The Global Warming Religion Revisited

May 2017
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30	31

OUR LINKS

YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

The Global Warming Religion Revisited

14 May 2017

George Rebane

We are told the Internet is forever. So this is another missive I want to put in that time capsule to inform both my progeny and future cyber-archaeologists that George Rebane lived in the Post-Intellectual Age of Ignorance and was not party to, but merely an observer of, the hysterics camouflaged as science that then swept the globe. This posting is merely a matter for the record, an effort to drive another stake in the ground of reason. My previous writings on ‘climate change’, ‘global warming’, and most importantly on the preventable manmade component of global warming are a matter of record in these pages (e.g. here, here; also Download Climate Change Format_22jan08 and Download Climate Change Revisited).

A friend and RR reader recently sent me some links to videos of renowned physicists Freeman Dyson (Princeton’s Institute of Advanced Study) and Nobel laureate Ivar Giaever discussing global warming. Their calm words debunking the “pseudo-scientific” support of preventable manmade global warming (PMGW) are clear, concise, and comprehensive to an intelligent inquiring mind.

Both acknowledge that the belief in PMGW has assumed a mantle usually worn by religions, and therefore is now the compelling 21^st century religion that is every bit as vindictive to and intolerant of countervailing thought as are the orthodoxies of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Science advances on the twin principles of falsifiability and Occam’s razor (q.v.); rejecting both of these, PMGW sits sclerotic behind a moat of politically mandated ignorance.

Today the mob hysteria has gotten so bad that PMGW adherents will believe nothing beyond the politically inspired psalmists in the Climate Consensus Choir celebrating a new age that began when the PMGW debate was pronounced to finally be over. From that day onward, according to the acolytes, only the philistines and greedy purveyors of profit remain unrepentant in refusing to sacrifice their all for Gaia. As a scientist, I proudly wear that philistinian badge while absorbing the obligatory slings and arrows from my frenetically faithful brethren.

So here are the above referenced videos. Pour yourself a tall one, put your feet up, and pay attention to these renowned representatives of sanity, reason, and science – Professors Giaever (here) and Dyson (here). And for those for whom the debate is over and/or those whose comfort in such matters derives from consensus, please readjust and tighten your blinders before exiting.

Posted in Critical Thinking & Numeracy, Our Country, Our World, Science Snippets, The Liberal Mind, We the iSheeple

38 responses to “The Global Warming Religion Revisited”

Russ

14 May 2017

I had not viewed Professor Giaever’s video before but his words were familiar. He is quoted liberally in Mark Steyn’s book “A Disgrace to the Profession” The World’s Scientist ~in their on words ~ On Michael E. Mann, His Hockey Stick, and Their Damage to Science. I highly recommend Mark Steyn’s compilation of quotes by leading scientists on Mann and his hockey stick science and it’s symbolism for the religion of climate change.

LikeLike
Gregory

14 May 2017

I wasn’t the one who sent GR the links but I had seen them both. It’s a shame the folk who would learn something from Giaever and Dyson probably won’t bother watching.
Dyson mentions Shaviv somewhere in the middle of his interview; let be take the opportunity that it was Shaviv’s research that was instrumental in turning me from my lukewarmista expectations when I first noticed a reference to it in Svensmark’s Cosmoclimatology paper in 2007.
When Svensmark first published his paper linking clouds to cosmic rays he was denounced as “incredibly naive and irresponsible” by the chair of the IPCC, and in that IntelligenceSquared debate of the question “global warming is not a crisis” in 2007 the mathematician/modeler Gavin Schmidt, now in charge of the NASA-GISS climate office responded to a reference to Shaviv by Dr. Stott by declaring Shaviv’s research as bogus and that Shaviv, Stott and Schmidt all know it was bogus.
Well, it’s a decade later now, it does appear Shaviv and Dyson met while Shaviv spent a sabbatical year at the IPS and Schmidt is reduced to demanding the GOP administration not cut his budget at the Goddard Institute whose work product has been shown to greatly overstate warming.

LikeLike
Gregory

14 May 2017

Over at the Crabb’s, I got “Purged. I’m fed up with this endless bickering. If you want to carry on Mr. G, I suggest you try the Dragon’s Breath.” -RL Crabb
Earl, that isn’t a blog I generally visit or comment on.
As that exchange was apropos this thread, Crabb’s is well on its way to being a shell of its former self much like Pelline’s playpen and yes, he was giving deference to Frisch on his climate change views. It’s been a two against one there for quite some time with Frisch and Earl’s uberprogressive BFF Chris given free reign. Frisch is apparently now exploring what free speech might look like in the future.

LikeLike
Walt

14 May 2017

You got it Gregory. The LIB’s idea of the 1ST Amendment. ” You can say ANYTHING you like. Just as long as “we” agree with it.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

14 May 2017

So you got booted eh? Funny how we get to see Crabb’s crap in the Union twice a week and have to endure his infantile drawings. Yet he cannot hack a back and forth with a conservative or even a non-aligned. So any protests from Crabb over free speech will be falling on deaf ears as he is truly a total hypocrite and possibly a fascist!

LikeLike
Russ

14 May 2017

Global Warming vs Global Greening
Professor Matt Ridley explains some basics about just why we should not be in fear of “man-made” climate change. He gave his Global Warming vs Global Greening speech at the Royal Society of the United Kingdom on the 17th of October, 2016. The YouTube link is here: https://youtu.be/YCcLggcPcj0
It is well worth the time to watch, as it supports the videos presented in this post.

LikeLike
George Rebane

14 May 2017

Gregory 1159am – Your comment made me visit Bob Crabb’s post on communism (to which I linked from my own), and I read what Frisch again misattributes as to what I believe. Can’t figure out whether he is trying to be cynical on purpose, or he just doesn’t understand. Oh well.

LikeLike
Scott Obermuller

14 May 2017

Carl Zimmer has an item from the NYTs that showed up in the hinterlands of the Idaho Statesman.
Apparently some ‘scientists’ (AKA AGM Pimps) are trying to simulate the horrible damage that is coming to a climate near you. In this really cool scientific experiment, they are setting up a simulation based on a model of a theory of what might happen when everything goes to hell.
Guess what? The ‘spearamint goes exactakly like they set it to do. Houda thunk?
Money quote – “In nature, you have all this complexity, and you never know which factor is really causing the outcome you’re observing”.
Well, our intrepid heroes tried to achieve a happy medium. The article’s words – not mine.
I’m sure these fine fellows in Australia did their very best at recreating something far more complex than their brains can figure out, but really – is this the best you blokes can do?
And their results confirmed their worst fears – we’re all going to die.
Sigh – I remember when science meant something.

LikeLike
Russ

15 May 2017

$697,177 for a ‘Climate-Change Musical’: You Call That Science?
The [National Science Foundation], whose mission is to ensure U.S. leadership in areas of science and technology that are essential to economic growth and national security, frequently funds politically correct but low-value research projects. A few doozies include the veiling-fashion industry in Turkey, Viking textiles in Iceland, the “social impacts” of tourism in the northern tip of Norway, and whether hunger causes couples to fight (using the number of pins stuck in voodoo dolls as a measure of aggressive feelings). Research funding in the geosciences, including climate change, is certainly legitimate, but not when it goes to ludicrous boondoggles such as a climate-change musical that cost $697,177 to produce.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/697-177-for-a-climate-change-musical-you-call-that-science-1494625499
Your Tax Dollars creating more AGW propaganda!!! We need some swamp draining a the NSF.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

15 May 2017

http://dilbert.com/strip/2017-05-14

LikeLike
Paul Emery

15 May 2017

Anyone of you want to talk to NID about your view of climate change and how it may effect the need for a new Reservoir since most of you believe it is a fraud and a front for world government and communist takeover. It could save a billion dollars, the possible cost of a new dam.

LikeLike
George Rebane

15 May 2017

PaulE 101pm – you may have misunderstood the gist of the sentiments held by most commenters here re climate change and its impact on increasing CA’s available water supply. Not sure that anyone beyond stack/pack liberals want to prevent the dam from being built. I would like to encourage NID to proceed with all due haste in getting the dam built.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

15 May 2017

George
A majpr pitch for the necessity of the Dam is diminished snow pack due to climate change. Do you disagree with NID on that assumption?

LikeLike
Gregory

15 May 2017

Paul, I expect any NID insider tasked with increasing their future revenues would enthusiastically parrot any official State projection of future snowpacks they could use to sell the damn Dam project. Do you think that is not the case?

LikeLike
George Rebane

15 May 2017

PaulE 127pm – Agreeing with Gregory’s 139pm, I would add that diminished snow packs have been an historical occurrence in the Sierra over the millennia, and therefore don’t need evocation of ‘global warming’ to argue their return, therefore recommending the need for additional water storage infrastructure. For building the dam, global warming is a political Lucky Strike extra for those so persuaded.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

15 May 2017

higher CO2 could facilitate the extra growth for the redwoods and doug firs of the forest. That could lead to more ctitters and help the forests flourish. And the rainfall trickles down into the grantinitic rocks here and recharges the wells. Lots of pluses for the area and the Sierra. I am amazed that over 20 feet of snow has fallen at the tail end of the current drought and the scare mongers don’t mention it. I guess that is why no one believes the press and the AGW peddlers

LikeLike
Paul Emery

15 May 2017

So then it’s a case of the ends justify the means. What you’re saying is it’s ok if NID peddles global warming to make their case even if you don’t agree with it. This now becomes an ethical issue.

LikeLike
Gregory

15 May 2017

“[M]ost of you believe [catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming] is a fraud and a front for world government and communist takeover”.
Paul, did you determine that by your spidey “green libertarian” senses or by a sober and objective collection of survey data?
My own opinion is that there is more evidence for limited AGW being real than there is for “green libertarianism” to be anything other than a fig leaf for greens wishing for more acceptance from centrists. How do you square that with your not so gentle rhetoric to push registered GOP to move away from your county?
BTW did everyone read the scathing piece in Sunday’s SacBee about the building of the Oroville Dam by the Jerry Brown’s dad? Damn the flaws of design, materials and BS, just get it done by any means necessary… sounds to me not unlike the current governor, his embrace of the 350.org view of AGW and his bullet train push.
‘Lethal Arrogance’
http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article150278687.html

LikeLike
George Rebane

15 May 2017

PaulE 237pm – In reference to your logic again, there might just be a teeny-weeny bit of difference between 1) identifying that NID is peddling global warming, and 2) agreeing that they should do that to build the dam. In the above I’ve seen #1 but have yet to find #2. Note that Todd’s 159pm did not contribute to this ‘dam thread’, but was just an observation about flora responding to increased CO2. How you cobble such statements together continues to amaze.

LikeLike
Gregory

15 May 2017

“What you’re saying is it’s ok if NID peddles global warming to make their case even if you don’t agree with it”
Paul, what I was saying was, in essence, your 101 and 127 were transparent challenges based on a lie that you may or may not have fully understood. Do you deny human nature?
The NID is acting on what they see is in their best interests. That also was true for “Pat” Brown when he pushed the Oroville Dam, which by the way is currently quite spectacular from the air, and local pilots have made a number of flights that jogged over it to get a good look. Even at night as they’ve rigged decent lighting of the damaged spillway, I’m guessing to be able to see if any particularly big chunks start moving at o’dark thirty.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

15 May 2017

Gregory @ 2:43 pm.
Yep, read it this morning. In addition to that, right now they are taking river rock and breaking them so the cemet will adhere to the jagged surface of the fractured rock. Hold your horses! Fractured rock being added to the cement to make the repairs?? On the nation’s tallest dam????
In addition to the above, that green spot half way up above the powerhouse has been looked at by a few independent experts. They say that the wet spot is not wrap around water, but is coming through the concrete liner in the earthen dam from the reservoir side. We got ourselves a leak they have known about, but it’s getting larger. Oppps.
Whoa Nelly,the dam is busting! Mum’s the word on the cost to fix a bad design. That is one guarded secret.
I don’t see what all the fuss is about. We don’t need no stinking dam repairs or any stinkin’ new dams. Gov. Brown and his money grubbing eco-fascists have repeatedly assured (told) us that with the onset of global warming (like, now), there will not be any snowpack in the mountains for the reservoirs to collect any water. No water means no need for dams, right? See how simple that was.
Oh, I think I will let others wrestle with the moral dilemma created by ethical issues. We all got issues.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

15 May 2017

Oh a personal note, of all the comments posted by Gregory concerning science, math, and education, the very best comment that stuck with me and rings true as the day is long was his link to Monty Python’s Agrument Clinic sketch. Different topic, same point. Thankyou

LikeLike
Russ

15 May 2017

PaulE 237pm
My views on the Centennial Dam are on my Sierra Foothill Commentary blog: https://sierrafoothillcommentary.com/2017/03/16/california-drought-report-85-centennial-reservoir-project-eis/
At my blog post, you will find some graphics which shows wet and drought periods in the region watersheds. Many of the drought years are proceeded by wet years or in some case the longer term drought periods were interrupted by several wet years. Look at the period 1125 to 1175 in the Sacramento watershed. In this 50 year segment, California and Southwestern US had a persistent drought. A time when the cliff dwellers of Arizona and New Mexico abandoned their cliff dwellings and went in search of water. Look again for 1920 to 1960 another period of long-term drought interrupted by some wet years. These long-term drought years will return again, and it is imperative that CA has the collection and storage infrastructure in place during the wet years. The Centennial Dam is an essential part of the required infrastructure.
Droughts are not determined by California temperatures, they are set by the water temperature in the Central Pacific. A warm Central Pacific, more evaporation more rain and snow, cooler Central Pacific less evaporation, more drought. As you can see from the charts, the Central Pacific water temperatures vary widely over extended periods, producing unreliable weather patterns in California. 5000 years ago, Calfornia had a 200-year drought, with some rain and limited snow some years, but Lake Tahoe level dropped 45 feet in those 200 years.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

15 May 2017

Geoege
We do continue to amaze each other. I’m still spinning that you gave the thumbs up to Trump allowing Russian media access to the white house and at the same time banning the US press. That opinion from a Conservative such as you is beyond my imagination,

LikeLike
George Rebane

15 May 2017

PaulE 514pm – Am clearly guilty of being beyond your imagination with my explanation of Trump’s rationale. But my 306pm outlines a simpler logical flaw.

LikeLike
ScenesFromTheApocalypse

15 May 2017

re PEmery@5:14PM
“I’m still spinning that you gave the thumbs up to Trump allowing Russian media access to the white house and at the same time banning the US press.”
lol. Heck, who was to know that the Kremlin was more closely aligned to the survival of Western Civilization than the Green Libertarians? We live in interesting times.

LikeLike
jon smith

15 May 2017

So Russ, what is your point?
Centennial dam will create a low elevation, hot, shallow, high evaporative reservoir, when raising the dams at Spaulding and Bowman, will create additional cold water storage with minimal environmental destruction and decreased evaporative loss.
Please explain your preference for the lesser of effective reservoirs. It is a land grab simple and final from the start to the finish. It has nothing to do with increased water, but everything to do with NID walking away with a bigger kingdom.

LikeLike
fish

16 May 2017

Posted by: Paul Emery | 15 May 2017 at 05:14 PM

BLOODSPORT: WASH POST NEWSROOM CHEERS AFTER LATEST TRUMP HIT…..

……yeah……can’t imagine why Trump would exclude the domestic press. It’s……um……inexplicable!
https://twitter.com/GlennKesslerWP/status/864231063295582209

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

16 May 2017

The media AND global warming in one article. Got the bases covered
http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/new-scientific-study-demolishes-liberal-climate-change-arguments?utm_source=FBLC&utm_medium=FB&utm_campaign=LC
In other news related to a wildly off thread comment posted here yesterday, 94% of the people do not trust MSM. That means only 6% do. Good to be in the vast majority looking at that old time MSM religion with a skeptical eye. Baby, it going to get cold outside.

LikeLike
Russ

16 May 2017

jon smith @ 11:40 PM
My point is CA has had drought periods lasting 25-50 years in the past, with the CA population of toilet flushers increasing we may need all of Mother Natures water we can save. I would support the raising of existing dams and be building more dams, including those proposed by NID.

LikeLike
Robert Cross

16 May 2017

“Their calm words debunking the “pseudo-scientific” support of preventable manmade global warming (PMGW) are clear, concise, and comprehensive to an intelligent inquiring mind.”
Regarding Dyson, I believe you are misrepresenting his position. He is not “debunking” PMGW.
From Wiki:
“Dyson agrees that anthropogenic global warming exists, and has written that “[one] of the main causes of warming is the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere resulting from our burning of fossil fuels such as oil and coal and natural gas.”[61] However, he believes that existing simulation models of climate fail to account for some important factors, and hence the results will contain too much error to reliably predict future trends”

LikeLike
George Rebane

16 May 2017

RobertC 1211pm – none of the technically astute skeptics have stated that AGW does not exist, nor have they failed to acknowledge that CO2, as albeit a minor atmospheric GHG, has not contributed to that warming. It is the only the insane certitude of the true believers as to the amount of contribution, their predictions of future temperatures along with effects on earth’s fauna and flora, and their proposed nostroms to stop/reverse warming that the cited skeptics (and I) wish to debunk. Those assessments and remedies are not based on science. Thanks for the opportunity to again clarify.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

16 May 2017

The fundamental cause of climate change revealed.
https://patriotpost.us/posts/49108

LikeLike
Eric Anderson

16 May 2017

Treason – you guys paying attention? Resignation coming, arrests. You own it. Good times.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

16 May 2017

Gee, right on time is a voice from the bubble. We own AGW? Learn something new everyday.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

16 May 2017

Eric Anderson | 16 May 2017 at 05:45 PM
Yes I agree. Chuck Schumer is the target. And Hillary Clinton. Good call Eric.

LikeLike
Don Bessee

16 May 2017

Sounds like one of po’ ol’ PE’s ‘other devises’ @ 545. 😉

LikeLike
ndemi

29 June 2017

This global warming thing has to be stopped once and for all.

LikeLike