Let Us Ponder

Let us ponder again. If atmospheric dust is a significant source of uncetainty in climate models already, how can they claim to be accurate to begin with? Further if we come to a greater understanding with this new previously unknown information are they going to reprogram the computers to adjust to their previous level of uncertainty?

It boggles the mind at how many things are left out of these computer climate models known and unknown, yet we trust them to make generational decisions based on their projections. Faith based science.



Unexpected Discovery Could Impact On Future Climate Models

....This could impact on climate theories because atmospheric dust is a significant source of uncertainty for scientists trying to model the climate. ‘If it’s proven the dust is affected by electric fields, elements of current climate models may have to be re-worked with this new information, to remain accurate’, explains Joseph Ulanowski, Centre for Atmospheric and Instrumentation Research (CAIR) at the University of Hertfordshire....

Skeptics From Around the Globe

Finland

Dr Boris Winterhalter Retired Senior Research Scientist and Coordinator for national and international marine geological research at the Geological Survey of Finland
"I have a very deep concern regarding the present attitude of the politicians and especially the majority of environmentalists regarding the issue of man-made "global warming".

UPDATE: 50-below sets Maine record


By Giselle Goodman, Maine Portland Press Herald - Maine Today

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Geological Survey and Maine State Climate Office announced today that a minus-50 reading in northwestern Maine held up to scientific scrutiny. That beats Maine’s old record of 48 below zero set in 1925 in Van Buren, and ties the record for coldest temperature recorded in New England. That reading was made in 1933 in Bloomfield, Vt.

The record on New Hampshire’s Mount Washington is minus -47. Maine’s minus-50 reading was made on Jan. 16 at a remote site along the Big Black River near the Quebec border as the region was in the grip of a blast of arctic air.

By the way after a thaw this week, cold air will return starting Friday to the nation. Watch for lots of cold and snow probably the rest of the month.

Keep your eye on the ball

In his excellent article In Politics Today, It’s All About the Narrative, Charlie Martin makes the very real point

If you control the narrative, you don’t just control what gets reported. You control what people see and hear.

Controlling the narrative in the modern world is a very powerful tool. It is not that we are not smart in modern day society, mankind has never been more educated, and for sure it is not that we have a lack of information resources, we have never had more. The simple truth is that we are lazy, apathetic and of course just too busy. A summarized thirty second sound bite and we are set to go, right?


The problem with narratives is that they can be manipulated to.... well manipulate. Once you control the narrative you set the agenda. Watch this video from the above article before reading further.





Once you have people focused on the narrative it really does not matter what the reality is. The narrative becomes the truth, the narrative becomes the reality.

So what is the narrative about Man Made Global Warming, excuse me Climate Change , I almost forgot that little narrative swtchiharoo. Even the switch from global warming to climate change is now part of the narrative. It has always been about climate change don't you know? After all the UN agency is the Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change. the fact that skeptics point out that the terminology has been changed from the once popular global warming to the now accepted climate change, is just those silly deniers paranoia over some mythical conspiracy, it has always been about climate change, jeez get a grip.

The truth is that it has always been about climate change.

The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.

That is from the IPCC charter, sounds reasonable doesn't it? I'm all for it. So what is the narrative? I'll give it my best here

THE NARRATIVE

Mankind's burning of fossil fuels is generating excessive CO2 which is warning the Earth. This warming will cause terrible consequences for mankind and the planet. The solution to the problem is for man to limit and eventually eliminate the burning of fossil fuels.

Did I leave anything out? Not really I don't believe, but like any good narrative there has to be sub-narratives to get peoples eyes focused back on the ball should they notice a bear in their midst.

Here is a sub-narrative

People who disagree with the narrative, particularly scientist are either in the employ of a fossil fuel concern, incompetent, blinded by right wing ideology, or in a state of psychological denial.

The idea that people may seriously question the premise behind the main narrative is just not acceptable. Denying that the main narrative is fact is derided and it's opponents are slandered and humiliated, regardless of their reputation or background.

Sub narrative number two;

WE MUST ACT NOW! The crisis is so great that failure to act is the equivalence to inviting world wide Armageddon-someday.

A very important sub-narrative here! The more the public can be made to believe that there is a crisis the more likely they are to believe and follow the suggestions and recommendations of those who claim to know the solution. After all if you are told your child is dieing and only an emergency surgery is going to save them, who is going to waste time waiting for further test and a second opinion? Act now or your baby will die!-someday.

Is there some vast secret plot to deceive the world? I seriously doubt it, though it would not be the first time it has happened. No what it is, is a combination of ideologues gaining control of a process and having willing accomplices that help promote it. Once a narrative, especially a seemingly well intentioned one, is properly fertilized and nurtured it is bound to grow. Add to this mix vast sums of money to be made and earned, justice and fairness to be achieved, Polar Bears to be saved, Pollution to be eliminated and by God you got a narrative worthy of World Dominion!

There are other narratives in the story, everything from species extinctions to increased kidney stones but really there is only one that matters-the first one. You see, or perhaps you don't, without the first narrative, all the others are meaningless. All the hype, all the fear mongering and guilt trips simply collapse if the primary "Climate Change" narrative is wrong. If CO2 is not raising the Earth's temperatures to levels that will harms us and the planet, all the rest is just subterfuge used to promote an agenda. An agenda built on, well we won't call it a lie, we'll just call it a mistake.

So while you are watching the ball being tossed around in the Global Warming, I mean Climate Change debate, keep your eye out for the moon walking bear passing through, that might just be reality.

"Skeptics From Around The Globe"-Sweden

Sweden

Dr. Peter Stilbs-Professor Physical Chemistry at KTH (Sweden)

"There is no strong evidence to prove significant human influence on climate on a global basis. The global cooling trend from 1940 to 1970 is inconsistent with models based on anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions. Actual claims put forward are that an observed global temperature increase of about 0.3 degrees C since 1970 exceeds what could be expected from natural variation. However, recent temperature data do not indicate any continued global warming since 1998" ..... "There is no reliable evidence to support that the 20th century was the warmest in the last 1000 years. Previous claims based on the 'Mann hockey-stick curve' are by now totally discredited"....

Skeptics From Around the Globe

FRANCE

Marcel Leroux- Professor of Climatology at Jean Moulin University in France, and the director of the Laboratory of Climatology, Risk, and Environment



"Hardly a week goes by without some new 'scoop' ... filling our screens and the pages of our newspapers," he writes. "'Global warming' caused by the 'greenhouse effect' is our fault, just like everything else, and the message/slogan/ misinformation becomes even more simplistic, ever cruder! It could not be simpler: if the rain falls or draught strikes; if the wind blows a gale or there is none at all; whether it's heat or hard frost; it's all because of the 'greenhouse effect', and we are to blame. An easy argument, but stupid!"
"The Fourth Report of the IPCC might just as well decree the suppression of all climatology textbooks, and replace them in our schools with press communiqués. ... Day after day, the same mantra -- that 'the Earth is warming up' -- is churned out in all its forms. As 'the ice melts' and 'sea level rises' the Apocalypse looms ever nearer! Without realizing it, or perhaps without wishing to, the average citizen in bamboozled, lobotomized' lulled into mindless acceptance. ... Non-believers in the greenhouse scenario are in the position of those long ago who doubted the existence of God ... fortunately for them, the Inquisition is no longer with us!"

"Skeptics From Around The Globe"- India

INDIA



Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia PROFESSOR, Centre of Advanced Study in Geologyat Punjab University, Board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.



"The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists."

23% Fear Global Warming Will End World - Soon

Nearly one-out-of-four voters (23%) say it is at least somewhat likely that global warming will destroy human civilization within the next century. Five percent (5%) say it’s very likely.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 66% say it’s not likely that civilization will be destroyed by the year 2100. That includes 27% who say it is not at all likely.

Republicans and unaffiliated voters strongly reject the notion that global warming will end human civilization, but Democrats are more evenly divided—38% think that disastrous outcome is likely while 46% disagree.

Overall, voters are evenly divided over whether there’s an immediate need to take action on global warming. Forty-one percent (41%) believe there is, but the same number (41%) say we can wait a few years to see if the problem is real. Sixty-two percent (62%) of Democrats say we must take immediate action, but 64% of GOP voters say it’s all right to wait a few years. A plurality of unaffiliated voters give the edge to waiting.

One reason for the voter caution is that 46% believe giving government greater control over the economy to fight global warming will be bad for America. Just 35% believe it will be good for the country. Twenty percent (20%) are not sure.

Twenty-nine percent (29%) of all voters think a period of dangerous global warming is the most likely climate expectation. Five percent (5%) predict a dangerous ice age but most (52%) expect something in between. Most Democrats expect a period of dangerous global warming while most Republicans and unaffiliated voters expect something between the two extremes.

Forty-five percent (45%) of voters acknowledge there is conflict between economic growth and environmental protection.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? Sign up now. If it's in the news, it's in our polls).

Sixty-four percent (64%) say global warming is a serious problem, down slightly from a survey last April. But voters increasingly regard it as the product of long-term planetary trends rather than human activity.

Former Vice President Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize for his anti-global warming efforts, but just 36% of voters believe he knows what he’s talking about

How Likely Is It That Global Warming Will Destroy Human Civilization in the Next Century?

Very Likely 5%

Somewhat Likely 18%

Not Very Likely 39%

Not At All Likely 27%

Not Sure 11%


Original from RR

Skeptics From Around the Globe - Italy

ITALY

Professor Antonino Zichichi is Emeritus Professor of Advanced Physics at the University of Bologna, past President of the Italian National Institute for Nuclear and Subnuclear Physics, past President of the European Physical Society, past President of the NATO Science Committee for Disarmament Technology, President of the World Federation of Scientists, President of the “Enrico Fermi Centre”.



"Models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are incoherent and invalid from a scientific point of view".

Inquisition-Robert Carter

img src="" alt="" />

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Bob Carter is a Research Professor at James Cook University (Queensland) and the University of Adelaide (South Australia). He is a palaeontologist, stratigrapher, marine geologist and environmental scientist with more than thirty years professional experience, and holds degrees from the University of Otago (New Zealand) and the University of Cambridge (England). He has held tenured academic staff positions at the University of Otago (Dunedin) and James Cook University (Townsville), where he was Professor and Head of School of Earth Sciences between 1981 and 1999.
*****************************************************
Some heretical writing by this Skeptic


Knock, knock: where is the evidence for dangerous human-caused global warming?

Cold hard facts debunk global warming alarmism

Climate change. Climate science and the Stern Review.

********************************************************
Point To Ponder

The only argument that remains to the IPCC – and it is solely a theoretical argument, not evidence of any kind - is that their unvalidated computer models project that carbon dioxide driven dangerous warming will occur in the future: just you wait and see!

Robert (Bob) Carter

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Skeptics From Around the Globe- Norway

NORWAY

Dr. Pal Brekke, senior advisor to the Norwegian Space Centre in Oslo.



"Anyone who claims that the debate is over and the conclusions are firm has a fundamentally unscientific approach to one of the most momentous issues of our time."