Skip to main content

Sheep Science


I did a broadly cast takedown of the lie of consensus science recently where I unpack exactly what the so-called consensus is, why it's a fraud and include:

*Whistleblowers.
*The historical record of EXCLUSIVELY bad climate "science" that has never even made one single prediction of the calibre required for a true scientific model.
*That climate change is the same in all planets, they all heat and cool at the same time.
*How data is manipulated.
*WHY data is manipulated
*The obviously untrue stretch that each year is the hottest on record
*The political forces driving the lie and the misconception of who stands to gain and why.

Here is the post:
http://dwahts.blogspot.co.za/2018/03/scientific-consensus-is-that-consensus.html?m=1
The written post is rich with reputable sources, data libraries, links, references and interviews.

And the Audio file:
http://dwahts.blogspot.co.za/2018/03/audio-scientific-consensus-is-that.html?m=1
The audio file will suit you if you want to listen to the overview.

Atmospheric scientist professor Richard Lindtzen, lead IPCC scientist in the earlier years who resigned in disgust gives a talk outlining the problems and how the introduction of politics meant abandonment of all real science.

Here is a paper worth checking out showing the (gasp) crazy 'deniar logic that maybe, just maybe, nature has all along caused changes in climate?
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0170840612463317

And by now, after more than a decade long pause, the anticipated cooling period has kicked in:
https://m.accuweather.com/en/weather-blogs/weathermatrix/the-winter-that-wouldnt-end-cold-continues-sets-records/70004626

But despite this information being out there, it does not make it to people, usually because of the sort of problems we have with our media and special interests, which is well known. Here is the latest shocker:


The knee jerk talking heads in climate cult echo-chamber is no different. They keep championing their graphs of anomalies rather than data, usually truncated at the x-axis, all chanting in unison "no scientist worth his salt disagrees" before quoting non specialists like Bill Nye (twat) or MSM darlings that know nothing about Climatology but rely on the fortitude of integrity by colleagues, like Neil Degrasse Tyson, Brian Cox and David Attenborough (all 3 of whom I will continue to love and will always forgive for this one little mistake which is totally understandable when you consider the circles they move in and MSM programming they are doing)

So let's call them on it.

Let's be serious for s moment here. Real scientifically RELEVANT researchers, academics actually published IN THE REATED FIELD, don't play that game.

Here are a few:

David Bellamy, botanist.[19][20][21][22]
Lennart Bengtsson, meteorologist, Reading University.[23][24]
Judith Curry, Professor and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology.[25][26][27][28]
Freeman Dyson, professor emeritus of the School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study; Fellow of the Royal Society.[29][30]
Ivar Giaever, Norwegian–American physicist and Nobel laureate in physics (1973).[31]
Steven E. Koonin, theoretical physicist and director of the Center for Urban Science and Progress at New York University.[32][33]
Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan emeritus professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and member of the National Academy of Sciences.[30][34][35][36]
Craig Loehle, ecologist and chief scientist at the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement.[37][38][39][40][41][42][43]
Ross McKitrick, Professor of Economics and CBE Chair in Sustainable Commerce, University of Guelph.[44][45]
Patrick Moore, former president of Greenpeace Canada.[46][47][48]
Nils-Axel Mörner, retired head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics Department at Stockholm University, former chairman of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution (1999–2003).[49][50]
Garth Paltridge, retired chief research scientist, CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research and retired director of the Institute of the Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre, visiting fellow Australian National University.[51][52]
Roger A. Pielke, Jr., professor of environmental studies at the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado at Boulder.[53][54]
Denis Rancourt, former professor of physics at University of Ottawa, research scientist in condensed matter physics, and in environmental and soil science.[55][56][57][58]
Harrison Schmitt, geologist, Apollo 17 Astronaut, former U.S. Senator.[59][60]
Peter Stilbs, professor of physical chemistry at Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.[61][62]
Philip Stott, professor emeritus of biogeography at the University of London.[63][64]
Hendrik Tennekes, retired director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute.[65][66]
Anastasios Tsonis, distinguished professor of atmospheric science at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.[67][68]
Fritz Vahrenholt, German politician and energy executive with a doctorate in chemistry.[69][70]

Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes

Graph showing the ability with which a global climate model is able to reconstruct the historical temperature record, and the degree to which those temperature changes can be decomposed into various forcing factors. It shows the effects of five forcing factors: greenhouse gases, man-made sulfate emissions, solar variability, ozone changes, and volcanic emissions.[71]
These scientists have said that the observed warming is more likely to be attributable to natural causes than to human activities. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.

Khabibullo Abdusamatov, astrophysicist at Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences.[72][73]
Sallie Baliunas, retired astrophysicist,Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.[74][75][76]
Timothy Ball, historical climatologist, and retired professor of geography at the University of Winnipeg.[77][78][79]
Ian Clark, hydrogeologist, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa.[80][81]
Vincent Courtillot, geophysicist, member of the French Academy of Sciences.[82]
Chris de Freitas, associate professor, School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science, University of Auckland.[83][84]
David Douglass, solid-state physicist, professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester.[85][86]
Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University.[87][88]
William Happer, physicist specializing in optics and spectroscopy; emeritus professor, Princeton University.[30][89]
Ole Humlum, professor of geology at the University of Oslo.[90][91]
Wibjörn Karlén, professor emeritus of geography and geology at the University of Stockholm.[92][93]
William Kininmonth, meteorologist, former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology.[94][95]
David Legates, associate professor of geography and director of the Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware.[96][97]
Anthony Lupo, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Missouri.[98][99]
Tad Murty, oceanographer; adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa.[100][101]
Tim Patterson, paleoclimatologist and professor of geology at Carleton University in Canada.[102][103]
Ian Plimer, professor emeritus of mining geology, the University of Adelaide.[104][105]
Arthur B. Robinson, American politician, biochemist and former faculty member at the University of California, San Diego.[106][107]
Murry Salby, atmospheric scientist, former professor at Macquarie University and University of Colorado.[108][109]
Nicola Scafetta, research scientist in the physics department at Duke University.[110][111][112]
Tom Segalstad, geologist; associate professor at University of Oslo.[113][114]
Nir Shaviv, professor of physics focusing on astrophysics and climate science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.[115][116]
Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia.[117][118][119][120]
Willie Soon, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.[121][122]
Roy Spencer, meteorologist; principal research scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville.[123][124]
Henrik Svensmark, physicist, Danish National Space Center.[125][126]
George H. Taylor, retired director of the Oregon Climate Service at Oregon State University.[127][128]
Jan Veizer, environmental geochemist, professor emeritus from University of Ottawa.[129][130]

Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown
These scientists have said that no principal cause can be ascribed to the observed rising temperatures, whether man-made or natural.

Syun-Ichi Akasofu, retired professor of geophysics and founding director of the International Arctic Research Center of the University of Alaska Fairbanks.[131][132]
Claude Allègre, French politician; geochemist, emeritus professor at Institute of Geophysics (Paris).[133][134]
Robert Balling, a professor of geography at Arizona State University.[135][136]
Pål Brekke, solar astrophycisist, senior advisor Norwegian Space Centre.[137][138]
John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, contributor to several IPCC reports.[139][140][141]
Petr Chylek, space and remote sensing sciences researcher, Los Alamos National Laboratory.[142][143]
David Deming, geology professor at the University of Oklahoma.[144][145]
Stanley B. Goldenberg a meteorologist with NOAA/AOML's Hurricane Research Division.[146][147]
Vincent R. Gray, New Zealand physical chemist with expertise in coal ashes.[148][149]
Keith E. Idso, botanist, former adjunct professor of biology at Maricopa County Community College District and the vice president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change.[150][151]
Kary Mullis, 1993 Nobel Laureate in Chemistry, inventor of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method.[152][153][154]
Antonino Zichichi, emeritus professor of nuclear physics at the University of Bologna and president of the World Federation of Scientists.[155][156]

Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences
These scientists have said that projected rising temperatures will be of little impact or a net positive for society or the environment.

Indur M. Goklany, science and technology policy analyst for the United States Department of the Interior.[157][158][159]
Craig D. Idso, faculty researcher, Office of Climatology, Arizona State University and founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change.[160][161]
Sherwood B. Idso, former research physicist, USDA Water Conservation Laboratory, and adjnct professor, Arizona State University.[162][163]
Patrick Michaels, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and retired research professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia.[164][165]




Popular posts from this blog

Scientific Consensus is that Consensus is overturned 100% of the time

Everything you know is wrong. There is a very good reason why science succeeds more often than politics does.  Unlike politics, It's not a consensus or a vote,  it's actually method.  The scientific method. Anyone who has read this blog before probably knows I'm a lifelong science junkie as well as someone who spends thousands of hours breaking down the the political and economic agendas behind the special interest groups that guide public policy.  In many ways I'm actually uniquely qualified to tie these angles together in ways not well understood by the overwhelming majority of people.  That actually includes scientists. Scientists are notoriously naive in the political and economic forces that drive the human world.

First and foremost,  what is this so called 'consensus' anyway.  You will be horrified to find out,  it's not specifically that global warming is man made.  It's simply that humans contribute to climate change in an unknowable way and to…

CO2 is not a pollutant, it is greening the earth!

Whatever your persuasion is on CO² and AGW, nobody disagrees on the tremendous benefit it provides plant life. Many of the past famine disasters and desertification has CO² decline listed as a contributor.

http://dwahts.blogspot.co.za/2018/04/sheep-science.html?m=1

I feel I've already blown the notion that humans are the main cause of climate change out of the water. Or rather I've used the reasoning of others and put it together in a convenient outline. See my previous post above for starters.  However, I recognize that humans do increase CO² levels, no matter how tiny. Increases are likely to be very short lived because the earth has an effective feedback mechanism, but we can apparently get small increases, and it's been put forward on very poor science that this is a bad thing. That assertion hinges completely on bad models. More on that in the bottom most link.  Model's and the measurement sample dates are dubious at best.


Furthermore, the main increase in CO²  as…

You Don't Know What Capitalism Is So Stop Using The Word!

I am writing this for one purpose, to be able to post it every time the issue comes up in conversation to prevent myself from dying of boredom on a few key issues with label intellectuals, you know, the sort who drop labels for the singular purpose of demonstrating their talent at dodging real issues by posing as someone who knows the definition of a word.

When it comes right down to it, I personally think most economic and, for that matter, socio-economic systems across the entire capitalism/ socialism spectrum could work if corruption could just be reasonably controlled.  Many forget that Socialism still runs on the capitalism economics system and the finer points actually come down to policy and regulations. This is often missed.  That being said, I am fairly sure that many of the criticisms of communism for example are valid, and views that it does not work especially well because it tends to kill the inventiveness and passion of the human spirit do stand, but not for the reasons…