Monthly Archives: May 2015

Green’s Say That Computer Projections Are Just Basic Physics- Ok, But They Only Use A Very Small Portion Of The Physics

Basic physics?   Far from it. The greens are trying to sell this. A recent posting on this site has a video in which Carol Andress of the  Environmental Defense Fund uses this line in a debate with Marc Morano.   Ms Andress seems particularly ill informed so she had to resort to this line of “Just Basic Physics”.

Doug Hoffman on his blog site, The Resilient Earth, had this so say about Basic Physics:”

It should come as no surprise that General Circulation Models (GCM), the basis for more comprehensive computer climate models, are based on differential equations, as are weather forecasting models and hurricane path prediction models. As we all know, weather forecasts are not very accurate, only giving a general idea of conditions a few days out, and hurricane models generally cannot predict the point of landfall until just before a storm comes ashore. But GCMs are different from weather programs even though they use some of the same equations. That is a refrain often repeated by supercilious climate modelers. It is true that climate models also include extra factors like sea ice models and “parametrization” for things like clouds. Unfortunately for them their models are not immune to the laws of computation that make their short term cousins grow more and more inaccurate over time.”

Continue reading

Religious leaders should stop bleating about global warming

I am rebloging WUWT posting of Grant Goldman’s “Religious leaders should stop bleating about global warming.” Goldman begins by citing major atrocities that religious leaders did not demand governments have strong responses to the perpetrators but inexplicably demand strong action to prevent “man-made global warming.” Goldman also discusses coal’s benefits to humanity. He also says preventing the world’s poorest people to have access to coal, is a terrible crime.

Watts Up With That?

Christopher Monckton of Brenchley sends this article by Grant Goldman, a popular radio host in Sydney, Australia.

In July 1937 when the Marco Polo Bridge incident launched Japan’s aggression against China, that was not important enough for Australian religious leaders to write to the government demanding strong action against Japan.

In March 1939 the German occupation of Czechoslovakia was not important enough for Australian religious leaders to write to the government demanding strong action against the Nazis.

In November 1956 Soviet troops overrunning Hungary was not important enough for Australian religious leaders to write to the government demanding strong action against the USSR.

In October 2013 the massacre of Syriac Orthodox Christians and destruction of 14 churches in Sadad in Syria was not important enough for Australian religious leaders to write to the government demanding strong action against the Jihadis responsible.


The likelihood that there are more slaves in the…

View original post 1,067 more words

Texas Flooding and CO2 Emissions.

James Spann is an AMS certified meteorologist and Host of WeatherBrains.     His views on the connection between man-made global warming and the severe

Houston Post Photo

Houston Post Photo

flooding that parts of Texas have recently experienced were posted in a Medium Corporation blog, titled “The Age Of Disinformation”.  I have selected several things he has to say :

“No doubt national news media outlets are out of control when it comes to weather coverage, and their idiotic claims find their way to us on a daily basis. The Houston flooding is a great example. We are being told this is “unprecedented”… Houston is “under water”… and it is due to manmade global warming.

Yes, the flooding in Houston yesterday was severe, and a serious threat to life and property. A genuine weather disaster that has brought on suffering.

But, no, this was not “unprecedented”. Flooding from Tropical Storm Allison in 2001 was more widespread, and flood waters were deeper.”

“Flood events in 2009, 2006, 1998, 1994, 1989, 1983, and 1979 brought higher water levels to most of Houston, and there were many very serious flood events before the 1970s.”

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reports that the Texas record 24-hour rainfall occurred July25 and 26, 1976 in Alvin, Texas. The rainfall amount was 42inches.

I experienced a serious flood event in the 1970s in Beaumont, Texas. One day heavy rain began to fall in North East Texas, supercharging the Neches River. By the time the rain arrived in South East Texas, where Beaumont is sited, the Neches River was running over its banks. Adding to that, Beaumont got roughly 10 inches of rain in a 24-hour period . When the rain stopped, sightseers in canoes were paddling down the street in front of my house.

One more lifting from Mr. Spann’s posting:

“Back to my point… many professional meteorologists feel like we are fighting a losing battle when it comes to national media and social media hype and disinformation. They will be sure to let you know that weather events they are reporting on are “unprecedented”, there are “millions and millions in the path”, it is caused by a “monster storm”, and “the worst is yet to come” since these events are becoming more “frequent”.

You will never hear about the low tornado count in recent years, the lack of major hurricane landfalls on U.S. coasts over the past 10 years, or the low number of wildfires this year. It doesn’t fit their story. But, never let facts get in the way of a good story…. there will ALWAYS be a heat wave, flood, wildfire, tornado, tyhpoon, cold wave, and snow storm somewhere. And, trust me, they will find them, and it will probably lead their newscasts. But, users beware…”







Climate Debate And Pope Francis’ Encyclical On The Environment

A debate about the theory of catastrophic man-made global warming (CAGW) took place recently between Carol Andress, of the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and Marc Morano of the Climate Depot Blog. The EDF website lists Ms Andress as having expertise in “Climate Change, U.S, Congress, air quality and U.S. climate policy”.

There are two themes during this debate; one is the credibility of the science supporting the CAGW and the other is Pope Francis’ expected papal encyclical on the environment.

The first theme was entirely won by Marano. This has been the consistent outcome of these debates between warmers and skeptics.   It is difficult for skeptics to get a warmer to debate anymore.  Because Ms Andress is considered an expert by the EDF, I am  further persuaded  that the EDF, as an organization, is weak on science as are most of the environmentally focused NGOs.  While nothing Ms Andress said with regard to the second theme was persuasive, the Pope appears to have been taken in. There is little likelihood at this point that he will change his mind.

Watch the debate on this YouTube video–it will initially open up with what looks to be another topic, but give it several seconds and it will switch to the debate.  The total time for the debate is about 15 minutes.




















Cold Weather Causes 20 Times More Deaths Than Hot Weather

The science deniers* (aka warmers) tell us that a major reason to fear global warming is because so many people will die from the heat. But would an increase in global temperatures actually reduce the number of coldweatherimagesdeaths? According to study published in The Lancet of over 74million deaths in 384 locations across 13 countries, cold weather kills 20 times as many people as does hot weather. On balance, warmer weather would probably reduce the number of weather related deaths.

If you are not familiar with The Lancet, Wiki describes it this way:

The Lancet is a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal. It is one of the world’s oldest and best known general medical journals,[1] and has been described as one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world.[2] In the 2013 Journal Citation Reports, The Lancet‍ ’ s impact factor was ranked second among general medical journals, (at 39.207), after The New England Journal of Medicine (54,420)“ summarized the Lancet study as follows:

The study analysed over 74 million (74,225,200) deaths between 1985 and 2012 in 13 countries with a wide range of climates, from cold to subtropical. Data on daily average temperature, death rates, and confounding variables (eg, humidity and air pollution) were used to calculate the temperature of minimum mortality (the optimal temperature), and to quantify total deaths due to non-optimal ambient temperature in each location. The researchers then estimated the relative contributions of heat and cold, from moderate to extreme temperatures.

Around 7.71% of all deaths were caused by non-optimal temperatures, with substantial differences between countries, ranging from around 3% in Thailand, Brazil, and Sweden to about 11% in China, Italy, and Japan. Cold was responsible for the majority of these deaths (7.29% of all deaths), while just 0.42% of all deaths were attributable to heat.

The study also found that extreme temperatures were responsible for less than 1% of all deaths, while mildly sub-optimal temperatures accounted for around 7% of all deaths — with most (6.66% of all deaths) related to moderate cold.

According to Dr Gasparrini, “Current public-health policies focus almost exclusively on minimizing the health consequences of heat waves. Our findings suggest that these measures need to be refocused and extended to take account of a whole range of effects associated with temperature.”

 Study upon study in the past have arrived at this same conclusion although this may be the most comprehensive of such studies. No doubt the science deniers will continue to deny these facts.


*I use the word “deniers” reluctantly. However the catastrophic man-made global warming folks,  have recently undertaken a plan to fully brand all skeptics as “deniers.”  Maybe an unwise choice, but should we fight fire with fire?





Friday Funny – the horror of rising sea levels in context

What can you say about a President that maintains that “global warming” is the greatest threat in the world today? The cartoon that accompanies this WUWT posting is better than any words I can put together.

Watts Up With That?

As many know, Mr. Obama made some wild claims about climate at the recent U.S. Coast Guard Academy commencement.

For example:

The world’s glaciers are melting, pouring new water into the ocean.  Over the past century, the world sea level rose by about eight inches.  That was in the last century; by the end of this century, it’s projected to rise another one to four feet.

Rick McKee shares this epic cartoon on the WUWT Facebook page:


Further reading:

Does the ‘leader’ of the free world really know so little about climate?

Some pushback against Obama’s ridiculous climate remarks at the Coast Guard commencement

View original post

10th International Conference On Climate Change—June 11 & 12 in Washington DC

This year the International Conference On Climate Change will be held in Washington DC on the 11th and 12th of June.   The presenters are Major League skeptics. Among the panel participants are Singer, Idso, Monckton, Legates, Fred SingerSoon, Briggs, Michaels, Watts, Carter, Loehle, Ball, etc..  The keynote speakers are Senator Jim Inhofe, Journalist Mark Steyn, Representative Lamar Smith and Princeton Professor William Happer.

S. Fred Singer

Full information, regarding registration, location, program & speakers and hotel reservations can be found by clicking here.

Continue reading

Unrealistic Predictions FromThe US Global Change Research Program

On April 7, the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) released a draft for public review of its upcoming Climate & Health Assessment. No citations or quotations from the draft are permitted. Public comments are solicited with a requirement that they arrive prior to 7 June.  The Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) is preparing comments to be presented to USGCRP. If the USGCRP failed models6a010536b58035970c0168e987ee9d970c-400wioperates like the EPA, any comment that does not concur with their already made conclusions will be ignored.

SEPP have made some preliminary observations in their TWTW postings. The following is from the 16 May issue:

Even though the US government spent over $35 billion on climate science research from fiscal year 1993 to FY 2013, federal agencies have failed to create a global climate model, verified and validated, for predicting future temperatures. Without a valid climate model, temperature forecasts are highly speculative. Thus, the core of the entire USGCRP Climate and Health Assessment is speculative. Labeling such statements with terms such as Very Likely or High Confidence is pure fiction. There is no objective method to assess likelihood or confidence. Further, there is no indication that government agencies are attempting to create a valid climate model that has predictive power (skill).”

Continue reading

President Obama Likes German Energy Plan That Results In Electrical Prices 2.5X U.S. Prices

President Obama and polemists like Tom Friedman of the New York Times, tout Germany’s green power program as a model to be admired.   Well, I guess so if you like very much higher electricity prices with only a little effect on CO2 ice_age_endingemissions. As readers of this blog know, CO2 emissions are not high on my worry list. Increased electricity prices are worrisome to me, but they don’t seem to trouble Obama and Friedman?

Continue reading

John Kerry Again Proves His Ignorance

Why am I picking on John Kerry again?  Partly because he is such an easy target but mostly I want people to be aware of how unaware he is.  In 2009,  the then Senator Kerry said that the Arctic would be ice free in 2014. As you know this prediction was very wrong.  He knew this because he claimed to be up-to-date with all the real science as provided by the real scientists. Kerry chose to lecture Senator James Inhofe, someone he said failed to get it when it comes to global warming and in this case Arctic Sea ice.  Watch this Youtube to see the “haughty”  Senator in action:

By the way, Jim Inhofe is probably the most knowledgeable man in Congress with regard to global warming science.

Kerry is the chief US negotiator in the talks with Iran about Iran’s program to make nuclear bombs. God help us.  And he seems to be the President’s lead man in the Global Warming talks scheduled for Paris this coming December.  IMHO, he is in way over his head, but he is so egotistical, he thinks he knows it all.   Lecturing Senator Inhofe!!!

Look at these two posting to see how misinformed he can be, even when he has a prepared speech.   Click here and here.