Toward the end of this year we face the jumping together of a fearful populace and some renegade, dangerous law-makers.

Michael Crichton said it best. “Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.”

Let us examine consensus.

In 1795, Alexander Gordon of Aberdeen suggested that the puerperal fever following childbirth was an infectious processes and he could cure it. The consensus said NO! and it took 125 years for the deaths of women from this easily prevented process to stop.

Pellagra. The consensus of scientists said it was infectious. All that was needed was to find the germ. Dr. Joseph Goldberger concluded that diet was the crucial factor and stated that he could induce the disease. The consensus said NO! The result? Despite a twentieth century epidemic, the consensus took years to see the light.

Stomach ulcers? The same.

Continental drift? Alfred Wegener proposed in 1912 that the continents had in fact drifted apart. The consensus said NO! for fifty years. The theory was denied by the great names of geology until 1961.

There are more, but now we face a consensus that borders on religious belief. Why? Because there is zero evidence that CO2 caused the tiny warming at the end of the last century. Evidence of warming is not evidence that CO2 did it. Models are not evidence.

The planet has been warmer than at present, and colder than at present, for geological time periods, with higher ppmv of CO2 in atmosphere. Mammals, and the plants we rely upon, evolved at a much higher level of CO2 than we can reach if we burn all known reserves of fossil fuels.

The latest propaganda derobed. With hat tip to matt v over at wattsupwiththat.com :

www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/last:120/plot/hadcrut3gl/last:120/trend

OBSERVED RATE OF CLIMATE CHANGE 1850-2008 was 0.004 C/year [over158 years]
OBSERVED RATE OF CLIMATE CHANGE 1908-2008 was O.0075C/year [over 100 years
OBSERVED RATE OF CLIMATE CHANGE 1999-2009 was 0.0052C/year [over last 10 years]

The propaganda?

The latest Met Office climate forecast of 4C during the next 50 years (by 2060) – an average rate 0 .08 C/year

Met Office projected rate of temperature rise?

20 times faster than the trend of the last 158 years
10 times faster than the trend of the last 100 years
15 times faster than the trend of the last 10 years

Yes lads, looks like that is happening doesn’t it. That is why we cannot believe your forecast for just this next UK winter. You have not got a seasonal forecast right for the last 3 1/2 years.

But Lo, cometh a righteous man, in the form of appeal court judge Michael Burton, found “If a person can establish he holds a philosophical belief based on science as opposed, for example, to religion, then there is no reason to disqualify it from protection.” in the case of Mr Tim Nicholson, whose views on climate change should be given the same consideration by employers as “religious or philosophical beliefs” and his former employers were in the wrong when they made him redundant. He claims his opinions on climate change led to his unfair dismissal.

Mr Nicholson, from Oxford, said his views were becoming “more and more relevant” to the planet’s future, adding: “I am grateful that Mr Justice Burton understood that deeply and genuinely held views about catastrophic climate change and the need to change our ways to protect the human race are philosophical views that are worthy of protection.”

At least the plaintiff did not claim there were facts at stake and admitted it was a philosophical issue. His Honour agreed.

Not insignificantly Mr Justice Burton was the man who found that Al Gore’s award-winning climate change documentary claims were wrong and had arisen in “the context of alarmism and exaggeration”.

He has done us all a back-handed favour with his latest ruling. I will leave it to the reader to work out what has happened here.

Just in time for Al Gore’s new science fantasy novel;

www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/02/al-gore-our-choice-environment-climate

Based upon “…an admission that facts alone will not persuade Americans to act on global warming and that appealing to their spiritual side is the way forward.”

With this missive, that must be empty of said facts for if they existed we deniers would have our faces rubbed in them for all eternity, Al is well on the road to becoming;

www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/6491195/Al-Gore-could-become-worlds-first-carbon-billionaire.html

“The world’s first carbon billionaire”

God give me strength.

AGW “believers” are such nice people. Slanderers first and foremost with a dash of recidivism as back-up. One by one their arguments are failing. Even the extrapolated ones such as “there are too many people” and “peak energy”. It is little wonder they are turning nasty in the face of massive gas/oil finds, human ingenuity in the field of GM crops and the increasingly large deviations of projected CO2 based doom from nature’s icy reality.

Arguing science with them is utterly pointless. Pearls before swine is the old expression. Been there, done that. All that is left is my scorn and ridicule for them. Not one of their “projections, ifs, buts and maybes, 95% confidence levels and strong beliefs” has come to pass. Not one. Yet their faith is upheld by… well, faith alone it would seem.

Far easier to attack the person and ignore their message. Far easier to “believe” the MOD funded Hadley/CRU unit and the Pentagon (NASA/Giss) and other arms of government such as the Royal Society and all those other “establishments” populated by formerly respected scientists than to wonder why they say what they say and who foots their bills. Far easier to believe the fairy-tale of “a global temperature” than to look at the world empirically. Far easier to concentrate on the WAIS than the continent as a whole, or the Arctic as opposed to total global sea-ice. Simplicity itself to ignore the natives of somewhere such as the Maldives and concentrate on *their* politicians’ differing story. Far easier to claim that the “chum club” of peer review is mightier than the lone patent clerk.

Trundling into a bleak future the rickety gravy train is doubtless shaking itself apart but we will all be harmed by the madness of crowds before this episode is over. All of us. Those who saw through this entirely political ruse immediately, those who came to see through it by observing the world and those who pushed the agenda and those who puffed it into existence by instigating it, promulgating it or by wishing to fall into the guilt-trip trap for whatever reason.

Praising the executioners as you are forced into the slaughterhouse is a symptom of how far the game has progressed and the lengths that those who have bought into the dream will go to prevent dissonance from disturbing their religious dream world.

Real Climate and Climate Progress, to name but two viperous collectives with the affront to name their funded houses as if they alone know what is going on, are not the type of place for free discussion of climate related hypothesis. Echo chambers only. Sandalistas screeching to the choir. No-one has the facts. The IPCC themselves warn against attempting to model a chaotic system before going on to base this entire sham on a collection of them.

That didn’t stop the idiots who were given a greater than 50% chance of living through their own birth as direct a result of far higher intellects than theirs’ utilizing fossil fuel based technologies for the greater good of their “fellow” men. Men that they now denounce, prancing around on the mother of all parliaments’ rooftop and screaming like the children they appear to be that we should not allow their yet-to-be-born offspring and all those current and future children of the 2nd and 3rd world the same benefits.

We are heading for a cold, maybe very cold, couple of decades. That there may soon not be enough electricity to keep us in the comfort to which we have begun to become accustomed, no matter our ability or desire to purchase same, is entirely down to the short-sightedness of those who never got anything “right”. Stop using (entirely sustainable) paper bags at the supermarket they shrieked and now they shout that there is a continent sized mass of plastic swirling around in the centre of the Pacific and in the trees. They were as incapable then as they are now of joined up thinking. None need worry about unintended consequences if one’s intentions are good. Duh.

That I should have lived so long to see it, with all my teeth and my intellect intact, is also purely due to fossil fuel usage. At least there is a glimmer of hope in the publication of Paul Hudson’s post on the Ministry of Truth’s own website.

If the climateprogress, realclimate, tamino, desmogblog circular circus could, amidst their delegated coercion, hand waving and furious denigration, highlight just one overwhelming pointer to empirical evidence for their case they most assuredly would. Instantly.

Watching their antics over the Ferenc Miskolczi affair should show anyone that enters this fray where investigation, theory and truth stand in this debate. The aforementioned could care less for any of those.

That the other side cannot produce a definitive counter just empowers the entire agenda.

We all know it is far more complicated than this. Adiabatic lapse rates, just one component of our dynamic envelope that elicits two opposing theories, one claiming more CO2 cools the world and one saying the opposite, will interfere with a hypothesis that CO2 alone can affect climate in any easily measurable form.

This is why CO2/climate/weather is utterly perfect for policy makers. It is an extremely complicated, young and wide field. Its main premise fulfils many needs for the power hungry whilst diverting attention from truly pressing problems for which they will offer no solution. Why is anyone on this planet ever thirsty? We have the technology. Why is anyone ever hungry? We have the technology. Why is anyone undereducated? We have a world body that should address all of these dreadful realities.

The, so called, “green” environmentalists pushing this load are intent on control. Nothing else interests them. Amongst many other devices they will use your suppressed guilt over owning myriad “stuff” at the expense of others, mostly unseen, having nothing but dirt and pain. They suffer no such guilt. Especially the demagogues at the UN who would redistribute our supposed wealth to dictators, and worse, while laughing at their cleverness and our weaknesses. They could care less that their power is passed to them by those who, for example, tear down trees because hemp is too natural and universal for an industrialist to contemplate. Where would centralized profit come from if a rampant weed were utilised in place of a constrained resource in just that one example?

There is only one question. In having no answer to it and taking up the entirety of the debate on alternative technologies it is obvious that CO2 was chosen precisely because of its ability to compound the weather/climate forecasting problem to the point where real industrial pollution, over fishing, de-forestation and the other disgusting shit that should be on the agenda, not to mention the third world living in their own sewage and unable to find clean drinking water are points that are now, mostly because of supposed environmentalists, completely off the table because politicians can see much cash and power in their future by making out that CO2 is a pollutant.

That question that no-one answers?

Is there, or has there ever been, empirical, repeatable evidence that past, current or future levels of CO2 in atmosphere have, can or will lead to an increase in global temperature?

Computer models are not proof. (The IPCC state that the climate cannot be modelled because it is a chaotic, non-linear system) Proof of warming is not proof that CO2 did it. (Proof of warming is where all the academies, scientists and media are concentrating their efforts – why is that?)

CO2, apart from lagging, rather then leading, global temperatures by up to 800 years, is vital for every living thing, at historically low levels, slowly rising out of dangerously low levels for plant life (which is why the 0.28% extra, the portion we humans “create”, of total CO2 is gulped down by plants and plankton to the point where the Earth has greened 15% extra since NASA have been studying it) and, at 0.038% of atmosphere currently, even if it tripled it would be nowhere near a problem (in the greenhouse sense) and would need to be x10 before it reached the level in your front room when occupied for more than an hour by 4 adults in deep conversation. Imagine a world where all that went into reverse.

Even if we burn everything there is to burn, including all fossil fuels, plants and animals above ground as well the 19x(estimated) as much biomass underground, we will only be able to get the level to about 0.1% of atmosphere which would be up to 11x less than the permitted amounts on nuclear attack submarines, where you would guess that alertness and health are of prime interest. The oxygen level in atmosphere would, maybe, drop from 20.9% to 20.8% by so doing. This would take us into the year 2200(approximately) when coal, at current estimates of the easily extracted stuff, runs out. If we haven’t risen above burning stuff to get around by then we deserve everything we get.

The majority of those arguing for the bad science rely on attacking the man because no-one, on either side, can show definitively, as yet, CO2s role in climate/weather, benign or not. The “deniers” (such a nice word, foisted on sceptics by the religious fundamentalists who “believe” humans are all bad and whose guilt we must all pay for by the way) mostly, just want the subject cleared up so that the vast, ongoing funding (seems strange when the “science” is soooo “settled”) can be diverted into real, and really fixable, problems such as clean water provision for everyone of our brothers.

Cap and trade/ carbon trading will turn over more dollars in a decade than ALL the oil companies have turned over in the entire history of oil companies. At least the oil companies have to give you some tangible product for your hard earned, not just feed more paper into a printer.

CO2 looks more like the perfect target as time goes by. Shame the global temperature has plateaued over the last decade while CO2 continues a steady one millionth, or so, part per year increase.

I have turned from anger to jest now that I see the real motivation of the “authorities” that the alarmist warmers are always “quoting”. Especially those who deemed it unnecessary to poll their membership before uttering their propagandistic and only slightly obscured plea for a part of the billions upon billions showered over the “climate” fraternity that is yet to produce a meaningful evidential glimpse of the true state of play. Doubly so those in the grip of unelected, spiteful, wrong, recidivists such as holdren and chu who now wish to use actual pollutants to “mitigate” the imagined effects of that vital ingredient of life on Earth, CO2.

Never mind that as CO2 goes up H2O naturally adjusts, by levels of magnitude. Never mind that the biosphere is growing, on land and in the oceans, as a result of us moving away from dangerously low levels of the gas of life. Never mind the actual observed phenomena when the computer gamers amongst us can secretly manipulate data and obfuscate their “projections” with their possible, maybe, predicted to, could, should, percentage this, percentage that jargon and flashing lights that, by the way, is exactly what Wall Street’s computer gamers said about credit and debt. How is that working out for you? Never mind the rather obvious groupthink that has its foothold in places as diverse as the Royal Society and auntie Beeb, its brain on holiday and its hands in the public purse. Never mind that the people who are out there, at sea, on the ice, in their fields, are ignored whilst the air-conditioned, lily-white, pen pushers every word is treated as gospel.

That most don’t get the facts about the control of nations is best evidence that the mis-education system we have suffered under for decades has paid off.

Such a shame none of you will be here to see the results of your erroneous belief driven actions. In 3 or 4 years it will be really cold. You will not be here to answer to the people you demean, vilify and attack. You may be hiding in shame (unlikely, as zealotry brooks no dissonance and true believers will still be heard shrilly above the creak of the glaciers as they creep southwards – both the ice and the herd of willing sacrificial lambs), too impoverished to maintain the luxury of what passes for debate on this issue (due to the unparalleled burden of fiscal irresponsibility that our glorious leaders currently employ) or you will have shuffled off this mortal coil as a result of mismanaged governance, fraudulent science and the basic lack of preparation for the REAL climate change falling upon us as we witter, the coming cold.

Or does CO2 cause cold nowadays? You move the goalposts so often it has become hard to tell.

Well, it matters little. China, Pakistan and India have absolutely zero intention of stopping their coal fired power station builds. Everyone else can whine all they like, it ain’t gonna happen. You would almost think that their scientists have reported to their governments that there is nothing to fear from 1000ppmv of CO2. So. We should get down to enjoying the bounty that an increased level of CO2 brings to us all. If it stays warm? Nice. Enjoy the diminution of deserts and the expansion of arable zones. If it turns cold? Be grateful for our ingenuity and the poly tunnel, but be prepared for exodus, war, pestilence and death because cold is bad for us and kills in many ways. What temperature would your royal hubris’ like the planet to be? Let us just vary the CO2 levels a minute your eminence. Yeah. Riiiight.

After all, when you watch a baby grow into an child and subsequently to adulthood you are seeing CO2 in action. The very same with everything that that person has eaten and anything, other than “plain” water, that they have imbibed.

The cockroaches will inherit the Earth.

I have spent nearly two years sorting through the dust-trail of the litigation pushers on the global warming thing. I used to argue, but types like monbiot and the guy who edits (up to 600 times a day) the environmental pages of wikipedia (william conolley) are corrupt. Utterly. They avoid debate because whenever it has occurred they lose. This site:

wattsupwiththat.com

is overflowing with bright minds who once were convinced the globe was warming so must be forgiven for the vehemence and anger they sometimes display as a result of feeling conned, and this page:

wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/16/consensus-climate-science-what-would-thomas-huxley-say/

cuts to the divide between the actual science and the religious foot stamping of the cap and trade/carbon credit industry (that, by the way, will “handle” – in just two years at full flow – the same amount of cash that the entire oil industry has worked for, actuall work because they have had to produce an actual commodity not just paperwork,  since the second world war) that holds the media and public in thrall. People acted stunned when 1 oil co produced “profits” of 10 billion. Imagine how stunned they may become when trillions is “traded” annually. For what? So that the biggest polluters can “buy” their way out of trouble.

I would just ignore it all like so many do if it were not for the fact that these liars and charlatans are pushing for green this and that but current technology is not yet fit. Their subsidising of wind farms, biofool and solar (to name the three big ones) and forcing production at the expense of continued development will undo many years of hard won ground when the public (and shareholders) find out that it is all about 20 years too early to be (anywhere near) efficient. I know we have to start somewhere but they are ruining the entire movement by creating a bubble out of it. When it pops it will set everything back by decades as well as exposing the science industry as the money grabbing advocacy machine that it has become. They have been given over $50billion to “settle” the “science” of global warming and all they do is ask for more, more or less. More time and more funding. Less discussion, no dissent and zero debate. Nice.

Anyway, it’s been a while since I bothered railing against it because big brother sees cap and trade as a revenue source – even though China and India will (must) keep building coal-fired power plants and have zero intention of joining any “alliance” that the (continuously partying in tropical paradises) UN IPCC one world government machine get the west to sign on to. Their scientists (China, India, Pakistan, etc) have reported to their respective governments and told them “CO2 is good for plants, doesn’t cause “dangerous” warming and can never reach noxious levels even if everything that can burn is burned”. It is an inconvenient truth that geologists are in the best position to see the big picture as they train in chemistry, physics, engineering and earth sciences, but most of the good (best at their job) have been employed by oil companies at some time so are targeted only in that area.

Meanwhile the really noxious shit is getting buried, figuratively and literally, as the media and the green environmentalists concentrate on that vital part of the carbon cycle without which we would all perish, that exists in trace quantities (some say dangerously low) of less than 400 parts per million (when atomic powered nuclear missile toting submarines are permitted to run for months at between 4000 and 11,000 parts per million – because those levels are safe for animals and do not alter human decision making capability) and can never exist in sufficient quantities to alter the PH of the worlds oceans, if that were indeed possible due to “buffering” -
CO2 – innocent as charged, has existed at 10 times today’s level for geological periods of time while temperatures were both much higher and much lower than today, entirely swamped by water vapour as a greenhouse “forcing” and vital to a cooling world (despite what the media and all the tentacles of big brother state we have not “warmed” while the computer models have claimed we have) with an increasing population (that even if it doubled could be fed from the untouched Russian steppes alone).

Despite my anger at the likes of WWF and Greedpiece continuously avoiding real, and curable, trouble such as starvation and thirst while pushing this “CO2 is warming the globe” heap of shite uphill I am very positive in my outlook compared to 20 years ago. Why, I even find myself agreeing with a Tory!

If you need a document that encapsulates the lies, distortion and manipulation of science in duty to false ends this is it-

scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/markey_and_barton_letter.pdf

Delivered to both houses and all senators individually but destined to be ignored as they all have their snouts in the trough. I advise everyone to read it at least once.

The poor will hurt most, as usual. The rich will stay rich, as usual.

But. Cold is coming. People will look back and shake their heads that we once thought that the tiny, tiny “warming” we have “suffered” at the end of the last century was in any way shape or form bad/catastrophic/dangerous. Cold brings the four horsemen. Warmth brings more, and bigger, plants, less death, longer lives, more drinking water(rainfall) and less desert, greater crop growing areas and more leisure time to teach our children and to discover solutions to real problems just like we always do.

All the (entirely) natural oceanic cycles have turned to their cold phases. The sun has produced less sunspots during this transition between cycles than at any time since the “Dalton Minimum” when ice fairs were held on the Thames and plague, pestilence, drought and the accompanying hunger, war and exodus were the “norm”.

Luckily, we have over 200 years of easily available coal (yep – even if another China came on stream) and oil (yep – “we only ever find oil where we look for it” the political implications of that are clear – we can’t allow the natives to make money old chap so we just don’t look for it where we can’t control it) Check out how everyone is “claiming” their continental shelf rights – although it is difficult to research – the UK just claimed a massive area around the Falklands – surprise, surprise.

As I have said before, if we don’t find cheap clean sources of energy by then we deserve to die off.

PR: wait… I: wait… L: wait… LD: wait… I: wait… wait… Rank: wait… Traffic: wait… Price: wait… C: wait…

Albert Einstein :- “Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.”

Today there is a protest, lead by government employee James Hansen, in Washington DC. He claims that coal-fired power is akin to an atrocity perpetrated in the 1940’s and that the trains that deliver that coal are “death trains”.

Never was there a more obvious move to demolish civilization. 50% of our electricity comes from coal. The man, and his following, is bad for business, possibly unhinged and definately outside his remit.

Luckily, Hilariously, the “weather” today in DC is “snow with biting wind and low temperatures” and this protest will be seen as the insane, hateful idiocy that it most surely is.

Take a look. Have a laugh. But, then, get back to doing your bit to ensure that this madness dies as soon as possible and the perpetrators are denied access to funding, politics and the media for the rest of their squalidly revisionist lifetimes.

www.earthcam.com/usa/dc/metrosquare/

One day some of us will look back and chuckle. The ancients are already rolling around close to wetting themselves. Open minds are needed when modern science has difficulties explaining climatic events on a daily, millennial and everything in between scale. You need to be brave to make the leap.

Here is the news. Japanese scientists protest that the IPCC practices Astrology and has climate science completely ass backwards.

Here is the Astrology. There are hot, cold, wet and dry planets. Their syzygies and oppositions stroke and stoke their effects upon our weather/climate. People died if the seers misread the possibilities, and if they misread too often they died at the hands of the hungry who had previously trusted.  You needed to be brave to take that job.

Here is the science (as much as I can give away). The planets – all of them – have an electrical/mechanical/gravitic relationship with Sol. Their vectors, inclination to the plane of the elliptic and their orbital speeds, whereby they catch up with and overtake one-another – or not – influence old Sol <em>and</em>, in turn, themselves. The ultimate feedback.

Just because someone, some when, did a study and found cyclicity wanting does not mean that it is. All it means is that the investigation was not thorough, for whatever reasons, and its conclusions may be utterly and totally wrong.

The distaste that modern scientists display toward old science, for that is what Astrology is, does not surprise me. What does surprise is the easy brush-off that some eminent scholars, both modern and olden,  receive at the hands of those who display no bravery.

Who will be next to join the illustrious ranks of Aristotle, Theophrastus, Ptolemy, Brahe, Kepler, Newton, Howard, Saxby, Herschel, Jose, Milankovitch, Fairbridge, Nelson, Bohr, King-Hele, etcetera.

Here is a page of interest:

www.crawfordperspectives.com/Fairbridge-ClimateandKeplerianPlanetaryDynamics.htm