good graphing work by Shea Lewis. This time Shea has responded to a criticism of the temperature pause graph prepared and regularly updated by Lord Monckton:




A Facebook poster in the customary Alarmist way has prepared a graph allegedly debunking this pause:



The graph is from RSS data. RSS compares its data by reference to a baseline. The baseline is the reference period of years which is used to compare particular years and periods of temperature both within the base period and outside it. RSS uses a base period of 1979-1998, or 20 years.

The mean of the base period for purposes of comparing other years or periods must be zero since it is the reference period. Other years or periods which are above or below that period are described as having anomalies referable to the base period.

Monckton’s pause covers the period from 1997 up to the present. The method for determining this pause is described by Werner Brozek. Brozek uses the same method employed by both Skeptical Science and Phil Jones from UEA. You go back from the present in the data to the furthest month from the present with a negative slope and then see if that trend is continued from the next month to the present.

It is a straightforward statistical technique for established trends to the present. Currently RSS is 17 years and 10 months as Monckton’s graph shows.

What has confused and angered the Facebook poster is that the period of the temperature pause is warmer than the base period. But this is comparing apples and oranges and we see this in the equally fallacious alarmist claim that each decade is warmer then the next.



This is plain from the graph of RSS data in the decades from 1980 to 2010. The 2010 decade is still hotter than the 1990 decade but has a declining trend. Which contradicts AGW.

So with the temperature pause. The temperature mean of the period in which temperature has paused is warmer than the RSS base line mean. But the temperature has stopped rising. Which again contradicts AGW. Shea’s graph clearly shows what is happening:




The RSS base line is in red. The temperature pause is in black. The temperature has stopped rising at a higher temperature than the base but it has stopped rising. The blue line still shows an overall upward trend over the whole period from 1979 but that is misleading because for 50% of that period temperatures have not been rising. All the temperature rise took place before 17 years and 10 months ago. In fact David Stockwell and I showed that all that rise happened from 1976 to about 1979.


Another nail in the AGW coffin.

Be skeptical. But when you get proof, accept proof.

ACS put the above quote (in quotes) into google and got 682 hits. It is attributed to Michael Specter.

Michael Specter (born 1955) is an American journalist who has been a staff writer, focusing on science and technology, and global public health at The New Yorker since September 1998. 

He has also written for The Washington Post and The New York Times. (wikipedia)

In 2009, Michael Specter authored a book titled

Denialism: How Irrational Thinking Hinders Scientific Progress, Harms the Planet, and Threatens Our Lives described by Amazon:
In Denialism, New Yorker staff writer Michael Specter reveals that Americans have come to mistrust institutions and especially the institution of science more today than ever before. For centuries, the general view had been that science is neither good nor bad—that it merely supplies information and that new information is always beneficial. Now, science is viewed as a political constituency that isn’t always in our best interest. (bold added)
His book seems not to cover the man-made global warming debate, however the non-science of the "consensus" scientists has surely contributed greatly to the the public's mistrust of the scientific community.


The "consensus" scientists have (inter-alia):
On Michael Specter's quote, FQTQ note:
That quote by Michael Specter is brilliant for describing what true skepticism should be. In the media machine today, the term “skeptic” is often applied to people who accept pseudoscience because they are “skeptical” of mainstream science: “vaccine skeptics,” “climate skeptics,” “pharmaceutical skeptics,” and so on. The term gives these people (and other similar groups) a bit too much credit. Generally, they are ignoring proof and evidence.  Michael Mann, a climate scientist from Pennsylvania State University, summarized it best when he said, “Denying mainstream science based on flimsy, invalid, and too-often agenda-driven critiques of science is not skepticism at all. It is contrarianism … or denial.” 
A true skeptic is willing to look at all of the scientific evidence available and is willing to analyze it without bias. When the evidence says something, a skeptic can accept the outcome before them…until new evidence is presented.
Looking at the scientific "proof and evidence" available, rather than FQTQ's 'pseudoscience,' we can see that the rise in atmospheric Carbon Dioxide follows the rise in global temperature (link)
After temperatures rise, on average it takes 800 years before carbon starts to move. The extraordinary thing is that the lag is well accepted by climatologists, yet virtually unknown outside these circles. The fact that temperature leads is not controversial. It’s relevance is debated. 
While it only needs once, the Man Made Global Warming (AGW) hypothesis has been falsified many times. As Einstein said:  “No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.” 

Googling "AGW falsified" brings up 536 results including:
Jeff Davis, on GlobalClimateScam.com writes
When future generations try to understand how the world got carried away around the end of the 20th century by the panic over global warming, few things will amaze them more than the part played in stoking up the scare by the fiddling of official temperature data. There was already much evidence of this seven years ago, when I was writing my history of the scare, The Real Global Warming Disaster. But now another damning example has been uncovered by Steven Goddard’s US blog Real Science, showing how shamelessly manipulated has been one of the world’s most influential climate records, the graph of US surface temperature records published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). (See also WUWT.)

So, the Climate Sceptics, the Global Warming Realists are skeptical. But when they get proof,  they accept proof. Now it is up to the alarmists, the Global Warming Nazis to accept the proof. Time to put the hoax and the billions in grant money behind them

 


Wednesday, 2 July 2014

IPCC Scientist turns journalist into Climate Sceptic.

An intelligent person would think that if a scientist writing for the IPCC assessment reports got a reasonable question from a journalist, he would try his best to answer it.


(It is a pity that their are not more journalists asking questions, but that's another issue - the decline of the MSM)



The response, or more correctly the lack of a response to a question turned one journalist into a climate sceptic.




Zev Chafers (FOX NEWS) explains:

....I was a columnist for the New York Daily News, recently arrived in the United States after more than 30 years in Israel. I had heard about global warming, of course, but I hadn’t thought much about it. Israel has other, more pressing issues. 
In May 2001, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change published its third report, which got a lot of media attention. I looked through it and realized immediately that I had no chance of understanding the science.  
I was in good company – I doubt there are half a dozen journalists in captivity who can actually understand the mathematical and chemical formulas and computer projections. That’s what press releases are for. 
One item got my attention. It said: “Projections based on the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios suggest warming over the 21st Century at a more rapid rate than that experienced for at least the last 10,000 years.” 
I called the professor, one of the authors of the report, for a clarification (he remains nameless because we were off the record). “If global warming is caused by man-made emissions,” I asked, “what accounts for the world warming to this same level 10,000 years ago?” 
There was a long silence. Then the professor said, “Are you serious?” I admitted that I was. 
The professor loudly informed me that my question was stupid. The panel’s conclusion was indisputable science, arrived at after years of research by a conclave of the world’s leading climate scholars. Who was I to dispute it? 
I told him I wasn’t disputing it, just trying to understand how, you know, the world could have been this hot before without the help of human agency. 
Maybe this is just a natural climate change like ice ages that once connected continents and warming periods that caused them to drift apart or … 
At which point I heard a click. The professor hung up on me. At that exact moment I became a climate skeptic. I may not know anything about science, but I have learned over a long career that when an expert hangs up in the middle of a question, it means that he doesn’t know the answer.