Linda Goudsmit advises
Terry Hurlbut, editor at Conservative News and Views, another of the publishers who graciously posts my articles, sent me this extraordinary email today after I thanked him for publishing “The Humanitarian Hoax of Climate Change II – Debunking the Bunk – hoax 46.”
Terry Hurlibut replies,
No, Linda. I thank you. For giving me yet another opportunity to resurrect my Wayback Machine links and paste them into a more recent article, at a critical moment in the debate on American, European, and other national public policies in this area.
Yes, it was I who, on 19 November 2009, broke the Climategate story out of the blogosphere and into the realm of semi-professional journalism. It was my article, “Hadley CRU hacked with release of thousands of e-mails”, that went viral and forced Phil Jones to take a leave of absence while his superiors met to find ways to whitewash his violations of the tenets of the scientific method. And it was I who made a graph of the period in parallel with the Hockey Stick graph, using their own “temperature anomaly” table, to show that the Hockey Stick was never accurate, and Michael Mann knew it.
And it is I who have consistently held that none of those besmocked bunco artists, nor their public-money sponsors, will lead by example. Just look at how everyone got to the Fifteenth Conference of Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, held at Copenhagen, Denmark, in December of 2009. 140 business jets! 1200 chauffeured limousines! Which represented the complete rent-out of every chauffeured limousine on the entire continent of Europe.
And it was I who pointed out the conflict-of-interest of Rajendra Pachauri, then Head of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, whose closely-held companies stood to gain financially from cap-and-trade schemes under negotiation at COP-15.
And it was I who kept harping on this subject–right up to the time that Google News told examiner.com, and examiner.com told me, to “stifle myself,” saying I was off my beat.
Where upon Linda replies,
I am absolutely in shock that this man who has been publishing my articles for two years was responsible for breaking the shocking story of Climategate that I wrote about in The Humanitarian Hoax of Climate Change II – Debunking the Bunk. I had no idea – and apparently neither does most of the Western world thanks to the deliberate censoring of Terry Hurlbut and his explosive articles exposing the massive scandal.
Below is the continuing email thread 3 and 4 – with his permission of course. Please review them. I think that Terry’s articles should be republished and the scandal of burying the Climategate scandal should be exposed to the conservative media. The story is a colossus of malfeasance – crime and coverup that continues in advance of the 2020 election.
Linda replies again,
WOW!!!!! I am reeling from your email Terry – I had no idea you were so personally and professionally involved in exposing this monstrous climate hoax. BRAVO!
In 2009 I was not politically engaged – I was still clueless. Becoming a political analyst was a surprising development of my retirement that began in January, 2013. Rob and I shuttered our business and moved to the beach – I was no longer encumbered by work responsibilities or family responsibilities. Our children were all adults and I finally had the time and energy to pursue whatever interested me.
I wrote a philosophy book in 1995 titled Dear America: Who’s Driving the Bus? that explored why people do what they do – it presented a universal paradigm of human behavior and the tools to understand how to change behavior. I never considered it political but I was wrong. I was very proud of Dear America but could not find a publisher. I threw the manuscript in a drawer and forgot about it for sixteen years until 2011 when I decided to self-publish it. The only thing that I would change from 2011 to now is that the regressive pull I witnessed in society 25 years ago was DELIBERATE!
That is how I became a political analyst – I started examining the regressive social pressures back to dependency and permanent childhood, and began thinking about WHY anyone would advance such a demonstrably destructive attitude. That is when I started connecting the dots and writing about the deliberate culture and information war against America – its motives, its allies, and the humanitarian hoaxes used to dupe people into accepting its false premises – it is revolution without bullets.
With your permission I would like to forward your editor’s notes to some folks who might be able to resurrect this important story. I thought you were speaking figuratively when you said Wayback Machine
Editor’s Notes:
The above article appears here at Pundicity.com. See also the author’s website.
Your editor first broke the Climategate story on a now-defunct site. It appears here, courtesy of the Wayback Machine. See also:
Phil Jones admits the files of the Climategate Archive are genuine.
Established media organs start to pay attention.
The Hockey Stick was never accurate—and Michael Mann knew it.
Rajendra Pachauri, then head of the UN-IPCC, stood to gain from a climate agreement.
Here is how the first linked article above begins:
It will happen without warning. As you drive along a street, road, or highway, your engine will die. So will every engine of every car or truck on the road at the time. Two pointed exceptional types will exist: police or military vehicles, and vehicles antedating the typical remote-stop anti-theft systems of today. (Cars of the latter type will get only so far as a roadblock perhaps 500 feet or so away.) Perhaps you will now wonder whether this was what that UN official told everyone to expect in her radio address to the world. What was her name? Ah, yes: Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary to the..what? Oh, yes: United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change. You will suddenly realize that jaw-breaking name stands for a concept now about to get right into your face.
Curfews, candlelight, and confiscation
A white vehicle with baby-blue trim will pull up behind you—a Zed Wagon.1 Out will step a burly, jackboot-wearing, no-nonsense soldier in a white uniform with a baby blue helmet. He will carry a rifle at port arms. His chest will bear the designator of his service: UNCliFor, the United Nations Climate Force. He will then walk up to your window. “Out,” he will bark. If you protest, he then will cock and level his rifle at you. “Out of the [fornicating] car,” he’ll say, “or I’ll blow your [fornicating] head off and drag you out!” You will then get out—one way or the other.
Then the Zed Wagon (having very powerful electric motors) will pull alongside. A double crane will lower a carrying frame over your car. A crew of three will then dismount and rig beams and chains under your car, and attach it to the carrying frame. The Z-form double crane will then lift your car off the tarmac and onto the cargo bed. Finally the crew will get into the Zed Wagon and drive away—with your car, leaving you standing where you stopped.
Unless you can get safely to a place of lodging by sundown, UNCliFor will pick you up for violating curfew. Wherever you do manage to lodge, there you will stay overnight. Christiana Figueres will likely appear on television (or the Internet Stream) to announce the new Global Emergency Decree Against Climate Change.
A list of regulations
- Curfew will begin at local sundown and lift only with local sunrise.
- No person, except a law-enforcement officer, an active-duty member of UNCliFor or a friendly military service, a Very Important Person or the said person’s chauffeur, shall own or so much as come near a private automobile.
- Rail and bus transport shall replace transport in sedans (even including taxicabs!) forthwith.
- Anyone wishing to conduct any activities at night must do so by candlelight.
- Truck or “lorry” transport shall give way at once to rail transport.
- The Global Aviation Administration shall ground all flights by any aircraft using fossil fuels. UNFCCC, UNIPCC, UNDSD, and similar officials, and their friends, will get special passes. The Global Aeronautics and Space Agency will announce plans to develop a jet that does not burn fossil fuels. How long such development will take, the world must wait and see. In the meantime, if you want to travel overseas, perhaps you can get a ticket to fly in a new class of helium-filled airships with propellers running on solar battery power.
- Local “block directors” (Upravdom in Russian) will issue assignments for doubling up in existing houses. Construction will begin at once on mixed-use dwellings. The regional Upravdom in each city or town will start accepting applications from shopkeepers for shop space on the ground floors of these new buildings. The upper floors will, of course, hold apartments. Electric shuttles will take residents to commuter trains, bus stops, etc.
That will give you a taste–just a taste–of my material.
Bear Klein Said:
“The religion of climate change.” Anti-religion, I would call it. But, semantics being what they are, your characterization is accurate enough.
I didn’t think you cared that I was a Gentile. But Adam Dhalgliesh, up-thread, certainly expressed a “care” on that subject.
And yes, I am a Christian–and a literalist, too. I happen to take Bereish’t chh. 1-11 literally. To be more specific, vv. 5:1b-6:9a give a genealogy that leads to the most violent event in Earth history. Vv. 6:9b-10:1a contain the log of the most important sea voyage ever–in the most important project in the annals of naval architecture, the Life-ship (Hebrew: tebah) of Noach.
I can’t speak to whether our mutual acquaintance is a Trotskyite or not–I haven’t been on this site long enough to know. But I can definitely say that most of those who trumpet the “findings” of Jones, Mann, Trenberth, et al. are either Trotskyites or Stalinists. I speak here mainly of prominent politicians and United Nations bureaucrats. Like Christiana Figueres.
@ Bear Klein:
I’m actually feeling worse because of your nauseating, ad hominem snide attacks, and occasionally. perfervid pronunciations. So that should have a dual purpose in which I answer the question you are so anxious about, , and make YOU feel better.
@ Terry HurlbutWho cares if you are not Jewish. Climate Change is a discussion of science not religion. Unless it is the religion of climate change.
Even though most commentators here are Jewish. Not all are and your debate partner Felix is a devout Atheist. He is a devout believer in Trotsky. I am not being sarcastic.
I hope I did not misrepresent that because I was trying to be accurate and not negative (in this case) in regards to Felix. Anyway if I erred he will correct me harshly I suspect.
Pro Israel Christians are not uncommon readers or commentators on this site.
@ Felix Quigley:
Ah–the Beeb. I might have known. Another organ of the government, together with the Met Office and the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. The relevance of DEFRA derives from their publication, under their imprint, of a flyer titled The Rules of the Game. Shades of Saul Alinsky. I found that flyer in the Climategate Archive.
Which brings me to the central thesis of the particular comment to which I am replying.
I represent the embattled end users of fossil fuels. I also represent those who wish to be free.
If the situation is as dire as Phil Jones (yes, that was his name, and he’s the one who said, “I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick…to hide the decline) and company say it is, then–apart from what I’ve already said about the failure of the most prominent alarmists in the world to lead by example–humanity has no choice but to manage the Earth, and more particularly its atmosphere, as a common.
I want you and everyone else following this thread to understand what that requires. It requires establishing a United Nations Department, or Ministry, or Council on the Global Environment. The present Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change would seem at first to be the likely candidate. But in my ceaseless research into the United Nations, I have discovered a far more likely candidate: the Division of Sustainable Development. And here is its history.
In 1992, several chiefs-of-state of Member States of the United Nations met at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Out of that meeting came the United Nations Agenda for the Twenty-first Century–Agenda 21. It is the furthest-reaching agenda for holding all things in common that I have ever seen.
For what is “sustainable development”? It sounds good–the sort of development that will not over-stress the planet, whatever that means. Those who typically speak of sustainable development give too short a shrift to the ability of the planet to sustain far higher levels of industrial development than the present level. They do so because what they actually want to do is to single out one country more than any other–the United States of America–for de-industrialization. Why? Because the people of the United States of America will not vote, in the majority, for inclusion in a one-world government. Which is what the United Nations has, from its very inception, desired and worked to become.
And what should that matter to Jews, barbarian Gentile that I am?
Simple: we Americans are the best friends the State of Israel has at the moment. The old Soviet Union tried to withdraw its recognition, and certainly withdrew its friendship, seeing that Israel was not going to become a “People’s Republic” in the mold of the Soviet Union itself, any of its member “Soviet Socialist Republics,” or the various “Democratic” or “People’s Republics” that were signatory to the Warsaw Pact. Likewise, the French withdrew their friendship, largely on the whim of Charles de Gaulle. The British are firmly in the grip of the New Baghdad Caliphate, with their Muslim mayors of London, Sheffield, and dozens of other British cities, and their Shari’a courts.
In sharp contrast, America just elected a reincarnation of King Cyrus the Great of Persia, or as near a thing to that if one does not believe in literal reincarnation. I don’t know that George H. W. Bush, the then President of the United States who signed the Rio Summit Document, could have predicted this. I do know the Bush Dynasty are bitter about the victory of Donald J. Trump, and in their bitterness have knocked the bloom off their roses. In any event, our President Cyrus ordered the United States Ambassador to the State of Israel to transfer his office and staff to the old United States Consular compound in southern Jerusalem, thereby transforming a consulate into a true Embassy. That gesture, symbolic though it was, struck the Middle East like a thunderclap, as well you all know.
So as you see, the United States of America is now the Great Stumblingblock in the path of a one-world government that, if I may borrow a few lines from the Prophet Daniel, “will confirm a covenant with the many for one ‘seven,’ and in the middle of the ‘seven’ shall make an end to sacrifices and oblations…” (Daniel 9:27)
And it is my deduction, from their behavior and from my perusal of their correspondence, that Phil Jones, Michael Mann, Kevin Trenberth, Keith Briffa, and other names that appear in the Climategate Archive, are all “true believers” in the anti-religion of the United Nations.
And what would such a government, and such a Department (or Division) of the Global Environment, mean for any of us?
To answer that, you may read again my essay, excerpted in the main body of the post that started this thread, on how the implementation of the IPCC Climate Manifesto would play out. And you may also visit Linda Goudsmit’s Pundicity page:
https://goudsmit.pundicity.com/
On that page you may read her series on various Humanitarian Hoaxes.
Now you know why I speak of a case of Earth v. Fossil Fuel Providers, Purveyors and Users. Or make that United Nations Division of Sustainable Development v. [names of every oil company, coal company, power company, and even every nuclear-energy company, since the UN wants to shut down nuclear power also.]
Edgar G. Said:
Never heard of that person. Did you think Linda was re-introducing him to this board under an assumed name? If so, you insulted her, too, by implying that she would be an accessory to sockpuppetry–one of the most flagrant abuses of on-line bulletin boards known to their administrators and moderators.
@ Terry Hurlbut:
Terry
Matt McGrath works for the BBC. He is involved with environmental matters. He comes from Waterford and he lists one of his interests as Gaelic Games. That is a plus for me!
Obviously we have never met and never communicated either. So he is not my friend. But here I am liking somebody who works for an organization, the BBC, which organization I never heard once saying a good word about Israel. And that is a big issue but another issue.
In this whole climate affair today what is so very hard to come by, I have found out, is good information.
McGrath has got huge resources at his disposal. I have nearly no resources except a little will power.
So I am genuinely very pleased that McGrath wrote about these three studies in the article I quoted above and gave the links.
I have read part of the first paper he noted, the “A”.
And not all of it yet I confess. It did seem to me though that McGrath in his article had done an honest job in extracting the vital info thereby imparted.
Again I feel grateful to McGrath for that.
So I learn to trust him but that trust is also conditional, and I am sure he would not be insulted, and I intend to read and master all 3 papers he listed, that is A, B and C. (The links in his article are live)
But it is a serious undertaking and many people will not do it. Simply I must do it.
I am driven on by my understanding that the human being is able to understand. The old empirical method of Bacon I believe in. Assemble the facts, if you can, and then reach conclusions.
Of course emotions are involved in this but very obviously emotions will not get us very far at all. We are sentient beings so we are emotional beings but what must predominate is knowledge.
So it is back again to the “hockey stick” this infernal hockey stick.
It is useless Terry to try to pin me down on a word like “trick” as I said that the whole story of this climategate needs to be investigated.
As I understand it, from what I have word, this is in between a slang word and a piece of technical jargon that these circles in science were employing, and remember speaking among themselves, like private, remember private emails were hacked, how nice is that?
What I said at the beginning was that this “climategate” must be examined, from all angles.
It is this method that needs to be fought for. First get the facts. Jones was wrong. Hope I have his name right? He should have said look there has been a cooling period of some years in such and such a time, and there was a shutdown in Yale University, and so on, tell everything. That was totally wrong in my book.
What I suspect, and here I speculate, they themselves felt embattled, yes and embattled by lies. LIES I have read enough on Breitbart and Infowars to see the extent of this lying.
But again I should not speculate. I need to study it.
So strangely enough if anybody thinks this is not for Israelis, there is another angle here which shows that indeed it is a vital matter, because how can lovers of Israel establish the truth of what lies behind the “Palestinian” Arab phenomenon, except by going right into that history.
It is the same method and this method is precious.
That is all I will say for now but obviously no matter who is in this discussion I will continue my studies of this.
)As regards Palestinianismcan I call it that, there is a very understandable history but it is a history that needs to be studied, clarified, simplified, taught, and what we have learned this will not happen by itself.
@ Edgar G.: You did not answer me are you feeling better, I am truly concerned!
@ Bear Klein:
“bro-mance” …”lecturing” an etc, what other crap do you have to sling. I TOLD you above that I was NOT aware of your former disputes, but again, in your unhealthy desire to malign, you ignore, and again, tiresomely chose to tell me what I already know….. except that “Terry” is a female…And you cant resist your little needle.
I suspect that next, you’ll be telling me that you are the only sane one in the asylum… par for the course –according to your unique, “Oracular”, posting style..
Can you tell me-in confidence, of course- the winning number for the next Mifal Hapayis…?
@ Terry Hurlbut:
If you arrogate to yourself the “provocateur”, cognomen, then you must also be that Lorenschen- whatever-his name is or was and still talking drek. . I never ever addressed a post to you at any time, under your present user name. In fact I saw it on this site for the very first time only a few days ago. Very hot-headed aren’t you…
(.If you are who you are, you owe me an apology, if you are Loren-etc. you don’t.)
So all the rest of your scathing diatribe is meaningless.
You may not have heard of Mishlai (Shlomo) or Proverbs …Let me quote…”The wicked flee, when none pursue, but the righteous are as brave as a lion.”…
So even though I didn’t refer to you, you still assumed the “guilt” (of course not guilt, just quoting the above Proverb which seems partly-at least-applicable…in case you once again misunderstand …
@ Edgar G.:Are you feeling okay? If not I hope you will feel better.
I have in the past been attacked on a personal level by your new buddy numerous times. I long ago decided not to have anything to do with him based on that. Once I relented on that and was immediately attacked again on a personal level. So I decided this person is not worth my time. I only mentioned this person and described his regular past personal attacking behavior to most commentators and Ted to our new commentator Terry. I hoped she would not take it personally.
Edgar, I am done with this subject. Again you may view things just as you please. I actually find it very puzzling that you do not remember the attacking nature of your new buddy. Anyway have a bro-mance with whomever you want. Your judgments here and lecturing is off base and rejected without animus.
@ Bear Klein:
Thank’s Bear, you are always full of extraneous info, and tell me something that I already know and have never needed to be told.
To viciously insult someone who holds a different opinion to you, (all of which will be null in a few years, when nobody will remember your name except for Yahrzeit,) Is just not like my picture of you. And when I say so, you respond with a “smarmy” innuendo.
You must have acrimonious history with our friend that I was not aware of. And take the opportunity to stick the needle in. I’ve done it myself, with our obsessively “religious” fellow member, although I have personally no bad feeling.. But I recall you yourself calming down other battlers, by evoking the same criteria as I have. .
I don’t give a hoot about global warming–or cooling,,,it’s always with us to a greater or lesser extent, depending on events far, far beyond our control and even perhaps , knowledge. It’s been going on for millions of years. As an Al Gore follower you’ll differ, but as YOU say, you are free to think what you want.
Why don’t you delve into the reason that the Sahara, once thriving and fertile, is now a wilderness which is spreading…..??
Felix Quigley Said:
And I am a bad guy.
For if Matt McGrath tells “the truth you do feel,” then as far as you’re concerned, I am lying.
Matt McGrath is a friend of yours. That is all you can establish.
And truth is not a matter of feeling. It is a matter of establishment of fact.
And that establishment of fact cannot be compatible with playing tricks with data, and combining two incompatible data sets, to hide declines. Or by regarding truth a scandal, as Kevin Trenberth did.
Matt McGrath is a real!y good guy. I am beholden to Matt for alerting me to these three papers. The essay of Matt is very good but he did offer the links. Therein lies the truth I do feel. I will come back on this.
Edgar G. Said:
And what about your name-calling on me? “Deliberate provocateur,” you said further up-thread. And you were definitely talking about me, because Peter Dale had not weighed in when Linda spoke of “good people.” So I know all the facts, but post garbage deliberately to stir something up? That’s what you said.
Just what do you think I am trying to provoke? I’ll tell you what I am trying to provoke: a rejection of that New Ba’al and New Babylon calling itself the United Nations. Do you really think they were sincere in their founding declaration when they talked of a rejection of Hitlerism? How many Resolutions must the Security Council pass before the people of Israel, and their friends outside The Land, realize that the UN are not your friends? And when they’re not passing Resolutions commanding you to withdraw to untenable armistice lines, they are funding dry-lab jobs and publicity campaigns by insincere politicians. Now who’s provoking what?
Goy I may be, but I am not rachah. Nor am I your enemy. The UN is.
Remember also: it was not the United Nations, or the League of Nations, that defeated Adolf Hitler. It was soldiers of the United States Army and Marine Corps, and sailors of the United States Navy. Including, I understand fully, many Jewish soldiers, sailors–and officers, including general officers.
And I am?
And how about when he superciliously summoned me back to this forum as though I were an absent-or-tardy-without-official-leave student in his class? By the way: I know that in your last quote you weren’t talking to me. I’m talking here about how you ignored Felix’ attitude toward me.
I deeply regret having to come back to this so many times. But lending credence to those purporting to be scientists, who falsify and otherwise manipulate their data in the service of grantors having a dark political motive, and never questioning either the “scientists'” flawed methodology or the grantors’ motive, is not an example of serious thinking. It is to cry out, like Chicken Little, “The sky is falling, the sky is falling!” And then to accept the wolf’s offer of a “shortcut” that leads to…well, I suppose, Gentile that I am, I shouldn’t go there, should I? You know what I mean, better than I ever could (only because I come from the next generation after that which fought and won the Second World War).
@ Edgar G.:Happy for you that you and Felix are such tight friends. As I always tell you, you are entitled to your own views.
Felix Quigley Said:
And you don’t recognize “I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick…to hide the decline” as proof of dry-labbing?
I wouldn’t have called it barbarism–although frankly what all too many scientists have to say is so much bar-bar to me, and I speak as the holder of the degree of Doctor of Medicine. But what I do call it is a deliberate plot to introduce tyranny.
I will take my chances with the weather, and the climate, however it changes, rather than risk laying the slightest foundation for a United Nations Climate Force, as I described in one of the original articles I mentioned in my quoted correspondence.
That’s right. In the immortal words of Charles Dickens (David Copperfield, paraphrased): I will take my chances with the climate. If the situation is as dire as you (yes, you) and Michael Mann and Phil Jones and Kevin Trenberth and Barack Obama say it is, I daresay I’m smarter than all of you put together about how to cope. (At least I am not buying fifty-million-shekel landed estates 150 U.S. Customary feet above sea level.)
But I don’t believe a word of it. And I never will, so long as those first three, who dry-labbed the whole thing, and Barack Obama, who leads by lip service and not by example, are in the lead, proposing draconian measures to “head it off,” as they say, refusing to lead by example, and announcing that rank hath its privileges.
@ Bear Klein:
Bear-I am disappointed in your nasty name-calling on Felix. I have got to know him very well, and he is certainly NO “nut job”, and you are only being deliberately offensive to someone who does not answer back in kind. You just don’t understand the way his mind works, and he is above all that sort of name calling……according to what I know of him. He has a very high regard and respect, for the Jewish People and Israel, none of which is affected by your opinion of him. I know this for certain…
He and I are working together on a project in Ireland regarding defunct and disused Jewish Cemeteries. (The some pictures he sent me showed the gravestones of several of my very close family).
He is the most serious thinker on this site bar none. His thoughts are tumultuous, and all wish for expression at the same time. The broadness of his interests cause him to want to “investigate” -as he puts it-, even whilst he is answering a point, diverting him into byways, and he can forget to come back to the main subject. Well so do we all, in different degrees.
Perhaps you will sit down and realise, that all this fuss and bother is MEANINGLESS, and only an outlet for our own vanities. We haven’t the faintest idea why the earth’s atmosphere heats and freezes. The scientists give 1000 different reasons…. ALL theories, and not provable to a certainty. We DO know, that even if present day humankind is causing global warming more than usual, it is a mere blip on the timeline. The real culprits, seem to be, as far as scientific theory can ascertain, to do with the earth’s wobble, the sometimes erratic outflow from the sun, and so on. We can do nothing about it. It has been agreed that is is CYCLICAL and returns at fairly specified periods. Enclosed in these cycles are mini-cyles. We all know this, and the amount of hot air, however much that we are expending on this, matters not a whit. It will happen , ebb and flow, ebb and flow. Who knows whether the movement of some distant planet a million years ago, is only now being felt here in the form of an extra wobble, with knock-on effect.
But, don’t let that interfere with your vicarious enjoyment, and exercise your undoubted talents. Unfortunately they are not those of a climatologist. And even if they were, all you could do is the same as what the others are doing.
Yes Greenland was Green, at least in it’s areas bordering on the sea, and the fjords, but further north it was ice-as usual. I have complete copies, and descriptions of Erik The Red, his transgressions and punishments, his expeditions, and of Leif Erikson after him, also much of the writings of Snorri Sturluson.
So call Felix what you like , I see no difference between his purported failings, and your own satisfaction in pointing them out. Disappointing…
Disappointing for me, as I regard you both as respected internet friends.
@ Bear Klein:
Bear Klein when I produced vital material it was completely being ignored. I could not see a future. But the attack of you against me intensified. It seems that you hate me. Can you lay that aside and concentrate on the papers 1, 2 and 3 that were mentioned above
@ Terry Hurlbut:
No Terry I am calling nobody a barbarian. Not you. Not anybody. What I said above is that if science falls, if it is corrupted, if it is no longer practised, if it is not believed because it is shown to be a fraud, then we have barbarism in our world, or even worse as in the Nazi period.
That is an argument on your behalf provided you can prove that this Climate issue is a giant hoax, as Ted believes.
But in my opinion that has not been proven.
If you can prove that it is all a hoax then we are on the road to barbarism.
@ Bear Klein:
Nevertheless, Ted (as you will see above) specifically asked me to reply to the worst excesses. As these are typical “defenses” of AGW alarm orthodoxy, I felt qualified–and in honor bound–to respond.
Once. Just once.
@ Terry Hurlbut:Felix is a version of a nut job, He has not demonstrated knowledge of anything. He does sooner rather than later attack all commentators on a personal level. You are just the latest on this site.
I long ago decided to ignore him, as I found him a waste of time. I am not alone in this. He promised he would no longer read the site or comment on it a few weeks ago. Unfortunately he reneged on that promise.
Everyone:
I apologize for, having left a lengthy reply to Messrs. Quigley, Dhalgliesh, et al., proceeding to deliver what amounted to a duplicate response, piecemeal. I did so because I had every indication that technical difficulties had caused the loss of my long reply, or perhaps I had exceeded the allowed length of such a reply. Perhaps I ought to have shown greater patience with the technical–and moderational–staff, than I ended up showing.
Felix Quigley Said:
Dare you now call me barbarian?
Do you know what a barbarian really is? It is one who speaks in a language the hearer does not understand, because the sounds of that language are merely “bar-bar” to him. The Greeks coined that word and used it to mean “foreigner,” i.e., non-Greek. The ancient Romans respelled it in their alphabet and used it to mean “foreigner,” or as in their case, “non-Roman.”
But somehow or other the word barbarian came to mean “savage in a way that the person so described would just as soon kill you as look at you.”
Do you really mean to suggest that I am such a savage, because I cast doubt on the climate change narrative, observing as I do that practitioners of what you call “the science” have behaved badly? So badly that, had I behaved as badly as that while at Yale College, I would have been dismissed from the college for that behavior?
I quote the Yale Student Handbook:
That this has not happened to certain people is a scandal and an outrage. Particularly given that the program they recommend would severely curtail the liberties of Jew and Gentile alike.
@ Adam Dalgliesh:
The site administrator has already responded to your questioning of his wisdom in including my correspondence with Linda Goudsmit, and the links I included therein, on his site.
I am now responding to your criticism of me.
Yes, I am a Gentile. Yes, while King David reigned, my ancestors were knocking on tree trunks to divine the future. But that does not diminish my concern for Israel as a concept, and the State of Israel in particular, one jot or one tittle.
In which connection: I remind you that Israel recently discovered, within territorial waters over which it has a legitimate claim, vast reserves of natural gas–a fossil fuel. Furthermore, a company called Zion Oil and Gas (NASDAQ:ZN) is even now exploring for oil “West of the Green Line.”
Both of which the global-warming crowd would specifically enjoin the State of Israel from using, could they gain the requisite authority. So I ask you now: are you sure you want to make common cause with such people?
@ Felix Quigley:
I take exception to your tone. Insofar as you have revealed about yourself, you are not a professor in any college or university in which I have ever enrolled–and in fact I am not now enrolled in any college or university, even by distance learning. Therefore your addressing me as though I were an absent-or-tardy-without-official-excuse student is rude and inappropriate.
I further state that I have recently found gainful employment beyond the maintenance of my Web site. A gainfully employed person does happen to have certain “off-line” demands on his time.
@ Linda Goudsmit:
Ted: Most people assume that the global warming crowd are fixated on global warming. They aren’t; they are using global warming as a means for trying to redistribute income and wealth. People who are interested in this topic should read both books written by Robert Darwall. He quotes from one of the leading European officials to the effect that the objective is to take money from the wealthy to give to the poor. Darwall also exposes the Nazi roots of the green movement. Fascinating reading. The titles of the books are: ‘The Age of Global Warming’ and ‘Green Tyranny’.
@ Terry Hurlbut:
Terry: There was technically no adjudication because there was no trial. Mann refused to produce the evidence required by the Court and so his case was thrown out. There is no doubt that the figures were fudged. Steven McIntyre and Ross McKitrick proved this in 2004.
@ Felix Quigley:
Sorry Felix,
I am uninterested in any dialog with any who want to keep G-d out of this.
(I made no reference to religion)
@ Ted Belman:
To all – please accept my apologies for not responding immediately – it was not intentional. I refer you to the affirming article from NASA I read yesterday titled, “NASA admits that climate change occurs because of changes in Earth’s solar orbit, and NOT because of SUVs and fossil fuels The article posted Friday, August 30, 2019 by: Ethan Huff: https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-08-30-nasa-admits-climate-change-not-caused-by-suvs-fossil-fuels.html
Political science has not only infected atmospheric and earth sciences, it has infected behavioral science, pharmaceutical science, and medical science as well. It is the nightmare that Eisenhower warned about. My interest in writing the Humanitarian Hoax series of articles is consciousness raising. It is my contention that the American people do not like being duped. It is very difficult for the civilized mind to accept the malevolence and malfeasance of those engaged in the will to power and the insidious effort to collapse America and internationalize the world under one world government. It is imperative that an informed electorate vote in the 2020 election because the outcome will determine the future of the United States of America. Will we choose American strength, independence, and sovereignty under Trump? Or will we choose Democrat collectivism and surrender our national sovereignty and strength to the corrupt United Nations, the main source and perpetrator of the manmade climate change hoax. Israel will be directly impacted by the American election outcome. The assortment of antisemitic Democrat candidates will not protect Israel or the Jews. Everything is connected – the seemingly academic and technical IPCC arguments supporting manmade climate changes and hockey sticks are political science masquerading as climate science. NASA has made my argument for me.
@ Felix Quigley:
If, as McGrath alleges, the Medieval Warm Period was partial only, do you not know that the new warm period, if it exist, is just as partial?
I live in south central Virginia. Two winters ago, the temperature dipped below zero Fahrenheit (that’s minus 17 Celsius). Now how could that happen if the dire predictions of Mann, Jones, Trenberth, Hansen (that’s James Hansen; there was no Michael Hansen), Gore, Obama, Ocasio-Cortez–and you–are correct? Unless the warming is partial only.
You can’t have it both ways.
@ Felix Quigley:
Michael Mann’s hockey stick eliminates the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age. See:
Erasing the Medieval Warm Period
What Michael Mann’s Hockey Stick gave to the UN climate change fraud.
Furthermore, the Medieval Warm Period existed. Historians often like to call Eric the Red, discoverer of Greenland, The World’s First Grand Real Estate Bunco Artist. They do so on the theory that Greenland was never green. But it was.
Furthermore, I dispute the Arctic ice melt. Why, if the situation is as dire as you represent, did an Arctic expedition get stuck in the ice? And no, I am not talking about Ernest Shackleton’s expedition. It’s happened in the Antarctic as well. Not only did the original ship get stuck in the ice; so did the icebreaker sent to rescue her.
Finally I offer my own response to the Hockey Stick, courtesy of the Wayback Machine. In brief: I graphed the “temperature anomalies” from the Climategate Archive. My graph showed the dip in temperatures in 1977-8, consistent with a blizzard that snowed Yale College in, and prompted the Governor of Connecticut to ban all travel on the streets and highways of Connecticut for a day and a half. The Hockey Stick graph does not show this.
Counterexamples, Mr. Quigley.
@ Felix Quigley:
You will note, first of all, that I quickly followed up my coverage of the Climategate Archive with this piece, also in examiner.com, titled The Hockey Stick Was Never Accurate, and CRU Knew It. In it I contrasted the hockey stick graph with my own graph from the very temperature anomalies to which I know Mann and others had access–because they show up in one of the e-mails in the archive.
Please note: the graph I produced showed a sharp dip in temperatures in the winter of 1977-78. That winter I attended Yale College during the Great Blizzard–a blizzard so severe that then-Governor Ella Grasso of Connecticut forbade all travel on the streets and highways of Connecticut for a day and a half. And what ought to strike you even more is: Michael Mann predicted no such dip. So already I have falsified his graph with a direct counterexample.
Furthermore, I give you these two papers clearly showing that the Hockey Stick deliberately erased the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age from the historical record. He completely ignored them!
Erasing the Medieval Warm Period
What Michael Mann’s Hockey Stick Gave to the UN Climate Fraud
I remind everyone of Peter Dale’s report about Michael Mann losing his libel case to Tim Ball–because the court asked him to show his calculations and he refused. That he would so refuse, bespeaks an attitude I find disturbingly common among those who wear the white smock. “How dare this ant presume to criticize a man of my scientific talent?” I would actually choose to use a stronger word than ant, but that would be obscene.
The Medieval Warm Period was in fact warm enough that Greenland was green. Modern historians often like to cite Eric the Red as the First Grand Real-estate Con Artist. They do so on the theory that Greenland was never green. But it was. Even Scientific American confesses that.
But again, you would not know that if all you had were Mann’s Hockey Stick. If, therefore, he failed to predict a finding that Greenland was green, then whether or not you think his work was not only flawed, but fraudulent, you must admit his work made a prediction that turned out to be at variance with historical fact. That alone falsifies his theory. Again I use that earlier word: counterexample.
Aesop still reigns. When a given theory fails of a major prediction, then it cannot be credited with a true prediction. Not without revision of a sort Mann has never, to my knowledge, undertaken. And his personal credibility in predicting the future falls into serious, even disqualifying, question.
Now about the melting Arctic: why, then, did a global-warming expedition ship get stuck in the Arctic ice? And why have so many Antarctic expedition ships gotten stuck in the ice?
Ladies and gentlemen, surely you know that Michael Mann, Phil Jones, and Kevin Trenberth set themselves up as Plaintiffs’ Expert Witnesses in a case, now being tried in a court of world opinion, that I might call People of the United Nations versus All Producers and End Users of Energy from Fossil Fuels. And that the remedy for which these plaintiffs pray is a permanent and immediate injunction against the use of fossil fuels. And nuclear fuel as well, except for more reasonable “expert witnesses” like James Hansen at NASA. Who recently told someone publicly that if they succeeded in shutting down expansion of nuclear generation, and then even existing generators, and people had to restart now-shuttered coal-fired power plants just to keep the lights on, a lot of good that would do to the planet–or to air quality, in ways even fewer people dispute. But of course, the goal of these plaintiffs is to turn the lights off–except for their own lights.
So you see: your scientific arguments fall before contrary evidence you never once considered, and for which I believe you never searched.
Global Warming is and remains unproved. And not only does Albert Arnold Gore the Third (Junior?) refuse to lead by example, and arrogantly go about his life with a carbon footprint larger than that of all of us here combined, and then some. Barack H. Obama the Second recently spent $15 million US (that’s–what?–maybe NIS 50 million?) on a landed estate a scant 150 U.S. Customary feet above sea level–and on an island, yet. This, while a U.S. Representative from the Party to which he has always pledged allegiance, asserts without proof that the city of Miami, Florida, will lie under water within eleven years unless the use of fossil fuels ceases immediately.
I dispute the McGrath findings. Furthermore, if the MWP and LIA were partial, so might be any claimed spectacles of warmer winters and more stifling summers. You can’t have it both ways.
Have not public-policy advocates like Gore, Obama, Ocasio-Cortez (she of the “Miami will drown” vaunt), and you, too, Mr. Quigley, proposed taxing people to support this proposition? How do you propose to keep the lights on? Do you care about keeping the lights on?
With regard to your mention of Alex Jones: please cite any utterance by him that he would engage in a Second Holocaust. And while you’re at it, please remember that the Soviet Union turned against the State of Israel shortly after granting them recognition, when said State retreated from the socialism of the early days of Theodor Herzl and his kibbutz pioneers. Remember, too, the pogroms, not only under Tsar Nikolai II but also under successive First Secretaries of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, before the overthrow of that state.
For that matter, Barack Obama–he of the 50-million-shekel “drowning real estate” purchase, and of the Paris Agreement–is the same Barack Obama who dared presume to command the State of Israel to give up the territorial gains of the Six-day War, even though those gains include lands that were Jewish for millennia. For as you see, I know the history of the reason, having traveled to Israel myself eight years ago.
And you’re just as much a slam-banger as the rest of them. I cite–and resent–your tone. How dare you summon me as if I were a miscreant or delinquent student in your classroom? For your information, I am gainfully employed beyond running my Web site.
And now for the benefit of everyone here:
I’m a Gentile. Now perhaps that might disqualify me in the minds of some people here. That a Jew introduced me to this forum, might not seem to “cut any ice,” if you catch my drift. But I know what it means to suffer a collective false accusation. I hold myself qualified to give warning to others not to let a new enemy gain their confidence by assigning guilt by association to friends of human liberty. (That is less a reference to you, Mr. Quigley, as it is to Michael Mann, Phil Jones, Kevin Trenberth, Christiana Figueres, Barack Obama, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, inter altis.)
And I suggest that some people here are burning incense on the bamot–and I’ve seen an authentic example of a bamah on Tel Dan as well.
@ Adam Dalgliesh:
I think your criticism deserves a response. Yes, news and views on Israel are central on Israpundit. But there are many related subjects that must be addressed, e.g.,American Jewry, the threat of Islam, the red/green allliance, the US president, nationalism v globalism etc. Israel’s fortunes depend on all of these.
Now if you concede that Trump has been very good for Israel, Israel lovers must defend Trump to ensure he gets reelected, This is so because a high percentage of American Jews want to take him down. Thus we have to defend his policies which include his withdrawal from the climate change accords. We must also attack fake news of which the Climate Change Hoax is a part.
Finally there is huge interest in Climate Change theories and because it is a big part of the Democratic platform we must deal with it head on. Whenever I post an article on it, it garners more readers that the average article I post.
@ Peter Dale:
So we finally have a determination in that case. That’s key to my thesis, that the calculations were a total fudge.
Felix Quigley Said:
I will ask them.
@ Felix Quigley:
I keep on thinking on these questions after I post. Miller says he is a practical man. Also clear he is a practical Jewish man devoted to his religion and his one INDIVISIBLE God. That is absolutely OK indeed great by me because I am a very very liberal person with a good knowledge of the struggles the Jews have come through. I have a picture in my mind of a man who has worked very hard against many odds, overcome many things, and is very practical and successful. I know Edgar best and Edgar has an absolute wealth of experience that I rate right up there.
And this also is the problem. It is very hard to change and to adjust to a new situation. I am in the same boat. But also very different.
There is an age factor to this. Also a Republican factor. Also a Conservative factor.
There is also a clique factor.
It is going to be very hard to accept this Global Warming analysis because of many of these factors. It means in a way that the lives of such people have been wasted.
That is in effect what the Global Warming analysis which I reckon is correct is saying to people of our generation.
A 16 year old has only caused this a little bit.
Our age has caused it hugely. If the analysis is correct WE have caused it hugely.
I am very much in touch with agriculture in Ireland and Spain. I know them very well. I know very well the changes that the Common Market has made in both countries. I know Ireland best though.
The other thing is that this problem is not easy. I do not wake up in the morning, look out the window and say “Gee we have now Global Warming”.
It is far more complex, far more gradual yet with the potential of being sudden.
And the person of the age of say Ted says “What can I do anyway”
This is a very common answer that people give.
And this is an emotional thing too because it concerns our whole being, and how we see ourselves.
So I notice many slam bang words describing people but if you read me you will notice I never ever do that.
This is a struggle for ideas not who has the best insults.
Read and watch Alex Jones. He mixes this in with McCarthy commie hatred. And further to this, I will let you join the pieces, in Lithuania where his people hail from, the fascists took all the inhabitants of a town out of town into a field, and there under the local priest communists were singled, including a 16 year old boy, marched to the cemetery, dispatched. Within 2 months all of the Jews in the rural areas were murdered.
@ Miller:
From a simple practical person,
Is there even one doomsday prediction that has come to pass?
There are hundreds made by high powered professors that haven’t.
Whether you are practical or not practical is in YOUR mind. And what doomsday predictions are you talking about? Please tell.
If we weren’t being taxed to support this folly and asked to give up our freedom, it would be more believable. And if the Gore types would lead by example instead of buying ocean front property and jetting around, it would lessen the perception
that these types are deluded charlatans and flaming hypocrites.
You use the Gore answer. What did Gore say and when, source it, that you are in disagreement with. If you do not source it we have only hot air. And Gore is NOT the centre of this argument of Global Warming. And it is ME Felix Quigley who is addressing you here, with scientific arguments, WHICH YOU NEVER FOR A SECOND ADDRESSED, and I am not Gore and I do not even own a house beachfront or otherwise.
I believe G-d is in charge of the climate and is not distressed by carbon emissions.
Likely His concern is more the overflowing tide of unbelief and wickedness.
Keep religion out of this. Ted once had a policy to do exactly this but he was bushwhacked by religious fanatics and int he end gave up. But he was right originally. You see I have got a good memory, not like where I left my keys, but on these political matters.
People will notice that I addressed Terry and Linda directly, asked some questions and days later have not replied to me. Just noting.
Adam Dalglieth another who does not reply to me has said that is needed “well-informed new and views in Israel.”
1. Israel is not the centre of the world, nor is Ireland, nor anywhere. The world is.
2. Are your views on Climate Change well informed. You give no indication that they are. You do not deal with the science of global warming. So who is educated by reading what you write.
3. Say you want Israpundit to be relevant to Jews. What then? What Jews are you going to aim at? What about young Jews? What about young Jews interested in Global Warming? From what you say you are aiming to cut off from those young or younger Jews.
4. You say you believe in the veracity of the science of global warming. OK then is Global Warming not going to effect Israel and if it is then in what ways could you envisage
Finally this issue is going to stand or fall on the science. The science of this issue is going to have to prevail. Otherwise there is true barbarism. Not just insults by people ignoring other people. I mean barbarism. And what goes on in the heads of people as regards why they are sceptical towards the science which is plainly set out, sometimes with warts etcetera. is in the end besides the point. The reality of the world goes on independent of what goes on in the heads of certain people.
From a simple practical person,
Is there even one doomsday prediction that has come to pass?
There are hundreds made by high powered professors that haven’t.
If we weren’t being taxed to support this folly and asked to give up our freedom, it would be more believable. And if the Gore types would lead by example instead of buying ocean front property and jetting around, it would lessen the perception
that these types are deluded charlatans and flaming hypocrites.
I believe G-d is in charge of the climate and is not distressed by carbon emissions.
Likely His concern is more the overflowing tide of unbelief and wickedness.
I don’t think climate change is a hoax. But that is not my principal concern about its prominence in Israpundit. That concern is that it limits Israpundit’s appeal to die-hard conservatives in the United States and Canada, for most of whom Israel is not their primary focus of interest. American and Canadian readers who just want a general conservative-oriented publication already have Newsmax, Human Events and numerous other publications whose names in my senility I can’t remember. What pro-Israel people in the English-speaking countries, and English-speaking Jews in Israel, need Israpundit for is well-informed new and views in Israel.
Most Jews either have no interest in the climate change theory or believe climate change is real. Many of the negative responses that Israpundit receives to its climate-change-denial articles bears this out. Many Jewish readers are turned off by this kind of discourse I don’t think it is helpful to Israel to limit Israpundit’s appeal to hard-core American and Canadian rightists. It should seek a broader audience.
@ Felix Quigley:
The url for the important article by Matt McGrath about the three papers recently published and which build on that initial Michael Hansen research (the “hockey stick”) is https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49086783
As I said and I emphasise the three papers are noted by McGrath and can be followed. This is also very much the scientific method and can be read in full, agreed with, criticised, because this is above all now a war of ideas.
I would be very interested if Terry and Linda, and all on Israpundit who comment, have actually read this research. The indication to me is that they have not or else they would have brought it up already, urgently, and into the discussion.
BUT THEY HAVE NOT!
Terry and Linda
I find the graph produced by Michael Mann convincing. Not the final word by any means but that is always the way science works. Do you find that the research done by Michael Mann was and still is convincing. Leave aside this thing about the “trick” which is from a different person totally. Was the research by Mann worthwhile or not? I take it that even though you neither are scientists that you have studied the Michael Mann research. Do you disagree with it? Where? How?
But science has never stood still and never will.
The way it works is this: You stand on the shoulders of those who went before.
This has happened again on this Michael Mann research:
quote “The science teams reconstructed the climate conditions that existed over the past 2,000 years using 700 proxy records of temperature changes, including tree rings, corals and lake sediments. They determined that none of these climate events occurred on a global scale.
The researchers say that, for example, the Little Ice Age was at its strongest in the Pacific Ocean in the 15th Century, while in Europe it was the 17th Century.
Generally, any longer-term peaks or troughs in temperature could be detected in no more than half the globe at any one time,
The “Medieval Warm Period”, which ran between AD 950 and AD 1250 only saw significant temperature rises across 40% of the Earth’s surface.
Today’s warming, by contrast, impacts the vast majority of the world.
“We find that the warmest period of the past two millennia occurred during the 20th Century for more than 98% of the globe,” one of the papers states.” end quote
The 3 papers of recent vintage are referred to in the article by McGrath and can be read by following the links 1 2 and 3
McGrath (who I am proud to say is a Waterford man) writes:
“”They have done this across the globe with more than 700 records over the past 2,000 years; they have corals and lakes and also instrumental data,” said Prof Daniela Schmidt from the University of Bristol, UK, who was not involved with the studies.
“And they have been very careful in assessing the data and the inherent bias that any data has, so the quality of this data and the coverage of this data is the real major advance here; it is amazing.”
Many experts say that this new work debunks many of the claims made by climate sceptics in recent decades.
“This paper should finally stop climate change deniers claiming that the recent observed coherent global warming is part of a natural climate cycle,” said Prof Mark Maslin, from University College London, UK, who wasn’t part of the studies.
“This paper shows the truly stark difference between regional and localised changes in climate of the past and the truly global effect of anthropogenic greenhouse emissions.”
And this is where I myself as a non expert begin to focus in on:
1. Gone are the old arguments against global warming. These studies are claiming that the likes of The Little Ice Age, etcetera., were partial as far as global was concerned. The evidence for this in these studies needs to be STUDIED. Is it right or not right? But the essential nature of this warming of the earth is 100 per cent its global nature. It extends to every part of the globe.
2. And add to this that we are, and should be, in an Ice Age. technically speaking, because the poles are covered in ice. Definition of Ice Age there. But there is a a sudden melting. And this rise in temperature especially in the Arctic is having other effects because the Arctic is so pivotal that it MUST BE having other effects.
3. How easy life is for the person who opposes the CONCEPT of global warming. They do not have to bother themselves with these studies I mentioned above.
@ Linda Goudsmit:
Linda dear …you are surely not indicating that this deliberate provocateur is “good people”. …?? He KNOWS all the real facts, but posts his garbage deliberately to stir something up. Other posters fall for it all the time.
The only honest, sincere people I am sure of in Israpundit-apart from Ted- are Adam, Felix, and Bear. Even though I don’t agree with them all the time, and query their findings. but in good faith, like they do mine. Perhaps one or two others whose names I dont recall at the moment for this ad-lib comment of mine.
Terry and Linda
Myself included we are all struggling to understand the figures, I mean the figures which make up the science.
The “Climategate Scandal” needs to be thoroughly examined and explained in clear language and by this I mean what exactly was happening.
It seems that Michael Mann produced a graph based on tree rings going back a certain period of time.
The figures he produced showed a long period of stability give or take some changes you would expect but in the overall length of time still could be termed accurately stability…but with a sharp increase with the birth of the industrial revolution, but accelerating even more in our times. I think that is accurate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy
People on sites liek this, and there are many sites, are faced with difficult language. I do not criticise the language.
Edgar will find in the above wiki article a great explanation of the word used often “proxy” which we discussed here on this site a few weeks ago, just thought I would throw that in to Edgar, who I respect his views a lot. And Edgar is a very quick learner. But this stuff is new to us all.
Some criticize the scientists but I do not do that. I enter on their ground. So I think I need to learn.
So it comes down to the hockey stick graph produced from research into tree rings by Michael Mann.
I am asking Terry and Linda to talk to us about this research by Mann. Was it faulty and if so how … precisely?
My own position we are still in an ice age hence the presence of ice at the poles. But there is a rapid increase in temperature which is causing a melting in the poles, especially in the Arctic.
So my issue is…we are still technically in the last ice age, but the poles, especially with very clear knowledge the Arctic, IS MELTING, so what is causing it? Please give your opinion on this because this is the heart of the problem.
Earlier this year, Michael Mann, creator of the famous hockey-stick presentation of ‘warming’ lost his case against Dr Tim Ball in the Supreme Court of British Columbia. He lost because he refused to produce, although ordered by the Court, his calculations. The court dismissed his claim ‘with prejudice’ meaning that he can’t try to re-start the case. He was also ordered to pay not only damages, but also Tim Ball’s legal costs.
Tim Ball gives a first rate presentation of the issue of warming or change or variability in climate here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1VJtER2IUE
For readers, consult the two books written by Rupert Darwall for a good understanding of the fraud behind the ‘science’ of climate change.
@ Frank Adam:
I have no objection to reforestation (especially including the trees you mentioned, plus several others I’m sure we could each name), and the use of PV or concentrated-solar-heat generators, with our without the new generation of batteries I have already seen under development. The tax measure you mentioned re HVAC systems shouldn’t be necessary; I enjoy measurable savings using heat pumps with auxiliary gas furnaces that kick in when it gets cold–as it still does, even here in south central Virginia.
My only quarrel is with those who, citing “climate change” as their reason (excuse?), want people to abandon air travel, and propose, for example, a multi-trillion-dollar (US) program to compel everyone to trade in their present (internal combustion engine) vehicles for electric vehicles. The value that EVs add is such that I expect them to replace ICEVs eventually, out of sheer practicality–fewer systems to fail, fewer moving parts in the systems that remain, four times the efficiency of a gasoline engine (two and a half to three times the efficiency of a Diesel engine), faster acceleration, regenerative (dynamic) braking, reduction of noise and immediate air pollution on the roads, extra convenience of being able to recharge at home (apartment developers, take note!) and at an increasing number of popular destinations and stops-along-the-way, and too many other advantages to count. But anyone in the EV industry will have to admit they haven’t worked the kinks out for everyone yet–especially in cold regions. They’re working on it–and others are even working on a better type of battery that will likely solve the intermittency problem and even let us run nuclear generators at a higher base load and thus eliminate peak-load plants. But these things take time.
The problem with those pushing the CC/AGW narrative is that they don’t want to wait. They want to impose the regime of curfew, candlelight, and curtailment–things you don’t hear from Elon Musk or any other maker of ground-up-designed all-electric vehicles. Worse yet, some (but not all!) of those same people want to shut down nuclear generators as well. By that method more than any other, you can tell the difference between those who genuinely want to solve a problem (if there is one, and maybe there is, just not the one they think) and those who want to use the problem as an excuse to remake society according to their own dreams. Rahm Emmanuel said, “Never let a crisis go to waste.” Now do you understand my concern?
Even if the reports of receding glaciers, melting ice caps and more hurricanes and typhoons than average were untrue??? It would pay to:
Plant a trillion trees ASAP to put the unemployed to labour and not clock in for welfare. In India and Africa make sure that some of these are: jatropha, olives, jojoba & other oil seeds/nuts to fuel agricultural machinery & cut local food costs.
To rig taxes to encourage changing boilers for heat pumps and insulation as it would knock off 75% of heating coats for buildings and washing water and pay for itself while making manufacturing work.
Change from carbonate to silicate cements and fuss for it to take attention off aviation. Both sectors emit a similar 7% or 8% of total CO2. Similarly put in flights and car adverts that since the 1973 oil crisis cars and plans have cut fuel consumption by – is it a fifth? or a third?
Already solar panels pump water to village water towers without need for Arab oil and with batteries provide electric evening light with low power LED lights. Anything that improves the African and other Third World living standards SLOWS MIGRATION and social destabilisation.
@ Lorensacho:
Do you deny the particulars as I related them? The Wayback Machine does not lie. Neither did I, when I extracted that archive and published several damning excerpts. How do you interpret “We can’t account for the lack of a warming trend, and it is a travesty that we can’t”? How do you interpret “I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick…to hide the decline”?
@ Lorensacho:
Denying reality is not a survival strategy. It is how good people are persuaded to surrender their freedom without realizing they are participating in their own destruction.
Paranoids talking to paranoids.