Wednesday, December 02, 2020

Link roundup: 2020 vote/election fraud resources

"Here is the evidence" (website Crowdsourcing the Evidence of 2020 election/voting fraud)

Patrick Byrne's "Deep Capture" work: 2020 election was rigged

 Every Legal Vote (see presidential election results with the fraud removed)

Black Box Voting, founded in 2003, is a nonpartisan investigative reporting and public education organization for elections.


My personal StopTheSteal twitter list (180+ related twitter accounts to follow)

Defending the Republic (Sidney Powell's site)

Sidney Powell's 11/25/20 explosive GA/MI election fraud complaints

Fraction Magic - Detailed Vote Rigging Demonstration (24 min; 2016) THE VIDEO DATABASE ON VOTER IRREGULARITIES

Very good Amazon Video: "Kill Chain: The Cyber War on America's Elections" 2020; 91 min

If you have more additions for this list, please let me know via comment/email/etc.

Thursday, November 26, 2020

Saturday, November 14, 2020

Sunday, September 13, 2020

Some notes for climate skeptics

Excellent resource here: "Why Everyone Should Be A Climate Skeptic"

"Consensus? 200+ New 2019 Papers Support A Skeptical Position On Climate Alarmism"

No consensus: Only 0.3% of 11,944 climate papers from 1991-2011 found >50% of post 1950-warming anthropogenic.

Here are 1,500 peer-reviewed skeptical scientific papers published between 2016 and 2018 alone.

Crop yields are way up.

Wildfires are way down.

Polar bear population is way up (by a factor of 4-6 since the 1960s).

According to the IPCC, hurricanes are decreasing.

About 10,000 years ago there wasn’t much ice in the Arctic. It’s only in the last 1000 years that we’ve seen this coverage of ice that persists significantly through the summer time"

IPCC says this about floods: "overall low confidence at global scale regarding EVEN SIGN of these changes"

Large number of peer-reviewed non-hockey-sticks here; keep scrolling

Climate models have been running *much* warmer than reality.

Medieval Warm Period Project site here contains a lot of detailed information about peer-reviewed papers finding that the period was warmer than the current period.

See ClimateGate "outed emails" here.

Extremely important warmist technique: Smooth out the fluctuations of climate in the past, leave in just the last one, then claim that the last fluctuation *must* have been caused by humans since it's abrupt!

Global Warming Petition Project: 31,487 American scientists (9,029 with PhDs) signed this strongly-worded skeptical statement.

Good Twitter follows include @SteveSGoddard @wattsupwiththat @curryja @BigJoeBastardi @ClimateDepot @JunkScience @ClimateAudit @EcoSenseNow @NoTricksZone @RogerAPielkeSr @JamesDelingpole @sjc_pbs @JoanneNova

Good skeptic sites include: Watts Up With That; Climate Depot; NoTricksZone; Climate Etc.; Not A Lot of People Know That

'Einstein's successor' Freeman Dyson is a climate skeptic. See interesting climate quotes from him here.

A complete list of things caused by global warming

NASA GISS: Global average temperature "may easily be anywhere between 56 and 58°F"

On sea level rise:
NASA: "global mean sea level has risen by 8 inches..since 1870"

Seas have risen naturally ~400 feet in the last ~20k years.

Second-century Roman port now two miles inland

Trying to prevent imaginary CO2-induced bad weather leads to bad energy choices, and bad energy choices can kill: African clinic's solar panels power lights OR fridge; not both
About CO2:
Maybe 3-4 volumes of CO2 "pollution" are deliberately injected into each can of your Coke!

People burn gas/propane in greenhouses to RAISE CO2 to ~1500 ppm

We all exhale ~40,000 ppm CO2.
Odd: Everyplace is allegedly warming much faster than everyplace else

We're not supposed to confuse weather and climate, but lots of warmists have claimed that we can see climate out of our windows.

Top 10 most convincing CAGW arguments

Warmist climate scientist time budget

Until U can tell me exactly what caused Minoan/Roman/Medieval warm periods, Dark Ages/Little Ice Age cooling, early 20th cent. warming, & mid-20th cent. cooling, I refuse to believe U understand natural variability enough to rule it out as the #1 post-1970s warming cause.

Good question to ask alarmists when they tout any climate change solution: How much global cooling (deg C by 2050) do we allegedly get, and why should we want global cooling?
I started out as a casual believer in AGW, then became more and more skeptical as I dug into the alleged evidence for myself.

Many climate skeptics have followed a similar path.
I don't see warmism as a conspiracy--it's mostly groupthink mixed w. plenty of foolishness & some outright fraud.

I've communicated w. lots of warmist scientists & the vast majority clearly have just taken it on faith that CO2 is the climate control knob.
A treasure trove of Heartland climate conference videos is here.

I highly recommend Alex Epstein's book "The Moral Case For Fossil Fuels".

Sunday, June 28, 2020

Some initial thoughts on Parler

--Quite a few climate skeptics are already on Parler, including Anthony Watts, Marc Morano, Tony Heller, Joe Bastardi, Chris Martz, Ben Pile, James Delingpole, JWSpry, Dr W Uddin, Jonathan Jones, Pierre Gosselin, Kirye, Chris Horner, Willie Soon, Andrew Montford, and more. I'm following all of the above people; you could scroll down here and quickly click to follow all of your favorites:

--Parler's technology is behind Twitter's tech now, but the chance for us to communicate in a place that isn't radically anti-conservative is wonderful. Having a viable competitor could encourage Twitter to be slightly less biased.

--I haven't found any Tweetdeck-like tools for Parler yet. Parler search is currently limited to users or hashtags.

---Even though I have about 150 times as many Twitter followers as Parler followers, the number of impressions I get on Twitter (left) vs Parler (right) doesn't seem wildly different. Why?

--1000 characters per post is nice

--Info on how to use Parler is available on their YouTube channel here.

--29-min interview with Parler CEO John Matze is here.

--4-min video: Parler CEO John Matze discusses social media's war on free speech and the rise of censorship.

Tuesday, April 14, 2020

Response to Don Cheadle

(This post was written to respond to Don's Twitter question here)

Don, off the top of my head, here are some things I believe:

1. CO2 is a greenhouse gas
2. Greenhouse gases have a warming effect
3. Human activity has caused atmospheric CO2 to increase over the last 100+ years
4. The Earth warmed during the 20th century
5. Global sea levels rose about 7.5 inches since 1901

6. We can't burn fossil fuels forever without running out
7. Alternative energy research is a good thing
8. Energy efficiency is a good thing
9. Destroying the environment is a bad thing
10. I want the best world possible for future generations

Some things I don't believe:
11. The Earth is a more dangerous place at 61F than at 59F.
12. Carbon dioxide taxes can prevent bad weather
13. Increased CO2 causes drought

If the hard evidence supported the idea that trace CO2 is dangerous, I would be fighting very hard ON YOUR SIDE.

CO2 hysteria risks making energy less available and affordable for poor people who currently have no connection to stable grid power. Many of those people's lives could be greatly improved by a big honkin' coal plant instead of some solar panels and wind turbines.

Catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is the most massive scientific fraud in human history.

Wednesday, February 12, 2020

Interesting report: Skeptic Bob Heath goes to a warmist conference

Last week, I and some physics friends went to the conference in London at the Inst of Physics. It was an all-day meeting: “Studying the Climate: A challenge in complexity”. It was organised by The Grantham Institute, which describes itself as “An Institute of Imperial College London” with a mission “--to contribute to, and lead on, world-class research, training and innovation towards effective action on climate change and the environment [which] is more relevant now than ever”. One of Grantham’s handouts at the meeting was entitled “9 things you can do about climate change”. One suggestion is to cut back on flying, though obviously no one told the tens of thousands who go off to each COP meeting.
Nevertheless, IMO, the meeting was even more appalling than one might expect with that sort of marketing. I honestly expected better, even from taxpayers-funded alarmists. The audience seemed mostly to be PhD students who presumably only get funding to look into how bad things were, and all the speakers seemed far too deeply into the alarm.  Not knowing of our position on the issue, my friends and I were asked about what we thought (probably expecting us grey hairs to applaud their efforts) and we said, in various ways, what a load of rubbish it was. It was worth being there to see the looks on their faces. I do not believe any of them had ever met anyone who didn’t go along with the alarm. Even worse, I didn’t find any student who wanted to engage in any debate. In fact, they seemed to have little idea about the concepts of curiosity, scepticism, open-mindedness. What has happened to British physics?
The impression of others who go more regularly to IoP meetings was that non-believers were not particularly encouraged to come anyway, since the email alerting IoP members only went out a short while before the meeting itself. Someone I know then offered an abstract on thermodynamic matters relating to climate (showing yet again why CO2 cannot perform the magic ascribed to it) but just one day before the meeting was told that there was not enough time to include him. This was obviously untrue as there was time in the programme for so-called flash talks and two unscheduled pro-alarm talks.
Clearly, they had little intention of allowing any view to be expressed with might support “it ain’t us” and when we were allowed to ask questions, even basic ones in regard to temperature lagging CO2, they were pretty much avoided. I think speakers included some from Exeter and Reading Universities, high altars to the alarm.  Of course no physics was discussed which might lead down to the trail of getting anyone to imagine CO2 cannot perform miracles.
I have attended hundreds of conferences in my field, for physicists and geophysicists over the years, have given more talks/papers than I can remember (with a fair few I’d rather forget), and at all such meetings contrary but data-supported views were encouraged. I never went to a conference like the IoP one though.
BUT THE WORST PART -lunch only had vegetarian and vegan options. That should have come as no surprise as one of the nine things I can apparently do to avoid climate disaster is to eat less meat.  I left before the end but am informed it got worse. I really couldn’t bear to be part of it any more.

Tuesday, November 05, 2019

Fighting back against upcoming Al Gore-produced fraudulent "Climate Reality" presentations in our schools

11/7/19 update--Success! Our principal has ruled, correctly, against allowing in-classroom Al Gore propaganda at our local high school on Nov 20: "Climate change is not a current curricular standard. As a result, it will not be included in the curriculum for this course, and we won't be welcoming in-classroom speakers on the topic".
On Nov. 20-21, 2019, in schools around the world, for ages down to kindergarten, Al Gore's "Climate Reality" group plans to give presentations based on Gore's highly fraudulent "Truth in 10" slideshow.

I think as many skeptics as possible should check out the map here. If a presentation is scheduled at a local school, please take the time to write a complaint letter.  (Please let me know via DM, email, or comment here if you do some pushback).

From an email I just sent to our local high school's superintendent, principal, and chemistry teacher:
I found out that a climate presentation from an Al Gore group (“Climate Reality”), along with a “climate activism” talk, is scheduled to be given to five Mounds View chemistry classes on Nov 20.

The presenter was part of a group personally “trained” by Al Gore when he was in Minneapolis in August 2019.  The stated goal of that training is to "shape public opinion, influence policy, and inspire your community to act at this critical time”:

From Climate Reality’s mission statement:
"The Earth is facing a climate crisis, driven by fossil fuels.
At Climate Reality, we’re here to make urgent action a necessity. In politics. In business. In every aspect of our lives. Everywhere.
Urgent action to cut greenhouse gas emissions and speed the global shift to renewables. Urgent action to halt the Trump Administration’s radical fossil fuel agenda"

I view the proposed presentation (given by Al Gore here) as politics masquerading as science. I personally don’t think this presentation or “climate activism" belongs in MVHS chemistry classes, but if that happens, I’d like to ask for “equal time” in those chemistry classes to correct some of that misinformation.

I have a great interest in the scientific debate around climate change; I’ve been sanity-checking these issues almost daily in great detail for about 12 years. I do have about 35 slides (graphs etc) that I’ve pulled together in the last few days, with more planned.

I agree with [another parent] who wrote about the Nov 20 presentations:

"The kids should be given both sides and let them use their critical [thinking] skills to decide what they believe. I would be happy to support...You can include me as concerned parent.  I could also attend the class to support your cause”.

Background: From this Al Gore tweet, I found out that his “Climate Reality” group will be making basically the same climate pitch all around the world on Nov 20-21, including in high schools and in classes for students as young as kindergarten:

Here’s one key misinformation-packed slide from Al Gore's spiel. Look at all the horrible stuff allegedly caused by ~400 ppm CO2!

Wednesday, March 06, 2019

2005: Minutes after an AAAS writers' email exchange on an embargoed McIntyre/McKitrick paper/story, Mann forwards it to Briffa, Santer, Schneider, Schmidt etc?

From page 2335 of University of Arizona Overpeck ClimateGate emails (released Feb 2019) here

From ???@??? Wed Jan 26 09:33:51 2005 Return-Path: Received: from ( []) by (Cyrus v2.1.14) with LMTP; Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:06:31 -0700 X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2 Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D87B9A68B90 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:06:31 -0700 (MST) Received: from smtp.mail.Virginia.EDU (smtp.mail.Virginia.EDU []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A69BA69C5D for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:06:29 -0700 (MST) Received: from ( []) by smtp.mail.Virginia.EDU (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62502A04C; Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:06:26 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <6 .""""> X-Sender: X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:05:11 -0500 To:,,,,, Tom Wigley , Gavin Schmidt , Stefan Rahmstorf , Ben Santer , Stephen H Schneider From: "Michael E. Mann" Subject: Fwd: Re: Climate story Mime-Version: 1.0 JTO-058867 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.195 required=7 tests=BAYES_00, HTML_20_30, HTML_MESSAGE, MIME_HTML_ONLY X-Spam-Level: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 6.5.2 Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 09:57:28 -0500 From: "Richard Kerr" To: "Eliot Marshall" , , Cc: Subject: Re: Climate story X-UVA-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at


This is all about Mann's famous "hockey stick" graph of the climate of the past 1000 years. Science published a paper a couple of months ago by a mainstream climate researcher that raised questions about the uncertainties involved. The contrarians--including some extremists--have been on Mann about it for years. There has been at least one dustup over an irresponsibly published anti paper in a disreputable journal. GRL is quite reputable but not hard to get into. I've been considering yet again whether it's time to get into some of this. This paper this week is not the time, but I'm guessing the time should be soon. There's another contrarian angle on the ipcc case for human-induced warming coming up that might pair with this.


Richard A. Kerr Senior Writer, Science phone br> fax br> 1200 New York Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20005

>>> "Martin Enserink" 01/26/05 09:46AM >>> All,

I was appraoched by a former colleague who is now the publisher of 'Natuur en Techniek,' a Dutch monthly magazine. They are publishing a 12-page take-out about a paper that will be published in GRL shortly, which attacks what is apparently a central graph in the Kyoto treaty, produced by climate researcher Michael Mann.

The GRL paper (written by two Canadian climate skeptics) and this Dutch magazine story all but accuse Mann of scientific misconduct, and they take some swipes at Nature as well.

The magazine seems to think they're onto something huge, and they're trying to get international attention. A Canadian newspaper has agreed to print their story, and the Wall Street Journal apparently is interested. (I have attached an English translation of it.) Dick: you're a much better judge than I am as to whether this is a interesting, or a big deal. So I'm just forwarding the story, which is embargoed for tomorrow -- do with it what you think is best.

Seperately, the Natuur en Techniek editor is asking whether Science is interested in somehow cooperating in the organization of a meeting about this topic later this year, organized with the Royal Dutch Meteorology Institute. They also wanted to know if I would chair part of it. Eliot, Dan: I assume we are not, but I thought I'd check. (I certainly am not going to chair a session about a topic I know little about.)

Cheers, Martin 


Martin Enserink

European correspondent Science magazine ( 78 rue du Rendez-vous 75012 Paris, France tel. +33 1 4340 0685 ______________________________________________________________ & nbsp; Professor Michael E. Mann Department JTO-058869 of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA 22903 _______________________________________________________________________ e-mail: Phone: nbsp; FAX: br> http:// 

Tuesday, September 13, 2016

Dick Lindzen on cold and heat extremes

Gavin Schmidt and Richard Alley made some comments on extreme weather here

Dick Lindzen (via email) on cold and heat extremes:

"Gavin and Alley both seem pretty ignorant.  Extremes of both cold and heat depend on advection by baroclinic eddies.  This should get weaker in a warmer climate (assuming polar amplification which is another dicey matter).  Alley is assuming that one just adds the change in global mean temperature to any current extreme.  Marc shouldn’t be so defensive.  He’s not dealing with experts.  On the other hand, perhaps it should be noted that the reduction in extremes is ‘consistent’ with global warming."

Friday, May 13, 2016

RICO20 emails

Released May 13, 2016.  Press release

Five PDFs, 190 pages

Pages 1- 59
Pages 60-102
Pages 103-133
Pages 134-178
Pages 179-190

Related post on Watts Up With That

Click on this Twitter thread for some excepts. I plan to post more excerpts on Twitter using the #RICO20 hashtag.

Saturday, April 11, 2015

Hillary Clinton tells thrilling tale of Obama/Clinton planet-saving heroism at Copenhagen 2009

From this December 2014 LCV speech (17 min mark).
President Obama and I went to the global climate conference in Copenhagen in 2009. We ran into a solid wall of opposition from countries like China, India, and Brazil.  The president and I literally had to crash a secret meeting between them to force real negotiations.  We marched right by startled Chinese security officials. I had to duck under their outstretched arms. We got into the room--you should have seen the looks on the leaders' faces because they'd been dodging us all day and the president said wow, we've been looking for you.  Persistence paid off..we did hammer out an agreement..

Friday, April 10, 2015

"Limits to Growth" co-author "argues that capitalism and democracy will continue to hamper climate action"

'Global warming going from bad to worse'

Randers, co-author of the seminal 1972 report "Limits to Growth," which highlighted the devastating impacts of economic and population growth on the Earth, argues that capitalism and democracy will continue to hamper climate action.

...And capitalism and democracy will remain strong for a very long time because people have trust in that system as it delivered impressive improvements in many people's quality of life over the past century, he said.

Note that "The Limits to Growth" was commissioned by the Club of Rome.

Thursday, April 09, 2015

Obama emphasizes threat to public health as part of climate change [scam] push

Obama emphasizes threat to public health as part of climate change push | US news | The Guardian

Murthy said the issue was “personal” for him, since he once lost an uncle to a severe asthma attack. “We have more people exposed to triggers that can cause asthma attacks, and more asthma attacks mean more days of school missed. They mean more days of work missed. They mean more costly trips to the doctor,” Murthy said. “And they most importantly mean more scary moments for parents and for children.” In a background call with reporters ahead of the event, administration officials identified the elderly, children, minorities, the sick and low-income individuals as being at particularly high risk levels for injuries caused by extreme weather.

Warmer is better; 17th century--Global cooling caused "famines, wars and political upheaval"

Historian Reveals Climate Change Lessons from 17th Century

In his book “Global Crisis: War, Climate Change and Catastrophe in the Seventeenth Century,” Parker surveys the broad impact that long, harsh winters and cool, wet summers have had on human populations across the globe. Parker uses firsthand accounts and scientific evidence to examine how changing weather patterns caused famines, wars and political upheaval during that time. The book won the Society of Military History’s Distinguished Book Prize and a medal in 2014 from the British Academy for “a landmark academic achievement … which has transformed understanding of a particular subject.”

Tuesday, April 07, 2015

Judith Curry pulls no punches: Draft climate "statement is an embarrassment to the APS"

Draft APS Statement on Climate Change | Climate Etc.

JC reflections

Well, their paragraph on Climate Science is a rather astonishing take on the APS Workshop.  Their paragraph on Climate Change seems to come from the Guardian.  Their statement on Climate Action reiterates their rather crazy statement in 2007

Apart from the issue that no one on the POPA seems to understand any of these issues beyond a superficial level (after Koonins and Rossner departed from the POPA), and that their statements are naive and unprofessional, here is my real problem with this.  This is an egregious misuse of the expertise of the APS.  Their alleged understanding of issues like spectroscopy and fluid dynamics are not of any direct relevance to the issues they write about in this statement.  The statement is an embarrassment to the APS.

...JC message to APS POPA:  no one cares about your political preferences in the climate change debate.  You have demonstrated that you bring nothing intellectually to the table (once Koonins and Rossner left).   You simply have no business issuing a policy statement on climate change. You have embarrassed the APS membership.

Monday, April 06, 2015

Freeman Dyson: It would be crazy to try to reduce CO2

Check out what much-decorated scientist Freeman Dyson says about carbon dioxide and climate change:

3:20: "First of all there is man-made climate change's a question of how much and is it good or bad..we don't understand the details.  It's probably much less than is generally claimed. The most important thing is that there are huge non-climate effects of carbon dioxide which are overwhelmingly favorable which are not taken into account. To me that's the main issue--the Earth is actually growing's increasingly agricultural yields, it's increasing forests, it's increasing all kinds of growth... That's more important and more certain than the effects on climate.

5:20: CO2 is "enormously beneficial both to food production and also to biodiversity, preservation of species and everything else that's good.  The remarkable thing is that these effects which have nothing to do with climate...are so much easier to measure than the effects on climate and so much more certain"

9:15: [On warmists] "There certainly is an enormous religion in which there are lots of true believers who think that climate change is evil and that we're going to run into big catastrophes if we don't do something drastic. That's a sort of belief system which exists...I don't understand it and I don't pretend to understand their motives."

11:00: "The real world is far more complicated than the models...I don't think any of these models can ever be predictive"

13:45 On sun's effect on climate: "The correlation is certainly there. Exactly how the activity of the sun influences the climate is not completely clear. Something to do with cosmic rays...probably an effect on clouds"

15:15 "CO2 is so beneficial in other ways, it would be crazy to try to reduce it"

16:40: "Average temperature of the a very poorly defined thing anyway"

18:50: "Carbon dioxide will increase. We will continue to burn oil and coal; probably it does us good. The Earth will get greener as a result"

19:30: "[People from Asia] don't feel pessimistic at all...This sort of mood of doom and gloom...only is particularly in the academic communities, particularly in the western societies...The media have gone alone with it, but I think the general public has a lot more common sense."

20:20: Dyson brought along Lomborg's book "Cool It".  Dyson says "I think it's the best general summary I've seen, in a way...I think he's very sound"

21:45: "Man-made climate change certainly is real..question is how much and whether it's good or bad...I would say it's on the whole's not as large an effect as most people have imagined".

22:00: "I'm an optimist...Everything I look at has improved compared to the 1930s"

Nice FOIA warning on Gavin's page

NASA GISS: Dr. Gavin A. Schmidt

Please note that emails sent to government addresses may be subject to disclosure under FOIA and that you should have no expectation of privacy. If you want to contact me in a non-official capacity, please do so via my columbia email. (Replace the -at- with the @ sign).

Efficiency company CEO: "statistics we use to understand global climate phenomena are telling a tragic tale"; solution involves buying lots of efficiency products

Climate Change -- Just a Data Problem?

Unfortunately, the statistics we use to understand global climate phenomena are telling a tragic tale, and we must find a way to change these trends. I believe that a large part of the solution to this process involves using mass production methodologies to roll out efficiency at a rapid and global scale.
Jason Trager is CEO and co-founder of Persistent Efficiency, maker of the stick-on energy sensor. He is an energy scientist and sustainability engineer with a PhD in Mechanical Engineering from UC Berkeley.

Sunday, April 05, 2015

The Mask Slips on the Climate Scam

The Mask Slips on the Climate Scam | Power Line

We’re always told that revenue from emissions trading or a carbon tax will be used for energy and climate change adaptation purposes.  But Inslee has let the mask slip and made obvious that it is a lie.  Liberal politicians especially are drooling for a carbon tax as a new revenue source. It isn’t going to be rebated to taxpayers.  It isn’t going to be used as a bargaining chip for a decent tax reform.  It’s going to be used to pay for more government goodies.
Inslee isn’t the first to let the mask slip.  In California, Jerry Brown is planning to use emissions trading funds to pay for his high-speed-rail-to-nowhere project, on the ludicrous grounds that high-speed rail will reduce emissions.  (The opposite is likely the case.)  No one should fall for the carbon tax trap.

Baffling stuff from Washington Gov. Inslee: He's selling anti-CO2 policy as being about kids' lungs and education, not AGW

Washington Governor Puts Focus on Climate Goals, and Less on Debate -

The deeper reason he is pushing for tough new air-quality policies is to combat worsening health problems, like asthma in children, that are caused by pollution. “It’s not the flowers,” he said. “It’s kids’ lungs.”
“You don’t even have to allude to climate change,” Mr. Inslee, a first-term Democrat, said in an interview. “One can support this simply on the fact that you want to support the education of your children.”

Saturday, April 04, 2015

1998: Hockey stick hype coincided with real-life temperature spike. Scientists and public fooled by natural variation?

Below is some background information on late 1990s hockey stick hype, the simultaneous elevation of newly-minted Ph.D. Michael Mann to IPCC lead author, the conversion of "many scientists" to believers, and the real-life temperature 1998 temperature spike.

My hypothesis is that the natural 1998 temperature spike was crucial in selling both scientists and the public on the validity of Mann's bogus hockey stick. If the exact same paper had been published after, say, an 18+ year hiatus, not nearly as many people would have been fooled.

This article looks back at the late 1990s
Many scientists who had until then remained sceptical of climate change were convinced and the headlines and broadcasts meant that large swathes of the public were simultaneously concerned about the activities of the oil companies, the profligate use of coal and oil in developed countries, and the amount of carbon dioxide pouring into the atmosphere.
IPCC TAR and the hockey stick | Climate Etc.
JC comments:  Christy’s assessment, when combined with the UEA emails, provides substantial insight into how this hockey stick travesty occurred.  My main unanswered question is:  How did Michael Mann become a Lead Author on the TAR?  He received his Ph.D. in 1998, and presumably he was nominated or selected before the ink was dry on his Ph.D.  It is my suspicion that the U.S. did not nominate Mann (why would they nominate someone for this chapter without a Ph.D.?)  Here is the only thing I can find on the U.S. nomination process [link].  Instead, I suspect that the IPCC Bureau selected Mann; it seems that someone (John Houghton?) was enamored of the hockey stick and wanted to see it featured prominently in the TAR.  The actual selection of Lead Authors by the IPCC Bureau is indeed a mysterious process.
Note in Mann's book "The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars", page 26, Mann suggests that skepticism was just fine in the early 1990s--you might say his advisor Barry Saltzman was skeptical, and Mann's "was closer to Barry's position than Hansen's or Schneider's.

Note the 1998 temperature spike.

Do NOT miss this: 90-sec video compilation of 1970s Ice Age scare reporting from ABC evening news

Glaciers Down to the Mason-Dixon Line!

40 Years of Media Hype for Climate Alarmists | Heartlander Magazine

"Warm periods like ours last only 10,000 years, but ours has already lasted 12,000. So if the rhythm is right, we are over-ready for a return of the ice,” Smith said in his comment on the January 18, 1977, ABC evening newscast.

He cited “experts like Reid Bryson” who based their worries on “cooler temperature readings in the Great Plains” and elsewhere and the “retreat of the heat-loving Armadillo from Nebraska to the southwest and to Mexico.” Bryson argued the return to an ice age had begun in 1945.

In 2006, Gavin Schmidt claimed that greenhouses gases "quite clearly" caused the warming over the last few decades

RealClimate: Medieval warmth and English wine
Why? Well, warm periods have occured in the past, and if not the medieval period, then probably the last interglacial (120,000 years ago), certainly the Pliocene (3 million years ago), without question the (Eocene 50 million years), and in particular the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (55 million years ago), and so on. Current theories of climate change do not rely on whether today’s temperatures are ‘unprecedented’. Instead they examine the physical causes of climate change and match up what we know about their physical effects and time history and see which of the multiple drivers or combination can best explain the observations. For the last few decades, that is quite clearly the rise in greenhouse gases, punctuated by the occasional volcano and mitigated slightly by the concomittant rise in particulate pollution.

Friday, April 03, 2015

Skeptics should enjoy BBC's March 31, 2015 "Costing the Earth" show

It's a panel of warmists, but lots of interesting admissions are made, such as that evidence fitting the warmist narrative is over-emphasized.

At 7:00, Hulme says "there has been a pause for sure".  He admits in the early 1990s, there was "an idea that [surface temperature would] rise in a linear way...maybe we didn't understand enough about natural cycles".

At 8:00, Hulme admits that in the mid-1990s, there was "a rather simplistic understanding" of global warming. "Models at that time did not have a rich enough understanding of how the oceans worked in order to point out that actually rhythms of the climate could produce pauses and hiatuses".

At 11:20, Czerski claims "scientists tend to be really happy, actually, when [reality] doesn't meet their models, because it means they're going to learn something. There tends to be a delight in it, rather than a disappointment."

At 11:30, Heap asks why Antarctic sea ice has grown, when 95% of the best 50 models had Antarctic sea ice *decreasing* over the last 30 years.

At 19:58, Mark Lynas says "if you're in the polar regions, you might be able to grow pineapples in 2080".