Gleick Joins In The Stupid

Nearly identical weather as February, 1934 tells thief, liar, fraudster and likely forger Peter Gleick that “we broke the weather.”

ScreenHunter_7320 Feb. 19 23.01ScreenHunter_7312 Feb. 19 08.06

About stevengoddard

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

22 Responses to Gleick Joins In The Stupid

  1. Curt says:

    But Gleick would never do anything dishonest!

  2. omanuel says:

    As I recall, Peter Gleick was in charge of ethics for the AGU – an organization established by the US NAS to advance the goals of its Geophysics Section.

    At the 1956 AGU national meeting in Washington, DC, Paul K. Kuroda first reported his prediction that natural nuclear reactors had burned on Earth about two billion years ago.

    At the 1976 AGU national meeting in Washington, DC, Dwarka D. Sabu and I first reported that the Sun itself made our chemical elements and birthed the solar system.

    Although both papers were confirmed by later measurements, both papers were ambushed by NAS members in the AGU meetings and dismissed as technically impossible.

    Peter Gleick is well qualified to speak as an advocate for AGW.

    • omanuel says:

      As Gail Combs reports below, the press is beginning to realize the danger of having politicians and puppet “scientists” as bedfellows.

      This strange relationship allowed the US National Academy of Sciences to direct public tax funds to finance the following lies as scientific facts:

      1. Conflict of science with religion
      2. The Standard Climate Models
      3. The Standard Nuclear Model
      4. The Standard Solar Model
      5. Big Bang Cosmology Model

      All of the above consensus science falsehoods are designed to hide our total dependence on the Sun’s pulsar core that first made and now sustains each atom, life and world in the solar system and the changing climate on each planet orbiting the Sun.

    • omanuel says:

      After confronting NAS members at the Spring AGU meeting in April 1976,
      I was invited to chair the section on xenon isotopic anomalies at the 1976 summer Gregynog Workshop on Isotopic Anomalies.

      This picture shows me sitting directly behind Willie Fowler at the workshop:

      Click to access Photo1976GregynogWorkshop.pdf

      On the ride from Cardiff to Gregynog, Willie Fowler tried to persuade me it was okay for NAS to review budgets of research agencies for Congress; that the practice was not in conflict with the basic principles of science, as I had already suggested in letters to Congress after the Spring 1976 AGU disaster.

      Willie Fowler later became President of NAS and then won the 1982 Nobel Prize in physics for promoting the false Standard Solar Model that Fred Hoyle actually developed in 1946.

      In his 1994 autobiography, “Home Is Where the Wind. Blows,” Fred Hoyle explains how the Sun’s internal composition was abruptly changed from:

      1. Mostly iron (Fe) in 1945 to
      2. Mostly hydrogen (H) in 1946

      Thus ended the scientific revolution that Copernicus started in 1543!

  3. _Jim says:

    Gleick, asshole,and in the same ‘innumerate’ category as ‘lame brooks’ in not recognizing repeating weather patterns over periods of a 100 years …

  4. markstoval says:

    “Gleick Joins In The Stupid”

    Gleick joined the stupid (and dishonest) years and years ago. Your report is late.

  5. Ben Vorlich says:

    Did he ever leave The Stupid?

    Which isn’t to that he’s not cunning and dishonest.

  6. gator69 says:

    I thought it was the climate we were worried about.

  7. bleakhouses says:

    And how about last year?

  8. Gleick was holding it in too long. He had to discharge the pressing thought in full public view.

  9. Snowleopard says:

    So the weather is broke, because it has returned to a pattern last seen in the 1930s. I wonder what he would say if it returned to a 1630s pattern?

    The current “weather volatility” is mild compared to the volatility of four centuries ago and very mild when compared to reconstructions of the early Holocene. Interglacial periods ARE inherently volatile, especially at the beginning and when approaching their end (soon).

    Apparently they are programming people to feel guilty of causing weather to depart slightly from decades of unusually stability, because guilty people are easier to control.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Heck the weather was volatile in the 1960s and 1970s. In New York state we had very cold winters and hot summers (minus 30F to 100 F) and people thought it was just typical weather.

      I blame central heating and air combined with the boob tube and video games keeping people inside.

      • Jason Calley says:

        “I blame central heating and air combined with the boob tube and video games keeping people inside.”

        Good point. For most people, weather is what they see on TV — even if it is half way around the world or all the way at the South Pole! Of course they cannot instantly visit the other side of the world, so they just assume that what the tube tells them must be the case. If the tube tells them that the world has a fever, well, it must be true!

        • Gail Combs says:

          Note that only 8% of farmers fell for the CAGW crap.

          scientists hold deeply different views on climate change and its possible causes, a study by Purdue and Iowa State universities shows.

          Associate professor of natural resource social science Linda Prokopy and fellow researchers surveyed 6,795 people in the agricultural sector in 2011-2012 to determine their beliefs about climate change and whether variation in the climate is triggered by human activities, natural causes or an equal combination of both.

          More than 90 percent of the scientists and climatologists surveyed said they believed climate change was occurring, with more than 50 percent attributing climate change primarily to human activities.

          In contrast, 66 percent of corn producers surveyed said they believed climate change was occurring, with 8 percent pinpointing human activities as the main cause. A quarter of producers said they believed climate change was caused mostly by natural shifts in the environment, and 31 percent said there was not enough evidence to determine whether climate change was happening or not.

          The survey results highlight the division between scientists and farmers over climate change and the challenges in communicating climate data and trends in non-polarizing ways, Prokopy said

          “Whenever climate change gets introduced, the conversation tends to turn political,” she said. “Scientists and climatologists are saying climate change is happening, and agricultural commodity groups and farmers are saying they don’t believe that. Our research suggests that this disparity in beliefs may cause agricultural stakeholders to respond to climate information very differently.”


          The propagandists think they can bamboozle farmers. Hate to tell them but at this point they distrust in the US government in rural areas is running very very high.

          Also many farms have been in the same family for generations and some have kept written records.

      • Snowleopard says:

        1934-7, 1974-8, 2013-? = ~40yr cycle? If so, not out of the recent ordinary.

        YES. If one lives indoors, gets one’s info from media, and memory is a history of TV programs, then one has no parameters to reality check weather lies.

        Just saying that, considering climate history since the ice age, things could get more volatile by an order of magnitude and still be within the historical “normal”. If they think this is rough, how will they adapt to that?

        One speculative possibility: Several astrophysicists think the solar system currently is in a dust cloud or possibly two. If solar activity and solar wind continue to decline, that dust could eventually intrude (due to heliosphere contraction) between the earth and sun. Ice core samples do show accumulations of interstellar dust during glaciation periods. Is this the actual cause of ice ages? Did earth experience a minor occurrence of this in the “dark age”?

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s