Climate Alarmists Have A 97% Failure Rate

Now that the Arctic sea ice scam has collapsed, as far as I can tell every single Hansen et al alarmist prediction has failed miserably. This is by far the biggest junk science incident in history.

Ten years from now, people like John Cook will be publishing fake papers claiming that scientists never believed in global warming. It was all media driven, but scientists always knew that solar activity drives the climate.

About these ads

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Climate Alarmists Have A 97% Failure Rate

  1. omanuel says:

    It is almost impossible to get reliable information to the public now because of an imaginary separation between the physical and spiritual properties of Nature.

    See the Republicans minority report on the need for Critical Thinking on Climate Change

    http://judithcurry.com/2013/09/05/u-s-republicans-critical-thinking-on-climate-change/

    Critical thinking – the obvious common trait of Aristotle, Einstein, Bohr, etc. – is the ingredient missing from climatology and a great deal of modern science.

    Why? Scientists are too busy writing reports, proposals and begging for research funds to contemplate and reflect on the connection between physical and spiritual properties of Nature.

    Before scientists grasped the concept of energy, religions said God sustained life. We maintained humility, sanity and conscious awareness of the Sustainer of Life through meditation, contemplation, prayer and physical contact with Nature.

    Einstein showed the connection between an inert physical property, mass (m), and the Sustainer of Life by showing in1905 that the conversion of mass (m) into energy (E) sustains our lives and powers the dynamic universe.

    Mass (m) => Energy (E) in cores of atoms, planets, stars, galaxies

    “The energy of the mind is the essence of life.” [Aristotle]

    Unfortunately for mankind, nationalism enticed humans to release this powerful new source of energy from cores of uranium and plutonium atoms on 6 and 9 Aug 1945 to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. This event triggered the demise of modern science, including climatology:

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Creator_of_Life.pdf

    With kind regards,
    - Oliver K. Manuel
    Former NASA Principal
    Investigator for Apollo

    • Sorry, the nuking of Japan didn’t trigger the demise but it may have accelerated the trend just a tad.

      Modern science was built upon the logic first recorded by Aristotle and reintroduced to the medieval world by St. Thomas Aquinas. Kant reintroduced Platonism by his so called “Critique of Pure Reason” in which Pure Reason was “pure” because it was totally separated from contact with reality. It pretended that knowledge of reality is even less tenable than Plato’s “Shadows on a cave wall.” That left Faith and Revelation as the only paths to *true* *knowledge*.

      Academia jumped on Kant’s pretense, pushed it hard, and ultimately developed Post Modern Philosophy and Post Normal Science. They became the high priests of The Religion of the New World Order. The politicians grabbed it as a prime justification of more power, more government, and more oppression of the lowly unwashed masses. Thereby leaving a bloody trail of dead bodies piled high and broken visions of a free and prosperous future centuries long.

      Compared to this, the Japan bombing was a minor event causing a hardly measurable change in the accumulation of death and broken dreams. The most it contributed was an increase in fervor of the high priests as to how evil reasoning man could be. The path of salvation was to be true belief in their sacred revelations and being always politically correct. Naturally, with them setting the standard of correctness. All based upon “Who are you to know? You have no qualifications because you are not certified by us to be able to know.”

      In short: we are to shut up, sit down, hang on, take orders, and follow them without question because we can’t comprehend the higher knowledge they use to justify the orders.

      The real question is why do we keep feeding them?

  2. Robertv says:

    Barcelona is a dry city. It is dry in a way that two days of showers can do nothing to alleviate. The Catalan capital’s weather can change from one day to the next, but its climate, like that of the whole Mediterranean region, is inexorably warming up and drying out.

    Saturday 24 May 2008

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/spains-drought-a-glimpse-of-our-future-833587.html

    The water supply in Spain breaks record high, at 81.7% of its total capacity.

    02/04/13

    http://www.iagua.es/noticias/abastecimiento/13/04/02/la-reserva-de-agua-en-espana-bate-records-y-se-situa-al-817-de-su-capacidad-total-28881

    http://aca-web.gencat.cat/aca/documents/informesdwh/dades_embassaments_es.pdf

  3. nomoregore says:

    There is a 97% chance that the 97% statistic will really prove to be only .3%

  4. David A says:

    Now that the Arctic sea ice scam has collapsed

    Wow. There really ISN”T a lie you won’t resort to, is there?

  5. Eric Worrall says:

    Travesty Trenberth has already tried to backpeddle from the ridiculous predictions he’s been pushing, with a nonsensical claim that the IPCC doesn’t do “predictions”.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/25/trenberths-ipcc-claim-of-no-predictions-by-ipcc-at-all-refuted-by-ipccs-own-words/

    Next they’ll be claiming the IPCC was only ever running “scenarios”, and that the alarmist policy response was due to the misinterpretations of ignorant non-experts.

    They’ll even claim that they predicted the possibility of global cooling (they did – they like to cover all bets), and that its still our fault.

  6. Andy Oz says:

    There is only one alarmist prediction that is valid and proven.
    The one where they say global atmospheric CO2 concentration is increasing this century. Everything else is unadulterated crap, but there is no way to convince the brainwashed. You would have to press the reset button on their intellect.

  7. cleanwater2 says:

    The real problem is that scientists forgot to ask the very basic question about a Hypotheses. If it is to become a theory there has to be “credible experiments ” that proves if nature agrees with the Hypotheses. Circumstantial evidence especially fraudulent evidences does not prove that the “greenhouse gas effect” exists.
    Every “experiment ” that I have examined including one that was supposed to be for a Ph. D thesis,failed because they forgot very basic lab procedure, like you don’t put a thermometer in a glass container , then shine a heat lamp on the container and expect to have meaningful result.
    There are many real scientists that have examined the physics and thermodynamic of the Hypotheses of the Greenhouse gas effect I’d say starting with Knut Angstroms’s critic of Arrhenius(1903) ,Robert W. Wood,(1909) , and many others, but the politicians and nitwits began corrupting the science, we now have the case where” Alice in Wonderland ” makes more sense than the AGW environmental vampires.
    Here is my humble answer to the problem.
    There is an experiment that proves that the Greenhouse gas effect does not exist. This experiment which has been technologically reviewed by Ph.D physicists ,. Ph.D. Chemical engineers and others Ph. D’s in other fields The experiment is found on the web-site http:// http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com click on the blog tab then on page 3 of 12. . It is titled “The Experiment that failed which can save the world trillions-Proving the greenhouse gas effect does not exist”

    The Greenhouse Effect Explored
    Written by Carl Brehmer | 26 May 2012
    Is “Water Vapor Feedback” Positive or Negative?
    Exploiting the medium of Youtube Carl Brehmer is drawing wider attention to a fascinating experiment he performed to test the climatic impacts of water in our atmosphere.
    Carl explains, “An essential element of the “greenhouse effect” hypothesis is the positive “water vapor feedback” hypothesis. That is, if something causes an increase in the temperature this will cause an increase in the evaporation of water into water vapor.” ( This experiment proves that GHGE by the AGW is wrong)

    Another important website is www. The Great Climate Clash.com -G3 The Greenhouse gas effect does not exist.

    New Discovery: NASA Study Proves Carbon Dioxide Cools Atmosphere
    Written by H. Schreuder & J. O’Sullivan

    A recent NASA report throws the space agency into conflict with climatologists after new NASA measurements prove that carbon dioxide acts as a coolant in Earth’s atmosphere.
    NASA’s Langley Research Center has collated data proving that “greenhouse gases” actually block no less than 95 percent of harmful solar rays from our planet, thus reducing the heating impact of the sun. The data was collected by Sounding of the Atmosphere using Broadband Emission Radiometry, (or SABER). SABER monitors infrared emissions from Earth’s upper atmosphere, in particular from carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitric oxide (NO), two substances thought to be playing a key role in the energy balance of air hundreds of miles above our planet’s surface.
    NASA’s Langley Research Center instruments show that the thermosphere not only received a whopping 26 billion kilowatt hours of energy from the sun during a recent burst of solar activity, but that the upper atmospheric carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide molecules sent as much as 95% of that straight back out into space.
    The shock revelation starkly contradicts the core proposition of the so-called greenhouse gas theory which claims that more CO2 means more warming for our planet. However, this compelling new NASA data more likely serves as the final nail in the junk science global warming coffin and a huge embarrassment for NASA’s chief climatologist, Dr James Hansen over at NASA’s GISS.
     
    Already, leading international climatologists have been in full retreat after having to concede there has been no global warming for 16 years despite levels of atmopheric CO2 rising almost 40 percent in recent decades. The new SABER data now forms part of a real world double whammy against climatologists’ computer models that have always been programmed to show CO2 as a warming gas.
    As NASA’s SABER team at Langley admits:
    “This is a new frontier in the sun-Earth connection,” says associate principal investigator  Martin Mlynczak, “and the data we’re collecting are unprecedented.”
    Over at Principia Scientific International (PSI) greenhouse gas effect (GHE) critic, Alan Siddons is hailing the findings. Siddons and his colleagues have been winning support from hundreds of independent scientists for their GHE studies carried out over the last seven years. PSI has proved that the numbers fed into computer models by Hansen and others were based on a faulty interpretation of the laws of thermodynamics. PSI also recently uncovered long overlooked evidence from the American Meteorological Society (AMS) that shows it was widely known the GHE was discredited prior to 1951. [1]
    Pointedly, a much-trumpeted new book released this month by Rupert Darwall claims to help expose the back story of how the junk GHE theory was conveniently resuscitated in the 1980’s by James Hansen and others to serve an environmental policy agenda at that time. [2]
    As the SABER research report states:
    A recent flurry of eruptions on the sun did more than spark pretty auroras around the poles.  NASA-funded researchers say the solar storms of March 8th through 10th dumped enough energy in Earth’s upper atmosphere to power every residence in New York City for two years.
    “This was the biggest dose of heat we’ve received from a solar storm since 2005,” says Martin Mlynczak of NASA Langley Research Center.  “It was a big event, and shows how solar activity can directly affect our planet.”
    As PSI’s own space scientists have confirmed, as solar energy penetrates deeper into our atmosphere, even more of its energy will end up being sent straight back out to space, thus preventing it heating up the surface of our earth. The NASA Langley Research Center report agrees with PSI by admitting:
    “Carbon dioxide and nitric oxide are natural thermostats,” explains James Russell of Hampton University, SABER’s principal investigator.  “When the upper atmosphere (or ‘thermosphere’) heats up, these molecules try as hard as they can to shed that heat back into space.”
    To those independent scientists and engineers at Principia Scientific International this is not news. The “natural thermostat” effect of CO2 has long been known by applied scientists and engineers how have exploited it’s remarkable properties in the manufacturer of refrigerators and air conditioning systems. The fledgling independent science body has repeatedly shown in it’s openly peer reviewed papers that atmospheric carbon dioxide does not cause global warming nor climate change.
    Some diehard climate alarmists will still say that in the lower atmosphere the action of carbon dioxide is reversed, but there is no actual proof of this at all. PSI suggests it is time for the SABER team to have a word with James Hansen.
    ———————-
    [1] Brooks, C.E.P. (1951). “Geological and Historical Aspects of Climatic Change.” InCompendium of Meteorology, edited by Thomas F. Malone, pp. 1004-18 (at 1016). Boston: American Meteorological Association. It shows the American Meteorological Society had refuted the concept of a GHE in 1951 in itsCompendium of Meteorology. They stated that the idea that CO2 could alter the climate “was never widely accepted and was abandoned when it was found that all the long-wave radiation [that would be] absorbed by CO2 is [already] absorbed by water vapor.”
    [2] Darwall, R., ‘The Age of Global Warming: A History,’ (March, 2013), Quartet Books, London.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s