Archive for the ‘Critique’ Category

Science under stress?[image credit: thespiritscience.net]


Problems can arise ‘because experiments are not designed well enough to ensure that the scientists don’t fool themselves and see what they want to see in the results.’ For example, it seems ‘up to 85% of all biomedical research carried out in the world is wasted effort’.

Machine-learning techniques used by thousands of scientists to analyse data are producing results that are misleading and often completely wrong, reports BBC News.

Dr Genevera Allen from Rice University in Houston said that the increased use of such systems was contributing to a “crisis in science”.

(more…)



This approach to data seems par for the course in climatology, as they strive ever more to make the world look warmer than before, in order to prop up the failing theory of human-caused trace gases ruining the world.

Source: The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

The Bureau of Meteorology has rewritten Australia’s temperature records for the second time in six years, greatly increasing the rate of warming since 1910 in its controversial homogenised data set, writes Graham Lloyd in The Australian.

Rather than the nation’s temperature having increased by 1C over the past century, the ­bureau’s updated homogenised data set, known as ACORN-SAT, now shows mean temperatures have risen by 1.23C.

(more…)


The reality that can’t be faced by many is that the carbon dioxide theory of climate just doesn’t stack up, for many reasons. Expensive subsidies for part-time renewables create both economic and practical problems, as some are already finding out to their cost.

The GWPF – Press release: Rapid decarbonisation is “a delusion”

A prominent Canadian economist has called for the political classes to stop making claims that they cannot fulfil and to return to energy policies grounded in reality.

In a new paper published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), Robert Lyman sets out the economic and technological constraints on delivering decarbonization over the next two or three decades.

(more…)

.
.
The renewables malaise is spreading round the world like a cancer. The symptoms can be painful but are easily recognised, as Australians are finding out.

STOP THESE THINGS

Australia’s energy policy reads like a National suicide note: power prices went from the lowest in the world to the highest, in little over a decade.

Plotting the path to destruction is pretty easy: start by throwing $60 billion in subsidies at wind and large-scale solar, demonise cheap and reliable coal-fired power and put lunatics in charge of the whole operation.

Here’s Alan Moran, once again, detailing the source of Australia’s self-inflicted misery.

Reaping the fruits of political sabotage of the electricity industry
Catallaxy Files
Alan Moran
25 January 2019

The third world nature of Australia’s electricity industry was revealed this week with wholesale prices in Victoria and South Australia at the maximum $14,500 for lengthy periods in spite of thousands of customers being cut-off, major users agreeing to shut down demand in return for compensation paid by consumers, and even some oil plants being called in.

The…

View original post 670 more words


One for the ‘worse than we thought’ file. Anyone running out of power in an EV in winter due to sudden cold weather range reduction has no in-car way to keep warm while waiting for rescue.

Cold temperatures can sap electric car batteries, temporarily reducing their range by more than 40 percent when interior heaters are used, a new study found.

The study of five electric vehicles by AAA also found that high temperatures can cut into battery range, but not nearly as much as the cold, reports TechXplore. The range returns to normal in more comfortable temperatures.

(more…)

Credit: mygridgb.co.uk


H/T The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
Relying on interconnectors to get out of trouble when the wind isn’t blowing won’t be a good plan long-term, when most of Europe is pushing its own wind-dependent electricity plans forward. Nuclear and coal are largely fading out of the UK scene, so for industrial-scale reliable power it has to be gas or bust in the end, whether UK-sourced or not.

The chairman of Britain’s biggest private company has accused the government of using “slippery back door manoeuvres” to kill off fracking in the UK, reports City A.M.

Sir Jim Ratcliffe, the billionaire founder of Ineos, said the government is sticking to a plan which is “unworkable, unhelpful and playing politics with the country’s future”.

(more…)

.
.
No fun being the crash test dummies of over-reliance on intermittent ruinables.

STOP THESE THINGS

The dreamers who think they’ll soon be running entirely on sunshine and breezes, have just been smacked with reality, in Victoria, at least.

There’s something poetic about watching infants being forced to grow up. And, so it is, with once loyal RE zealots, being forced to rethink their love affair, after their taste of what it’s like swelter in Melbourne, without the benefit of that first world necessity, electricity.

Over the last couple of posts, STT has focused on the chaos that reigned in South Australia and Victoria on a couple of hot days – coupled with wind power output collapses (see above) that resulted in hundreds of thousands being deprived of power, 200,000 in Victoria, alone – and the price of power going through the roof.

Watching the panic spread was, somewhat, amusing. Nothing like watching those who thought they understood the electricity system left floundering and struggling for…

View original post 4,188 more words


Here we’re quoting the most relevant part of a longer article discussing this issue, also including particulates. Has the German public and the world been fed a scare story that gives diesels an unfair image, to some extent at least?

Several German pulmonary physicians question the current nitrogen oxide and particulate matter limits, says DW.com.

These are inadequate and mainly based on questionable epidemiological studies, they say.
– – –
Many victims of smoking, but where are the NOx deaths?

(more…)


Is the desire to promote climate alarm leading researchers to make mistakes?

Second ocean paper in three months is refuted by independent climate scientist Nicholas Lewis, reports The GWPF.
– – –
A scientific paper, published in Science magazine last week, led to widespread claims that the oceans were warming faster than previously thought, and received media attention around the world.  

But less than a week after the headlines, an independent scientist, Nicholas Lewis, has found that a team led by Lijing Cheng of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, had made what he calls important factual errors.

(more…)


Increasingly absurd disaster rhetoric is consistently contradicted by climate and weather data and backed up by little more than obstinate assertions, says Paul Driessen at Climate Change Dispatch.
– – –
Call it climate one-upmanship. It seems everyone has to outdo previous climate chaos rhetoric.

The “climate crisis” is the “existential threat of our time,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi told her House colleagues. We must “end the inaction and denial of science that threatens the planet and the future.”

Former California Governor Jerry Brown solemnly intoned that America has “an enemy, though different, but perhaps very much devastating in a similar way” as the Nazis in World War II.

Not to be outdone, two PhDs writing in Psychology Today declared that “the human race faces extinction” if we don’t stop burning fossil fuels.

(more…)

Confusing Diabatic and Adiabatic Processes within the Climate Theory:

A Reply to Dr. Roy Spencer’s Blog Article “Giving Credit to Willis Eschenbach

Ned Nikolov, Ph.D.
Physical Scientist

In a recent blog post, Dr. Roy Spencer at the University of Alabama at Huntsville attempted to criticize and dismiss the importance of our recent discovery about the physical nature of the atmospheric “Greenhouse effect” (Nikolov & Zeller 2017). I normally do not reply to blog articles, but this one reflects a fundamental generic confusion in the current climate theory that is worthwhile addressing for readership clarification. In his blog, Dr. Spencer demonstrated several misconceptions about our work that could be due to either not having read/understood our papers or perhaps an incomplete grasp of thermodynamics. The fact that Dr. Spencer cites a newspaper article about our research instead of the actual published paper may indicate a lack of familiarity with the technical details of our study. These are some key misrepresentations that I spotted in his article:    

1. Dr. Spencer incorrectly referred to our main finding as a “theory” when, in fact, it is a discovery based on vetted NASA data extracted from numerous published studies. This empirical pressure-temperature (P-T) function emerged from reported NASA measurements in the process of Dimensional Analysis, which is an objective technique employed in classical physics to derive/extract physically meaningful relationships from observed data.

(more…)

.
.
The only thing getting worse is the spurious climate alarm propaganda churned out every time a hurricane dares to approach the USA.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

image

https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2019/01/Homewood-Hurricanes.pdf

I am pleased to report that the GWPF have now published my latest paper on hurricane trends.

It demonstrates that, contrary to popular myth, hurricanes are not getting more frequent or more powerful.

The paper is based throughout on official data, scientific papers and IPCC reports.

Here is the Executive Summary:

image

image

View original post

Credit: nationalreview.com


Stirring up hysteria and issuing threats are well-known tactics of dictators hoping to suppress and discourage clear thinking.

H/T The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

Some climate change alarmists have become the Roman Inquisition of the 21st century.

Once again, the Earth is put at the centre of everything, with other issues such as free speech, democracy and scientific freedom relegated to some distant orbit.

(more…)

.
.
Monetising the wind isn’t going to solve anyone’s electricity supply problems. Exactly the reverse is far more likely.

STOP THESE THINGS

The meme has it that wind and solar are all about slashing CO2 emissions, whereas that pathetic pair are just a colossal moneymaking scam.

Apart from South Australia, no country other than Germany threw more at chaotically intermittent wind and solar.

The results have been an utter debacle: Germans suffer the second highest power prices in Europe, just behind wind ‘powered’ Denmark, and those prices are rocketing north at double-digit rates. The German grid is on the brink of collapse.

And all in an effort to curb emissions of carbon dioxide gas. Leaving aside arguments about whether CO2 is a toxic pollutant or a naturally occurring beneficial trace gas which plants crave, if the primary object of Germany’s ‘transition’ to an all wind and sun powered future was cutting carbon dioxide gas emissions, the result has been a dismal failure – that’s cost Germans more than a €Trillion, so…

View original post 1,584 more words

Airport scene
[image credit: Wikipedia]


Land-grown biofuel is in enough trouble already as an enemy of the environment. But the vain pursuit of the imaginary CO2 enemy leads to numerous bad policy decisions.

“Hydrocarbon fuels will remain essential for modern air travel. So-called sustainable aviation fuels are expensive, produced in negligible volumes, and provide CO2 savings only on paper. As such, they fail the real sustainability test of affordability, plenty, and reliability.”

Air travel is a miracle of our modern society, writes Steve Goreham at MasterResource.

(more…)


Prof Ray Bates discusses some points raised by a critic in response to his recent analysis of the latest IPCC summary report (SR 1.5).

Reply by Ray Bates to the blog post by Peter Thorne of Maynooth University
H/T The GWPF

A) General comments

1) Prof. Thorne states that my critique of SR1.5 was not peer-reviewed and should not be referred to as a paper.
His statement is incorrect. My critique was peer-reviewed.

I wouldn’t list it in my CV as a journal article, but it is correct to call it a paper (see the Oxford Dictionary). That said, it matters little to me whether my publication is called a critique, a piece, or a paper.

(more…)


People are being sold an unachievable, impossible fantasy of fuel-free energy with massive and ever-rising costs, that can never work anyway.

Climate extremists, like other hucksters, usually emphasize how their favored policies (decarbonization in this case) will avoid various alleged disasters, which never seem to happen except in the distant future, says Alan Carlin.

Rarely do they explain what these efforts will cost.

(more…)

BBC And The Extinction Rebellion

Posted: December 22, 2018 by oldbrew in alarmism, climate, Critique, ideology, Idiots
Tags: ,

.
.
What are they trying to do – make Greenpeace look tame?

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

From the Guardian:

image

The BBC’s central London headquarters has been put on lockdown due to a protest by climate change campaigners who are demanding it uses its status as national broadcaster to declare a “climate and ecological emergency”.

Extinction Rebellion, a direct action group that has recently shut down key London roads, has demand the BBC makes the environment its “top editorial issue”.

Broadcasting House was locked down early on Friday afternoon, with BBC staff and guests unable to enter or leave the building while security kept the peaceful but noisy protesters away from the entrance.

Extinction Rebellion activists, who are demanding a meeting with the BBC director general, Tony Hall, said the corporation had a duty to broadcast about climate change with “the level of urgency placed on informing the public about the second world war”.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/dec/21/bbc-london-headquarters-put-on-lockdown-over-protest-by-climate-change-campaigners-extinction-rebellion

A case of the biter bit!

The BBC…

View original post 402 more words


Not exactly shock news perhaps, but words like ‘extreme’ and ‘unrealistic’ ought to be embarrassing for those who summoned over 20,000 people from around the world to Poland to spend several days discussing it.

From The GWPF.

London, 20 December: One of Europe’s most eminent climate scientists has documented the main scientific reasons why the recent UN climate summit failed to welcome the IPCC’s report on global warming of 1.5°C.

In a paper published today by the Global Warming Policy Foundation Professor Ray Bates of University College Dublin explains the main reasons for the significant controversy about the latest IPCC report within the international community.

The IPCC’s Special Report on a Global Warming of 1.5°C (SR1.5) was released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in advance of the recent COP24 meeting in Katowice, Poland, but was not adopted by the meeting due to objections by a number of governments.

Professor Bates examines some key aspects of the SR1.5 report. He assesses if the IPCC report exhibits a level of scientific rigour commensurate with the scale of its extremely costly and highly disruptive recommendation that carbon emissions be reduced to zero by mid-century.

The paper concludes that such a level of scientific rigour is not present in the report. Specifically, SR1.5 is deficient in scientific rigour in the following respects:

● It departs from the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report in conveying an increased sense of planetary emergency without giving rigorous scientific reasons for doing so.

● It fails to communicate to policymakers a considerable body of important observationally-based research evidence that has accumulated since the Fifth Assessment which reduces the sense of a looming emergency.

● It fails to communicate important information made public by climate modellers since the Fifth Assessment regarding the empirical tuning of models to achieve desired results.

The paper concludes that, in view of these deficiencies, the SR1.5 report does not merit being regarded by policymakers as a scientifically rigorous document.

“There is much recent observational and scientific evidence that the IPCC report has failed to include and which supports a more considered mitigation strategy than the extreme and unrealistic measures called for in the SR1.5 report,” said Prof Bates.

Continued here.

About the author
Professor J. Ray Bates is Adjunct Professor of Meteorology in the Meteorology and Climate Centre at University College Dublin. He was formerly Professor of Meteorology at the Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, and a Senior Scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Centre. In his early career he was Head of Research at the Irish Meteorological Service. He obtained a bachelor’s degree in physics at University College Dublin and a PhD in meteorology at MIT. His PhD supervisor at MIT was Jule G. Charney, chairman of the committee that wrote the 1979 ‘Charney Report’ on the effects of carbon dioxide on climate. Professor Bates has been the recipient of a number of awards for his scientific work, including the 2009 Vilhelm Bjerknes Medal of the European Geosciences Union. He is a former President of the Irish Meteorological Society. He has served as an Expert Reviewer of the IPCC’s Fourth and Fifth Assessment Reports. He is a member of the Royal Irish Academy and the Academia Europaea and a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society and the Royal Meteorological Society.


Climate meetings and the concerns they try to generate are not that big a deal to most people, despite the alarmist efforts of the media and the so-called activists. ‘Crisis tomorrow’ has worn thin after three decades of no-show, with fast-rising energy costs a bigger worry.

IPCC Poland conference presents fictional climate chaos and fake renewable energy salvation, reports CFACT.
– – –
The unwritten rule seems to be that each successive climate report and news release must be more scarifying than any predecessors, especially during the run-up to international conferences.

(more…)