Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘IPCC’

The Incestuous Nature of the IPCC Reports | Watts Up With That?

Posted by Martin C. Fox on October 9, 2017

Flat earth and the sun revolving around the earth were settled science.  There were entities that would have a credibility crisis if the truth were known. That sounds familiar.

Another interesting finding is seen in their examination of who each organization was citing. In-text analysis of the IPCC’s AR5 report revealed that 19 out of the 20 most frequently cited authors in that report were directly involved in the compilation of it. And though the remaining person, J. Hansen, was not officially involved in producing AR5, he participated in the production of at least one prior IPCC report (Third Assessment) as a Contributing Author. Similar analysis of the AR4 report revealed that 14 out of the 16 most frequently cited IPCC authors were involved with the writing of that report. Yet, here again, the remaining two individuals were directly involved in the production of the IPCC’s preceding Third Assessment Report. Such findings indicate the IPCC report authors are most intent on citing their own work, thereby promoting their own interests and findings above the work of others. Read the rest of this entry »


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

REAL climate science shows Trump was right to Exit Paris | Watts Up With That?

Posted by Martin C. Fox on July 11, 2017

The Professor’s assertion is also logically invalid, since the Paris Agreement permits China, India and other developing countries to industrialize and burn fossil fuels, with no limit on their emissions and no date by which they must stop. That means major energy and economic sacrifices by the USA and other industrialized nations would not “save humanity” even if the “dangerous manmade global warming” hypothesis were true.

The Paris treaty is not about climate change

In actual intent and practice, the Paris Agreement is a political tool for suppressing growth, instituting global governance over energy use and economic growth, and redistributing wealth.

Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, former chairman of the IPCC, clearly spelled out that aim. Ms. Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change until last year, openly stated that it was not about climate but that, for the first time, it gave them the tools to replace capitalism. Former UNFCCC section director Ottmar Edenhofer bluntly said climate agreements are actually about how “we de factoredistribute the world’s wealth by climate policy.”

So whenever you hear about a new climate change agreement, think “Screw US”.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Michael, Hockey Stick, Mann Appreciation Day or Why Global Warming Was Really “Invented”

Posted by Martin C. Fox on July 8, 2017

(MCViewPoint note: Sorry this looks like a Daily Mail online article. WordPress and links were hard to control.)

I am taking it upon myself to inaugurate Penn State’s Michael, Hockey stick, Mann appreciation day. Seeing as I am a tax paying PA I feel it is my duty. Penn State continues to award Mann, why shouldn’t I follow suit.

Let us start with a quote from Phil Jones director of the Climate Research Unit of East Anglia. The East Anglia of Climategate fame.

I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd (sic) from 1961
for Keith’s to hide the decline.

As in temperature decline.

Cue “Hide The Decline”

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Environmentalists Are Dead Wrong – LewRockwell

Posted by Martin C. Fox on April 26, 2017

In 1970, when Earth Day was conceived, the late George Wald, a Nobel laureate biology professor at Harvard University, predicted, “Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” Also in 1970, Paul Ehrlich, a Stanford University biologist and best-selling author of “The Population Bomb,” declared that the world’s population would soon outstrip food supplies. In an article for The Progressive, he predicted, “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”

In International Wildlife (July 1975), Nigel Calder warned, “The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind.”
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Global Warming’s IPCC-We Were Really Sure, Now We Are Really, Really Sure

Posted by Martin C. Fox on September 29, 2013

Volcanos can destroy a summer in the 1800’s and emit tremendous amounts of CO2 in the 21st century. Both without raising the temperature. Whoda thunk it. Not the IPCC.

The big global warming news from the IPCC/UN is they are 95% sure global warming is man-made. So far lots of sound bites but little substance.

The IPCC still cannot explain the 15 years hiatus in global temperature rise yet “each decade has been warmer than the last”. I just can’t follow the logic.

Here is their excuse explanation:

The IPCC model simulations are projections and not predictions; in other words the models do not start from the state of the climate system today or even 10 years ago. There is no mileage in a story about models being ‘flawed’ because they did not predict the pause; it’s merely a misunderstanding of the science and the difference between a prediction and a projection.

Because the models cannot explain the past that is just a misunderstanding but we must believe what the models predict for the future. It made sense to global warming cheerleader BBC whose video of the UN news conference had Professor Mann’s, of Penn State, much maligned hockey stick front and center. BBC-Hast thou no shame? The answer is No.

Oh, but the science has advanced. We are to disregard the past analysis that doesn’t suit the grand plan. What about the raw data and the data gathering techniques of the past? What of their validity? Why should we then trust data from 1900 or 1950?

Now we have discovered the ocean. The heat energy we haven’t been seeing is hidden deep in the ocean. I know there is a current in the Atlantic that is like a conveyor belt. I am guessing this is what the “experts” are talking about. Somehow the heat trapped by the CO2 in the atmosphere travels through the air without heating it, gets absorbed by the ocean and is hidden in the depths. This heat energy then escapes the current and remains in Davy Jones locker.

This phenomenon has suddenly reared its head in the last fifteen years of the industrial revolution. Where was this deep ocean phenomena in the 70’s when we were being told a new ice age was on the way? Just a misunderstanding I suppose.

Remember the misunderstandings brought forth by the climategate emails? Such as the inability of IPCC computer models to explain the two great temperature increases of the last thousand years. Like we have said before there was a reason Greenland was called Greenland.

Mother Nature has been at work for 12 or so billion years. I doubt she has quit her job.

All this new climate analysis has of course been thoroughly peer-reviewed. About time, as we know from the climate gate emails that was previously not the case. I am sure none of the reviewers were hand-picked climate scientists whose livelihoods are dependant on flow of Progressive’s grant money,

Just to add a little spice to the discussion here is Ian Rutherford Pilmer claiming volcanic activity negates much of our anti-climate change efforts. He is controversial but volcanos have wrecked havoc in the recent past. Such as the year without a summer.

Volcanoes can destroy a summer in the 1800’s and emit tremendous amounts of CO2 in the 21st century. Both without raising the temperature. Whoda thunk it. Not the IPCC.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »

Yet More Proof (Man Made) Global Warming Is a Hoax

Posted by Martin C. Fox on March 24, 2013

How long are you going to ignore the lies in the East Anglia U emails?  It is hard to ignore the Daily Mail admitting global warming is a pack of lies.

See here

which contains this, text emphasis added.

global warming graph

Steadily climbing orange and red bands on the graph show the computer predictions of world temperatures used by the official United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The estimates – given with 75 per cent and 95 per cent certainty – suggest only a five per cent chance of the real temperature falling outside both bands.

But when the latest official global temperature figures from the Met Office are placed over the predictions, they show how wrong the estimates have been, to the point of falling out of the ‘95 per cent’ band completely.

The graph shows in incontrovertible detail how the speed of global warming has been massively overestimated. Yet those forecasts have had a ruinous impact on the bills we pay, from heating to car fuel to huge sums paid by councils to reduce carbon emissions.

The eco-debate was, in effect, hijacked by false data. The forecasts have also forced jobs abroad as manufacturers relocate to places with no emissions targets.

A version of the graph appears in a leaked draft of the IPCC’s landmark Fifth Assessment Report due out later this year. It comes as leading climate scientists begin to admit that their worst fears about global warming will not be realised.

Have you ever thought “shouldn’t there be more plant and animal life if there is more carbon”?

Apparently there is.  See here

I figure there has been climate change going on for about 12-15 billion years.  I figure Greenland was called Greenland for a reason.  I figure there is a rea$on why East Anglia Univer$ity and profe$$or Mann don’t admit publicly what they admit privately in leaked email$.  That their climate model$ can’t explain pa$t warming and cooling cycle$ let alone what i$ happening now or in the future.  I figure there i$ a rea$on why inefficient bio-fuel$ are being promoted at the expen$e of badly needed food crop$ and wildlife habitat

What do you figure?

I am beginning to think Whomever put all those biological fuels in the ground knew what He was doing.

Be $eeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »