Scott Adams: The Non-Expert Problem and Climate Change Science

As regular readers of this blog already know, human brains did not evolve to understand reality in any deep way. If some of us survive and procreate, that’s good enough for evolution. It doesn’t matter that you live in a movie that says you will reincarnate after you die, while I live in a movie that says reality is a software simulation, and perhaps our mutual friend lives in a movie in which his prophet flew to heaven on a winged horse. Those are very different realities, but it doesn’t stop any of us from procreating. This lesson about the subjective nature of reality is one we learned from watching Trump’s march to the election. As the world looked on, everything they thought they understood about Trump’s chances dissolved in front of them. And yet the world still worked fine.

This perceptual change in humanity is happening as I predicted it would a year before Trump won. I told you he would change more than politics. I said he would open a crack in reality so you could view it through a new filter. That transformation is well underway. I’ll widen the crack a bit more today.

Read more at Scott Adams Blog
Scott Adams is the cartoonist for Dilbert^TM

Read More......

Study rejected for publication because it was 'less than helpful' to the climate cause

A scientific study which suggests global warming has been exaggerated was rejected by a respected journal because it might fuel climate scepticism, it was claimed last night.  The alarming intervention, which raises fears of ‘McCarthyist’ pressure for environmental scientists to conform, came after a reviewer said the research was ‘less than helpful’ to the climate cause.  Professor Lennart Bengtsson, a research fellow at the University of Reading and one of five authors of the study, said he suspected that intolerance of dissenting views on climate science was preventing his paper from being published.

Read more at the UK Daily Mail Read More......

Science held hostage in climate debate

The broad theory of man-made global warming is acceptable in the purely qualitative sense. If humans continue to fill the atmosphere with carbon dioxide, there can be little doubt that the average temperature of the world will increase above what it would have been otherwise. The argument about the science is, and always has been, whether the increase would be big enough to be noticed among all the other natural variations of climate. The economic and social argument is whether the increase, even if it were noticeable, would change the overall welfare of mankind for the worse.

Attempts to resolve the arguments are plagued with problems, a lot of which are inherently insoluble. There are many aspects of the behaviour of the natural climate system and of human society that are unpredictable in principle, let alone in practice. But perhaps the biggest of the underlying problems, and it is common to both arguments since it inevitably exists when there is large unpredictability and uncertainty, is the presence of strong forces encouraging public overstatement and a belief in worst-case scenarios.

Read more at the Australian Financial Review Read More......

Canada’s Sun News Network Coverage of Heartland’s Seventh Climate Conference

The Sun News Network in Canada extensively covered our Seventh International Conference on Climate Change at the Hilton Chicago. For that, The Heartland Institute is very grateful — but the viewers of the excellent network should be even more appreciative.

The sharp and entertaining Ezra Levant anchored the coverage, and his dispatches are not to be missed. Below you can view seven videos of his reports for his program, “The Source.”

See more at Heartland InstituteBlog Read More......

Next Climate Debate Bombshell - from CERN

Get ready for the next big bombshell in the man-made warming debate. The world’s most sophisticated particle study laboratory - CERN in Geneva - will soon announce that more cosmic rays do, indeed, create more clouds in earth’s atmosphere. More cosmic rays mean a cooler planet. Thus, the solar source of the earth’s long, moderate 1,500-year climate cycle will finally be explained.

Cosmic rays and solar winds are interesting phenomena - but they are vastly more relevant when an undocumented theory is threatening to quadruple society’s energy costs. The IPCC wants $10 gasoline, and “soaring” electric bills to reduce earth’s temperatures by an amount too tiny to measure with most thermometers.

Read more at ICECAP Read More......

A broadside on AGW

Hat tip: Anthony Watts of Watt's Up With That? Read More......

Another Example of shameful Global Warming Propaganda

(Hat tip: John Eidson, author)
Angry Kid, A Greenpeace Global Warming Video - "In a threatening tone, this angry young kid implies that man-made global warming theory is beyond dispute, a totally bogus assertion. Why does the environmental left so often resort to false claims?

Dr. Patrick Moore, a co-founder of Greenpeace, expressed the thoughts below after leaving the organization due to his belief that the modern environmental movement has become a bastion of far-left extremism. When the Soviet Union collapsed, fears of a nuclear holocaust diminished. Looking for a new cause, anti-war activists flooded into the environmental movement, bringing with them their strident pro-Marist, pro-Sandinista and anti-capitalist views of the world. Dr. Moore writes:

“Since its founding in the late 1960s, the modern environmental movement has created a vision that was international in scope and had room for people of all political persuasions.”

“The traditional sharp division between left and right was rendered meaningless by the common desire to protect our life support systems. Truth mattered, and science was respected for the knowledge it brought to the political debate.”

"Now, this broad based vision is challenged by a new philosophy of radical environmentalism. In the name of deep ecology, many environmentalists have taken a sharp turn to the ultra-left, ushering in a mood of extremism and intolerance."

"These factors have combined to contribute to a new variant of the environmental movement that is so extreme that many people, including myself, believe its agenda is a greater threat to the global environment than that posed by the mainstream of society."

Environmental extremism is causing an increasing number of international scientists to change sides in the global warming debate, yet the alarmist community continues to claim that man's impact on climate change is beyond dispute. To read Dr. Evans’ article about greenhouse gas theory, click HERE.

Related article: (link not working - use back button and then scroll down to title)
Backlash goes viral over 10:10 eco film "No Pressure" Read More......

Heartland Institute: Audit of IPCC Procedures ‘a Vindication’ but ‘Too Modest'

The Amsterdam-based InterAcademy Council (IAC), a scientific body asked to audit UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) procedures, has determined the IPCC has improperly crossed the line of policy advocacy, is not transparent enough, is prone to conflicts of interest, and has made numerous alarmist assertions that are not supported by the scientific record. IAC recommends structural reforms to fix IPCC’s flaws before IPCC’s next report, due in 2014.

The Heartland Institute for years has led criticism of the IPCC’s determination to put politics over scientific rigor to promote the dubious theory of man-made global warming. Heartland has hosted four international climate conferences, established the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), and produced and distributed millions of copies of reports, videos and books – including the 800-page Climate Change Reconsidered, the only comprehensive critique of the latest IPCC report, published in 2009.

For more information contact Tammy Nash or Jim Lakely at 312/377-4000. --Heartland Institute Read More......

CBS: Rex Murphy on Climategate

“You wouldn’t accept that at a grade 9 science fair…”
Read More......

Climate change data dumped

UK TIMES, 11/29/2009 - SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based. ∴ It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years. ∴ The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation. Read more at the Times Online... Read More......

Open Letter to Congress: 'You Are Being Deceived

CLIMATE DEPOT, 7/1/2009 - Scientists Write Open Letter to Congress: 'You Are Being Deceived About Global Warming' -- 'Earth has been cooling for ten years.' ∴ 'Present cooling was NOT predicted by the alarmists' computer models, and has come as an embarrassment to them.' ∴ Read the July 1, 2009 Open Letter to Congress by a team of prominent atmospheric scientists at Climate Depot...

Read More......

Obama's EPA Quashes Climate Change Science

POWERLINE, 6/28/2009 by John Hinderaker - The Competitive Enterprise Institute has obtained an EPA study of the "endangerment" to human well-being ostensibly caused by carbon dioxide emissions, together with a set of EPA emails indicating that the study, which concludes that carbon dioxide is not a significant cause of climate change, was suppressed by the EPA for political reasons. Read more and find important links at Powerline...

Video link added: FNC interview with EPA scientist Read More......

LETTER: Plan to slow greenhouse gases targets wealth

CORVALLIS GAZETTE-TIMES/LETTERS, 3/25/2009 by Jean Nelson - It’s a political question, not a matter of climate science, says Oregon’s new chief climate scientist, Philip W. Mote, about Oregon’s SB 80, a proposed bill that claims it will slow emissions of greenhouse gases. ∴ But will it? Perhaps a teeny, tiny bit, but at a terrible cost to Oregon. Described in current testimony before our state legislature as “drastic” and “extreme,” the proposed cap-and-trade scheme has finally been subjected to scientific auditing.

QuantEcon Inc. scientists Randall J. Pozdena, Ph.D., and Eric Fruits, PhD., made their findings public in September 2008. They predict for 2020 if cap and trade is implemented:

Oregon’s economic growth to 2020 will be cut approximately in half. The result: 90,000 fewer Oregon jobs than normal growth would produce; state and local revenues will be $4.4 billion lower, making it even more difficult to fund social programs; personal income will decrease and energy costs for you and me will skyrocket.

A study based on a global analysis by well-known climate scientist T.M.L. Wigley assessed the possible “climate stabilization” effect of a complete cessation of state and nationwide emissions (no fossil fuel power plants, not even a single internal combustion engine). That’s a reduction of emissions to zero immediately and continuing into the future. The results by the year 2100 would be hard to measure accurately: merely an 0.021 degree Celsius change. Oregon’s contribution would be miniscule.

Oregon’s proposed cap-and-trade looks like a scheme to redistribute wealth without climate improvement.

Jean Nelson, Corvallis
See LETTER and COMMENTS at the GT...

Added 3/28: See Tracy Rupp's response (published in the Friday paper) and ONLINE COMMENTS: [GT] Letter: Conservatives are frightened that socialism may be on the rise (March 27). Then see here. Read More......