9 Causes of Scientific Decline in American Thinker
via Defeat Climate Alarmismhttps://defyccc.com
My article 9 Causes of Scientific Decline in Academia is published in the American Thinker.
via Defeat Climate Alarmism https://defyccc.com
February 26, 2017 at 01:19AM
Booker & Arctic Sea Ice
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAThttps://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com
By Paul Homewood
Booker on Arctic sea ice this week. For some reason, the printed version includes my MASIE graph, but the online goes with NSIDC.
Ice data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center/National Snow and Ice Data Center
As the fake science of global warming continues to crumble, one scare story the zealots are determined to hold on to at all costs is their claim that ice in the Arctic is dangerously vanishing. Yet again lately we have been treated to a barrage of such headlines as “Hottest Arctic on record triggers massive ice melt”.
But that ever-diligent blogger Paul Homewood has drawn on official sources such as the US National Snow and Ice Data Center to uncover what is actually happening. Under “Arctic Fake News”, on NotALotOfPeopleKnowThat, he posted a graph showing that last week the extent of sea ice was much the same as it has been at this date ever since 2001. Indeed, according to the Danish Meteorological Institute, there is even more of it today than in February 2006, and it is also significantly thicker. Back in 2008 much of the ice was only a metre thick. Today that has risen to two metres, and in some places four.
The DMI data also show that the Greenland ice sheet, which we are told is melting at horrendous speed, is actually growing this year at a record rate, to a size way above its average for the past 26 years. And the most authoritative record of Northern Hemisphere snow cover shows this year’s ranking as one of the six highest since 1967.
The Deplorable Climate Science blog, run by US expert Tony Heller, gleefully reproduces a 2007 headline: “Scientists: ‘Arctic is screaming’, global warming may have passed tipping point”. As Heller comments: “The Arctic is indeed screaming at climate scientists – to shut up.”
My relevant posts are:
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT http://ift.tt/16C5B6P
February 25, 2017 at 11:57PM
The Climate Science Debate Illusion
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)http://www.thegwpf.com
You think you live in a world in which there are climate science skeptics on one side of the debate, and climate scientists, plus their believers, on the other side. And you think they are talking about the same thing.
That isn’t what’s happening. It’s mostly an illusion.
I mean this literally. You perceive a debate, but that is mostly a shared hallucination.
Most of you think there are two competing opinions on climate science and the two camps are arguing about the scientific details. There is a some of that happening. But for the most part, the two sides are literally imagining they are debating each other. They are actually talking about related but different things.
As a perfect example, I give you this fresh tweet history from Rex Tillerson and Chelsea Clinton.
If it is not immediately obvious to you that Chelsea and Rex are on different topics – and not in disagreement over one topic – you are experiencing an illusion. I’ll give you a minute to see if you can work your way out of it on your own. Look at the two tweets and see why they are not the same topic.
Okay, that’s enough time. Back to me.
Rex is talking about climate models that predict the future. Chelsea is talking about the scientific method. Those two things are not the same topic. Scientists would not claim that their models are “science.” They are simply tools that scientists built. Rex is talking about tools. Chelsea is talking about the scientific method. You can’t reach agreement if you aren’t even on the same topic.
Chelsea’s tweet exchange is representative of the debate illusion around the country. It goes like this:
Believer: Climate scientists are correct because the scientific method is reliable over time, thanks to peer review. The experts are overwhelmingly on the same side.
Skeptic: The prediction models are not credible because prediction models with that much complexity are rarely correct.
Believer: You troglodyte! You know nothing of science! The scientific method is credible!
See what happened? The believer was discussing science and the skeptic was NOT discussing science. These are different conversations. The prediction models are designed by scientists, but they are not “science” per se, any more than a microscope is “science.” Both are just tools that scientists use.
If you are a climate skeptic, and you want to make your case in the strongest possible way, start by agreeing with all of the “science” of climate science. Make sure you specify that your skepticism is outside the scientific realm, and limited to the prediction models that are not science.
That will explode some heads. (I’ve tested this.)
I should pause here to tell any new readers of this blog that I don’t know the truth about climate science, and I don’t have any way of knowing whether the models are accurate or not. My interest in this debate is to get both sides out of their illusions. The science is not the models, and the models are not science. You can trust the science and still question the prediction models without being a troglodyte.
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF) http://www.thegwpf.com
February 25, 2017 at 09:50PM
Goldstein v CAN et al update
via Defeat Climate Alarmismhttps://defyccc.com
Few days ago I filed a Motion for Leave to File the First Supplemental Complaint in 5:16-cv-211-C, Goldstein v. Climate Action Network et al. Among other things, the First Supplemental Complaint alleges the following violations by all or some Defendants:
two cases of theft from New York State Common Retirement Fund in connection with acquisition of SolarCity and TerraForm Power shares
multiple thefts from California pension funds
collusion and corrupt dealing with the Attorneys General United for Clean Power
funding and/or commanding violence against supporters of President Trump
via Defeat Climate Alarmism https://defyccc.com
February 25, 2017 at 09:17PM
Iowa Climate Science Education 