The Era Of ‘Unquestioned And Unchallenged’ Climate Change Claims Is Over

Posted: November 4, 2023 by oldbrew in alarmism, climate, IPCC, Temperature
Tags: ,


What era? IPCC-favoured warmist scientists can’t even agree among themselves sometimes. But they usually agree that scientists who question their climate theories in research papers are fair game for sneers, jeers and various forms of harassment, if ignoring them isn’t enough.
– – –
Leading voices in the climate science community are in an uproar as their warming hypothesis is coming under fresh assault by new scientific papers, says The Epoch Times (via Climate Change Dispatch).

The authors of the papers are being attacked and say that “activist scientists” threatened by the new findings are “aggressively conducting an orchestrated disinformation campaign to discredit the papers and the scientific reputation of the authors.”

Indeed, from insults on social media and furious blog posts to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests demanding emails from a journal editor and federal scientist, the controversy is getting heated.

Several scientists who spoke with The Epoch Times expressed shock at the tactics used against those whose latest research is casting renewed doubts on the official climate narrative.

William Happer, Princeton professor emeritus of physics and former climate adviser to President Donald Trump, wasn’t surprised by the response to the new findings.

“Of course, the climate cult will be dismissive of any information—no matter how scientifically correct—that is politically incorrect,” he told The Epoch Times, noting that the new findings made important and valid points.

The reason that climate activists are so upset is that the findings of the new papers—a trio of peer-reviewed studies by astrophysicist Willie Soon and dozens of other scientists from around the world—are casting further doubt on the narrative of man-made global warming.

The papers are also fueling even more public skepticism about the U.N Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which the authors say ignores the facts and climate science more generally.

The rhetoric employed by taxpayer-funded scientists with a vested interest in the climate change narrative to attack the new research was profoundly unscientific, multiple scientists told The Epoch Times.

Atmospheric science professor Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University, for instance, denounced the authors of one of the new papers as “a group of climate deniers [clown emoji]” on X, formerly known as Twitter.

Mr. Mann, famous for the now-widely ridiculed “hockey stick” graph purporting to show massive man-made warming, also described the editor of the journal Climate as a “denier clown.”

Gareth S. Jones, a senior scientist at the UK Met Office, ridiculed the new studies as “nonsense,” while smearing the journal’s publisher for supposedly being “popular with the science denial community.”

Mr. Jones also denounced the guest editor of Climate’s special issue, Ned Nikolov, for having a “bit of a reputation, so much so that other climate contrarians distance themselves from him.”

Mr. Nikolov authored an earlier paper arguing that atmospheric pressure, not greenhouse gases, plays a primary role in temperatures on Earth and on other celestial bodies.

Also chiming in to attack the new papers and the scientists behind them was Gavin Schmidt, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, who’s using a FOIA request to demand all of Mr. Nikolov’s emails with relevant scientists.

Mr. Schmidt mocked Greenpeace cofounder Patrick Moore, one of the authors, saying on X that there was “mo[o]re [expletive] going around” before posting a highly edited version of Mr. Moore’s post on social media.

“The only point of this paper (which every climate denier and their dog has jumped onto), is to launder dirty ‘science’ into a clean made-for-Fox meme,” Mr. Schmidt wrote on X, before publishing a more detailed rebuttal on his blog Real Climate.

“The latest contrarian crowd pleaser from Soon et al (2023) is just the latest repetition of the old ‘it was the sun wot done it’ trope [1] that Willie Soon and his colleagues have been pushing for decades,” argued Mr. Schmidt, whose federal salary is almost $200,000 per year. “There is literally nothing new under the sun.”

Scientists Respond
The blog post by Mr. Schmidt “is dismissive in an insubstantive way,” said climatologist Judith Curry, who wasn’t involved in the new papers but previously served as chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology.

“The response by Schmidt, Mann, and others, particularly with regard to the FOIA request regarding editorial discussions on this paper, reflects their ongoing attempts to control the scientific as well as public dialogue on climate change,” she told The Epoch Times.

“In my opinion, their behavior not only reflects poorly on them but is damaging to climate science.”

Ms. Curry, author of “Climate Uncertainty and Risk,” who has a post by the lead authors on her blog Climate Etc. to provide a forum for discussion, said the new paper raises “an important issue that is swept under the rug by the IPCC and many climate scientists.”

In particular, it has major implications for how 20th-century climate records are interpreted, she said.

“Further, the issue of the urban heat island effect on global land temperatures remains unresolved, which is also highlighted in the Soon et al. paper,” she said, calling it “a useful contribution to the climate science literature.”

Mr. Soon, the main author of the paper and a principal with the Center for Environmental Research and Earth Sciences (CERES), explained that the three new papers by CERES scientists are a major threat to powerful vested interests.

“For over three decades, the claims and conclusions by U.N. IPCC reports reigned supreme, unquestioned and unchallenged,” Mr. Soon, who was previously with the solar and stellar physics division of the Harvard–Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, told The Epoch Times.

“Our latest series of three published papers show that those claims are scientifically empty. Our results appear to rock the weak foundation of IPCC, and this must be the reason why you are seeing such instantaneous rejection and outright complaining by activists like Schmidt and Mann.”

Mr. Soon and some of the other scientists involved in the new papers published another groundbreaking study in 2021 showing that solar activity could explain all observed warming.

In a highly unusual development for complex scientific studies, that paper has been downloaded more than 55,000 times since it was published. [Talkshop comment – kudos to Ned Nikolov].

“The high level of attention to this paper by people hungry for truth might be the real threats that Schmidt and Mann are worrying about,” Mr. Soon said, pointing to a detailed response to the attacks from critics published on CERES-Science.com, titled “The orchestrated disinformation campaign by RealClimate.org to falsely discredit and censor our work.”

Mr. Happer noted that the new paper by Mr. Soon and the other authors, headlined “The Detection and Attribution of Northern Hemisphere Land Surface Warming,” is indeed significant.

The two important and valid points are that there are “huge uncertainties” surrounding how much warming there has been since 1850 and how much of that might be due to human activities, he said.

“The paper presents very strong evidence that a warming bias is built into the records from urban areas,” Mr. Happer told The Epoch Times after reviewing the paper, which he wasn’t involved with.

“This extra warming of urban versus rural areas is not caused by increasing concentrations of CO2 and other greenhouse gases. It is caused by humans, but it cannot be reversed by ruinous net-zero policies.”

Mr. Happer, who believes that human CO2 emissions are responsible for “a relatively small contribution” to the “modest warming” that has been observed, agreed with the paper’s conclusion that available data isn’t good enough to determine how significant the various factors, such as volcanoes, solar irradiance, and greenhouse gas emissions, are to the warming.

Read more here.

Comments
  1. saighdear says:

    Huh, for how long now have I been ranting on about our governing class(es) demanding that ee have a HUNGER for compliance? As they like to say “if you’re not WITH us, THEN you must be AGAINST us”
    UK tv this now ? WHY? Satellite TV was better until much rubbish to watch on KLIMATE issues https://www.ardmediathek.de/suche/klima?channels=hr and after your perusal, take a L@@K at thisone about the ozone hole & heatpumps from water and the associated problems Phosphates bla blabla. https://www.ardmediathek.de/video/NWIxZmRhM2UtZGEzYi00YmVlLThiNjItOTc5OGQ5MTM2NzBi Och mannie, ye kannae make it up. Do this don’t do that, but do it this way, NO, THAT way…I mean THISway! Sound familiar? Diesel & ULEZ…..

  2. jb says:

    My memory is not so bad that I have not forgotten the published disputes over this nonsense 50 yrs back. While such differing view was not quite so suppressed as today, the bigger problem was ready availability. The Web did not exist then to plop any disputes in a person’s lap. We had to go looking for it and often subscribe to a rag to keep them afloat.
    So I’m not inclined to think of the last half century as an era of “unchallenged” claims. It was there, just not known so broadly as today

  3. Phoenix44 says:

    So not a single actual criticism, just insults and conspiracy theories. I’d bet none of them has read the papers.

  4. oldbrew says:

    The paper presents very strong evidence that a warming bias is built into the records from urban areas

    Arguing about city temperatures is of interest but sea temperatures cover >70% of the globe.

  5. AC Osborn says:

    Nothing new here, it goes all the way back to Climategate and their emails.

  6. stpaulchuck says:

    Dilbert says it all:

    file://D:\User Documents and Files\web pics\AGW\dilbert AGW.jpg

  7. stpaulchuck says:

  8. Ben Wouters says:

    oldbrew says:November 5, 2023 at 9:03 am
    “Arguing about city temperatures is of interest but sea temperatures cover >70% of the globe.”

    Agree, and the deep oceans are responsible for most of the explanation for the >90K difference in avg surface temperature between our Moon and Earth., unless someone can come up with a mechanism that explains how the Greenhouse effect has increased the deep ocean temperatures to ~15K above the infamous 255K of >70K above the avg Lunar surface temperature.

    Ben Wouters: Influence of Geothermal Heat on past and present climate

  9. stpaulchuck says:

    thanks catweasle666!

  10. saighdear says:

    Well, we have this in the ANIMAL Kingdom – A Pecking Order… thought this was well enough documented back in the 70’s , says Gramps.
    “are fair game for sneers, jeers and various forms of harassment,” so has anything been done in the modern animal ( Humo soap yins)? All of a sudden we see people walking the streets with hands stuck to their ears with a block of something in between, or eyes “pretty well glued to them” – is that to see what on earth was stuck / coming out of their ears? I dunno. Glad I don’t live in that world.
    Hmm which world ? 2 different results …AND no AI used ( by us) : 1. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Dr+Peter+R+English+animal+welfare+pigs&t=opera&ia=web 2. https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&q=Dr+Peter+R+English+animal+welfare+pigs&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 So what happened to all his great works? – gone the way of all other work “after the War” or before ‘Millennials took / GIVEN ( by whom) charge? FTR https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_English .

Leave a comment