The Anniversary Of The Climate Change Hoax

Before I start the post, let’s put the real crux of this on the table. It is a false crisis that was generated on wrong data to get money. I worked in this field and know the players and the facts. It is about stuffing their pockets and distracting the attention from the real problems. It is a go to for everything.

There is no better evidence than COP27 that did nothing to pretend to solve the supposed crisis. It was a bunch of elites in private planes who voted to move money from rich nations to poor. The reality is they are moving the money into their own pockets. They penalize the weak who will pay, and dismiss those who are the worst polluters as they get money under the table for that also.

Now to the anniversary.

There is no doubt that these emails are embarrassing and a public-relations disaster for science.” – Andrew Dessler, “Climate E-Mails Cloud the Debate,” December 10, 2009.

It has been 12 years since the intellectual scandal erupted called Climategate. Each anniversary inspires recollections and regurgitation of salient quotations. These quotations speak for themselves; attempts of climate alarmists to parse the words and meaning distracts from what was said in real-time private conversations.

And the scandal got worse after the fact when, according to Paul Stephens, “virtually the entire climate science community tried to pretend that nothing was wrong.” Whitewash exonerations by the educational institutions involved and scientific organizations– was a blow to scholarship and standards as well. The standard of fair, objective, transparent research was sacrificed to a politically correct narrative about the qualitative connection between CO2 forcing and temperature (see Wiki).

Fred Pearce’s The Climate Files: The Battle for the Truth About Global Warming (2010) was a rare mainstream-of-sorts look at the scandal. Michael Mann is the bad actor, despite his I-am-the-victim take in his account, The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars (2012). [1]

Background:

On November 19, 2009, a whistle-blower or hacker downloaded more than 1,000 documents and e-mails from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at East Anglia University (United Kingdom). Posted on a Russian server, these documents were soon accessed by websites around the world to trigger the exposé.

These e-mails were part of confidential communications between top climate scientists in the UK, the United States, and other nations over a 15-year period. The scientists involved had developed surface temperature data sets and promoted the “Hockey Stick” global temperature curve, as well as having wrtten/edited the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) physical-science assessment reports.

Branded “Climategate” by British columnist James Delingpole, the emails provided insight into practices that range from bad professionalism to fraudulent science. Bias, data manipulation, dodging freedom of information requests, and efforts to subvert the peer-review process were uncovered.

There is a lot more at the link above, but here are some salient facts.

Man-Made Warming Controversy

“I know there is pressure to present a nice tidy story as regards ‘apparent unprecedented warming in a thousand years or more in the proxy data’ but in reality the situation is not quite so simple.”

—Dr. Keith Briffa, Climatic Research Unit, disclosed Climategate e-mail, Sep. 22, 1999.

“Keith’s [Briffa] series…differs in large part in exactly the opposite direction that Phil’s [Jones] does from ours. This is the problem we all picked up on (everyone in the room at IPCC was in agreement that this was a problem and a potential distraction/detraction from the reasonably consensus viewpoint we’d like to show w/ the Jones et al and Mann et al series).”

—Dr. Michael Mann, IPCC Lead Author, disclosed Climategate e-mail, Sep. 22, 1999.

“…it would be nice to try to ‘contain’ the putative ‘MWP’ [Medieval Warm Period]…”

—Dr. Michael Mann, IPCC Lead Author, disclosed Climategate e-mail, June 4, 2003

“By the way, when is Tom C [Crowley] going to formally publish his roughly 1500 year reconstruction??? It would help the cause to be able to refer to that reconstruction as confirming Mann and Jones, etc.”

—Dr. Michael Mann, IPCC Lead Author, disclosed Climategate e-mail, Aug. 3, 2004.

“I gave up on Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she thinks she’s doing, but it’s not helping the cause, or her professional credibility.”

—Dr. Michael Mann, IPCC Lead Author, disclosed Climategate e-mail, May 30, 2008

“Well, I have my own article on where the heck is global warming… The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”

—Dr. Kevin Trenberth, IPCC Lead Author, disclosed Climategate e-mail, Oct. 12, 2009.

Let me end with some actual Climate facts:

  • That extreme cold has hit the South Pole this month.
  • That the South Pole had record cold temperatures in the six-month winter of 2020-2021
  • That 2022 was a relatively mild hurricane period, just like the ten years after Hurricane Katrina hit.
  • That we had extreme cold weather in the U.S this month along with record snow in the Northeast.
  • That the Arctic icecaps have been expanding the last ten years, contrary to predictions that the ice would be gone by now.
  • That the coral reef off Australia is growing with a vengeance
  • That wildfires were down 80% from the last five-year average.
  • After 150 years of exponential growth of crude oil and coal use, and rapid growth in the population and all the other components we are told cause warming, the dire predictions have all been false.
  • The temperature is only up one to two degrees after a Little Ice Age ended in 1860 and the Earth now has a temperature similar to over 1,000 years ago in the Medieval Warming Period.

Communism, Just Like Alcohol Addiction For Intellectuals

Why do they always go there. History shows it’s never worked yet the same group thinks they can do it better. It’s going on right now with the WEF, UN, COP27 and the rest of the one world wonders. Well, feast on this:

After the Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991, Communism was dead. Or so we were told at the time. However, it should be clear by now that Communism is the John Barleycorn of political ideologies:

They worked their will on John Barleycorn, but he lived to tell the tale.

That is, Communism was thought to have been destroyed, but not only did it survive, it eventually came to dominate those who believed they had destroyed it. (A full-length exegesis on this conceit may be found in my 2008 essay “John Barleycorn Was Dead”.)

The 21st-century version of the victorious ideology is not called “home-brewed ale”, but rather “Progressivism”, or the “New World Order”, or “Global Governance”, among other terms. The process of imposing the new global utopia is, of course, referred to as “the Great Reset”. Which is currently well underway, and will probably be completed before most people realize what is happening.

One of the features of latter-day Communism is that it has always been able to count on a multitude of fellow travelers among the members of the political class in the liberal democracies. The Soviets recruited agents of influence in Western governments and cultural circles, but they really didn’t have to work all that hard to find them; there was always a pool of idealistic intellectuals who were eager to embrace the utopian vision provided by the Socialist Revolution.

Communism is primarily a disease of the intellectuals. The proletariat — the purported beneficiaries of the socialist revolution — are generally indifferent to the allure of progressive utopias. But those who hold multiple advanced degrees are especially attracted to the idea of a glorious future planned and implemented by technocrats. They can draw up detailed plans for the construction of an ideal political economy, but they lack the political power to realize their dreams. Achieving such power tends to consume all their energy for well over half their lives; hence the pursuit of power becomes an end in itself.

More at Gates of Vienna:

They get them young with the college professors. How many of them do you think are conservatives or middle of the road? About 4 percent. Most of the mush heads don’t have a chance. It’s why they vote liberal when they aren’t educated properly. Usually they keep the single women, as demonstrated by the last election. They are the easiest to persuade.

I see the current administration trying to take us down that road in the (thinly veiled) guise of climate change and woke. I don’t buy it.

The answer is that it is about money and power. The intellectuals think they know more and need to tell others how to live and what to do.

Bear in mind, the rest of us are getting tired of this charade and are well educated in how to live. Let the power go out and see who survives and who gets robbed.

Unfortunately, communism in America has started. We’ve been steered in that direction since Wilson and FDR.

COP27 – 400 Private Jets To A Climate Conference. Anyone Else Smell Something Rotten Here? Dripping With Hypocrisy And Begging For Money

First of all, green energy isn’t really green.

“Green” policies are destroying the natural environment and changing local weather.  This is part of a futile U.N. scheme claiming to improve the climate of the world.

All green energy degrades its environment.

Take wind power.  Wind turbines steal energy from the atmosphere and must affect local weather.  Turbines are always placed on the highest ground and along ridges to catch more wind.  Natural hills already affect local weather by causing more rain along the ridge and a rain shadow farther downwind.  Wind turbines enhance this rain shadow effect by robbing the wind of its ability to take moisture and rain into the drier interior.  Promoting more inland desertification is not green.

Wind turbines and solar panels soon wear out and have to be replaced.  Some have already reached their use-by date.  Most of this “green” debris cannot be recycled.  To calmly bury that complex toxic waste of plastics, metals, steel, and concrete is not green at all.  Soon chemicals will be leaking into the groundwater and water supply dams.

Manufacture, erection, and final disposal of green energy generators uses more energy than they can produce over their short lives.  Their whole-of-life net energy production is negative, and their net emissions are also negative.

Greens also worship biomass energy like wood.  This is the fuel that cavemen used for warmth, cooking meat, and repelling wild animals.  Primitive people like the British still burn wood for power generation, but too much of the energy is consumed in collecting, drying, chipping, and transporting this low-energy fuel from distant forests to power station boilers.  

NEXT, IF THEY WEREN’T SO HYPOCRITICAL ABOUT IT

The BBC Defends Special People Flying Private Jets to COP27

Essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Peta of Newark; In 2020, the BBC asked “should we give up flying for the sake of the climate?”. That same BBC defends the right of the climate elite to continue using private jets.

How many private jets were at COP27?

By Reality Check team

BBC News

There has been criticism on social media of delegates arriving at the COP27 United Nations Climate Change Conference, in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt.

The day before the conference began, hundreds of environmental activists stopped private jets leaving Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport, by sitting in front of their wheels and riding around the airfield on bicycles.

What is the carbon footprint of private jet travel?

Emissions per kilometre travelled are significantly worse than any other form of transport.

  • Climate models can’t be validated on initiatialisation due to lack of data and a chaotic initial state.
  • Model resolutions are too low to represent many climate factors.
  • Many of the forcing factors are parameterised as they can’t be calculated by the models.
  • Uncertainties in the parameterisation process mean that there is no unique solution to the history matching.
  • Numerical dispersion beyond the history matching phase results in a large divergence in the models.
  • The IPCC refuses to discard models that don’t match the observed data in the prediction phase – which is almost all of them.

The question now is, do you have the confidence to invest trillions of dollars and reduce standards of living for billions of people, to stop climate model predicted global warming or should we just adapt to the natural changes as we always have?

More here

IT FIGURES AL GORE WOULD BE BEGGING FOR MONEY WITH ANOTHER SCAM

The 27th Conference of the Parties (COP27) of elite globalists is now gathering in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, to decide how to best use ginned-up climate crisis narratives to extract wealth and power from the United States are redistribute it . . . mainly among themselves.

Former Vice President Al Gore is at the event, touting his newest pet project and trying to regain relevancy. He joined with Google’s nonprofit arm to back the nanny-state Climate TRACE project. The goal is use a satellite database to track “individual emitters” of life-essential carbon dioxide and other gases.

Source

One of Al Gore’s houses

I like this one:

Finally, I defy the satellites to gather data on China and then enact any meaningful consequence to the Chinese government when it ignores the senseless emission goals.

The U.S. is suddenly open to making rich nations pay reparations to countries suffering the ravages of climate change — but only if China ponies up, too.

The about-face comes after years of Washington serving as the bulwark of wealthy countries’ resistance to making such payments, and would set up China as the new climate bogeyman. It would also challenge Beijing’s assertion that China should still be seen as a developing nation.

Paying developing nations that suffer from climate-driven disasters and rising temperatures is one of the most contentious issues in global climate negotiations, which resume this weekend at a major conference in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt.

China and India are way worse than any other country. This is about penalizing the West. I suppose that is the non-communist part of the world. An obvious target.

WHERE GREEN GOES TO DIE

People like the idea of solar farms in the abstract, but hundreds of communities around the world are currently fighting them because they require 300-600x more land than other energy sources, produce 300x more toxic waste, and devastate critical wildlife habitats.

Many rich nations dump used solar panels and batteries on poor African nations

Other rich nations send used solar panels to “landfills where in some cases, they could potentially contaminate groundwater with toxic heavy metals such as lead, selenium and cadmium.”

California went big on rooftop solar. Now that’s a problem for landfills California, a national leader in the solar market, has no plan for safely recycling more than 1 million photovoltaic panels that will soon need to be discarded. https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2022-07-14/california-rooftop-solar-pv-panels-recycling-danger

By 2035 there will be 3x more used solar panels than new ones, which will make them 4x more expensive.
“The economics of solar,” wrote Harvard Business Review researchers, “would darken quickly as the industry sinks under the weight of its own trash.”