IPCC AR5 Renews Demands For Governments Buy Their Climate Change Pig In A Poke

Guest essay by Dr. Tim Ball

Buying “a pig in a poke” refers to buying an unseen piglet in a sack. The piglet was actually a cat, so when you opened the sack after purchase “the cat was out of the bag.”

Governments bought the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) ‘pig’ ‘that human CO2 was causing global warming wrapped in the ‘poke’ of their Reports. IPCC assured buyers it was a pig with 90+ percent certainty.

They fooled governments and media four times now they offer a new poke in Assessment Report 5 (AR5), but with 95 percent certainty it’s a pig. This is despite the fact that the cat is already out of the bag. Their predictions have failed. For 17 years global temperatures have declined while CO2 levels continue to increase. Arctic summer ice, supposedly all gone by 2013 has recovered by 60 percent in one year. Severe weather has not increased. Damage done by policies already implemented, such as green jobs and alternate energies, is already evident. Newspaper coverage declined dramatically as people sense problems even if they don’t understand (Figure 1). Decline followed the peak created by Gore’s false fantasy An Inconvenient Truth.


Figure 1

Instead of acknowledging error, the IPCC [tries] to defend the indefensible. This alone warrants disbanding of the agency. 

They’re in a corner of their own design. They manufactured the poke through an organization, process, and computer models designed to prove their claim. Now we know it contains a cat. More frightening for them, people, including governments, are asking questions. A report by German scientists showing 65 climate models failed to predict the current no temperature increase period caused EU and US governments to ask questions.

“U.S. and European Union envoys are seeking more clarity from the United Nations on a slowdown in global warming that climate skeptics have cited as a reason not to “panic” about environmental changes, leaked documents show.”

To admit this the IPCC would expose their fraud. This includes ignoring the scientific method, changing terminology by switching from global warming to climate change and flooding the media with misleading stories about connections between natural events and their claims. AR5 indicates the has IPCC decided not to admit their deceit. Consider the problem for governments and people as a investment decision.

Would you invest time, money, and political capital in responding to a demand for total global action based on 23 years of failed predictions?

Would you take action when the few countries and regions who pursued the proposed remedial action of green jobs and alternate energy already prove it doesn’t work.

Would you even listen if you learned that:

• Their research of global warming/climate change was deliberately narrowed by definition to only studying human causes.

• You cannot determine human causes if you don’t know or understand natural causes.

• The demand for political action was based on an untested hypothesis.

• The standard scientific methods and tests of the hypothesis were ignored.

• Computer models were created to produce the predetermined outcome.

• All predictions made for 23 years were wrong.

• After five years they abandoned calling them predictions and opted for the term projections.

• Projections were created with low, medium and high potential scenarios.

• Even the low projections were greater than what actually occurred.

• Their claims of increased severe weather events proved wrong.

• Their claims of sea level rise were incorrect.

• The actual record since 1998 shows temperatures leveling and declining while CO2 increased.

• Instead of admitting their hypothesis was wrong and amending or rejecting it, as science requires, they changed the hypothesis from global warming to climate change.

• Instead of admitting their claim of 90+ percent certainty that human CO2 was the cause was wrong, they raised the claim to 95 percent certainty.

Would you invest in a plan promoted using a Report deliberately created to exaggerate and distort actual results. Their Science Report acknowledges all the severe limitations of their knowledge about climate and climate change. It itemizes the severe limitations of their climate models. However, they know most won’t read or understand what it says. Just in case they do they deliberately release a doctored report called the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) months before they release the Science Report.

As David Wojick, UN IPCC expert reviewer, explained

…What is systematically omitted from the SPM are precisely the uncertainties and positive counter evidence that might negate the human interference theory. Instead of assessing these objections, the Summary confidently asserts just those findings that support its case. In short, this is advocacy, not assessment.

The IPCC already sold four pigs in pokes in 1990, 1995, 2001 and 2007 Reports. Distortions, deceptions and deliberately falsified data was used. The most infamous was the “hockey stick”, which literally rewrote climate history, in the 2001 Report. Corruption was exposed in leaked emails of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU), whose members dominated the IPCC.

AR5 SPM is scheduled for approval in Stockholm at the end of September for release shortly thereafter. If you’re tempted to buy consider German physicist and meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Plus comments about the IPCC pig in a poke.

“Ten years ago I simply parroted what the IPCC told us. One day I started checking the facts and data – first I started with a sense of doubt but then I became outraged when I discovered that much of what the IPCC and the media were telling us was sheer nonsense and was not even supported by any scientific facts and measurements. To this day I still feel shame that as a scientist I made presentations of their science without first checking it.”

It is time for global outrage and accountability.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Hilary Ostrov (aka hro001)
September 13, 2013 11:50 am

They certainly seem to have backed themselves into a credibility chasm!
For those who might be interested, my view of the writing on the IPCC/UNFCCC desperation wall:
Hiding the decline (of the IPCC/UNFCCC)?

September 13, 2013 11:51 am

Excellent work Mr. Ball, many thanks.

September 13, 2013 11:52 am

I always enjoy a well written article backed by facts and applied basic logic. Thank you mister Ball. But remember the IPCC is a United Nations organization and it is accountable to no one.

Robert W Turner
September 13, 2013 12:06 pm

Several key warmists should be held accountable if it turns out they were totally wrong. This should be especially true in places where a carbon tax was enacted.

Bill Kruse
September 13, 2013 12:14 pm

I love the “pig in a poke” line, but it would be more accurate to say that the IPCC is putting lipstick on a pig. The lipstick will very quickly wear off. Due to the Internet and efforts of WUWT and others, plus the relentless flow of climate info, the general public, like Herr Plus, IS rapidly becoming aware of just how fraudulent the IPCC process is. I think you’re gonna be surprised at how much of a dud the new SPM will be.
By the way, there’s too much focus on “the pause” in global warming and not enough on the failure of the glblwrmsts’ predictions. Going back to J. Hansen in 1988, they said global avg. temps would be ACCELERATING upward. It’s the absence of this acceleration that marks the core failure of their forecasting, not “the pause,” although, of course, they’re related. Hey, it’s been 25 years, guys; the jig is up.

September 13, 2013 12:21 pm

Maybe I am way out in left field, but what if the Russians dig their heels in at Copenhagen on Sep 23rd? The last COP meeting in Dakar (?) ended in discord, when the Russians objected, strongly, to the killing of Kyoto. They stand to lose a lot of lovely virtual money they could claim as carbon credits when they destroyed the old coal fired generating plants built in the Communist era. They refused to agree even the agenda at the latest UNFCCC meeting in Bonn.
What if the Russians claim linkage, and refuse to cooperate with the IPCC in Copenhagen?

September 13, 2013 12:32 pm

• After five years they abandoned calling them predictions and opted for the term projections.

Yet they just can’t help hinting ever so slightly that they do.

…….Forecast/Prediction. When a projection is branded “most likely,” it becomes a forecast or prediction. A forecast is often obtained by using deterministic models—possibly a set of such models—outputs of which can enable some level of confidence to be attached to projections.
Scenario. A scenario is a coherent, internally consistent, and plausible description of a possible future state of the world (IPCC, 1994)…………..

September 13, 2013 12:32 pm

Tell me where to sign up!

September 13, 2013 12:33 pm

More like a “ManBearPig” in a poke! I agree, the jig is up.

September 13, 2013 12:40 pm

Excellent summary, Dr. Ball. I’m afraid that so many politicians, media, NGO’s and other rent seekers are so heavily invested in the narrative that the narrative will continue. For instance, does the USEPA retreat on its GHG rules because we know the process is a fraud? Not very likely.

Mike Smith
September 13, 2013 12:41 pm

Bring it [AR5] on.
A detailed dissection of the claims complete with scientifically sound rebuttals is the best way to correct the injustice already created by the IPCC.

Robert S
September 13, 2013 12:51 pm

IPCC still win the arguments despite their bogus reports. A professor of paeleantology in Bristol University explains mass extinctions following the Siberian traps by rising CO2 causing climate change or global warming. The belief is that if CO2 rises indefinitely temperatures will also rise indefinitely.
Last week it was glibly stated that climate change or global warming was responsible for the extinction of woolly mammoths. In the UK and Europe, climate change/global warming is routinely cited for most unexplained phenomena in the natural world – there is no longer any debate about it the in media; the false science pedalled by IPCC has been fully accepted. All that remains now is to decide how much money, what proportion of GDP should be spent on emissions reduction to combat climate change/anthopromorphic global warming.

September 13, 2013 12:54 pm

Governments don’t buy what the IPCC is selling. The IPCC reports what politicians order it to in order to advance the their political agendas and everybody involved gets rich at our expense.

September 13, 2013 12:54 pm

The disconnect between models and reality has been acknowledged by the establishment science community which is now busy suggesting various epicycle like theories as to where the “missing” heat went.Some say its in the oceans (Trenberth) some say its due to Chinese aerosols (Hansen) but the all main actors still persist in the view that it will appear Lazarus like at some unspecified future time.This is like the Jehovah’s witnesses recalculating the end of the world each time a specified doomsday passes.
In Britain , the gulf between the Met Office expectations for the last several years and the actual string of cold and snowy winters and wet summers which has occurred has made the Met Office a laughing stock-to the point of recently holding a meeting of 25 “experts” to try to figure out where they went wrong.The answer is simple.Their climate models are incorrectly structured because they are based on three irrational and false assumptions. First that CO2 is the main climate driver ,second that in calculating climate sensitivity the GHE due to water vapour should be added to that of CO2 as a feed back effect and third that the GHE of water vapour is always positive.As to the last point the feedbacks cannot be positive otherwise we wouldn’t be here to talk about it .
Temperature drives both CO2 and water vapour independently,. The whole CAGW – GHG scare is based on the obvious fallacy of putting the effect before the cause.As a simple (not exact) analogy controlling CO2 levels to control temperature is like trying to lower the temperature of an electric hot plate under a boiling pan of water by capturing and sequestering the steam coming off the top.A corollory to this idea is that the whole idea of a simple climate sensitivity to CO2 is nonsense and the sensitivity equation has no physical meaning unless you already know what the natural controls on energy inputs are already ie the extent of the natural variability.
Furthermore the modelling approach is inherently of no value for predicting future temperature with any calculable certainty because of the difficulty of specifying the initial conditions of a large number of variables with sufficient precision prior to multiple iterations. There is no way of knowing whether the outputs after the parameterisation of the multiple inputs merely hide compensating errors in the system as a whole. The IPCC AR4 WG1 science section actually acknowledges this fact. Section IPCC AR4 WG1 8.6 deals with forcings, feedbacks and climate sensitivity. The conclusions are in section 8.6.4 which deals with the reliability of the projections.It concludes:
“Moreover it is not yet clear which tests are critical for constraining the future projections,consequently a set of model metrics that might be used to narrow the range of plausible climate change feedbacks and climate sensitivity has yet to be developed”
What could be clearer. The IPCC in 2007 said itself that we don’t even know what metrics to put into the models to test their reliability.- ie we don’t know what future temperatures will be and we can’t calculate the climate sensitivity to CO2.This also begs a further question of what mere assumptions went into the “plausible” models to be tested anyway.
In summary the projections of the IPCC – Met office models and all the impact studies which derive from them are based on specifically structurally flawed and inherently useless models.They deserve no place in any serious discussion of future climate trends and represent an enormous waste of time and money.As a basis for public policy their forecasts are grossly in error and therefore worse than useless
For further discussion and a forecast of the coming cooling see

September 13, 2013 1:15 pm

The arguments are getting very weak boys, weak as piss on a hot rock. I have spent some time in the Alarmosphere just recently and I have to say hey exhibit exhaustion and an aimlessness. The pig-in-a-poke that is AR5 doesn’t look to be able to offer them much real hope.

September 13, 2013 1:20 pm

When the IR5 poke is opened and the cat leaps out, the cat will be covered in lip stick. Immediately the IPCC will proclaim that the cat is in fact a silk purse.

John K. Sutherland
September 13, 2013 1:23 pm

I got a laugh when someone said that you cannot polish a turd, but you can throw glitter on it. The IPCC is busy throwing glitter about.
We hear so much about a 97% consensus that is entirely bogus, but how about us pointing out that the IPCC is 97% wrong 100% of the time, to counter it. That seems to be a figure that we should be harping upon all of the time, and it is much more accurate than theirs. They might balance out to a ZERO problem.

September 13, 2013 1:35 pm

John K. Sutherland,
The Mythbusters proved that it is in fact possible to polish a turd.

September 13, 2013 1:43 pm

“It is time for global outrage and accountability.”

September 13, 2013 1:49 pm

It is part of the psychological dynamics of a doomsday cult that as the predictions are invalidated the people on the edges fall away, but the core of the group experiences strengthened conviction, and redoubles the effort to recruit new followers. Many people experience the theory of impending man-made climate catastrophe, the beliefs that surround that prediction, and the rituals prescribed for its mitigation, with a cult-like response, because it fills a psychological need. This is especially true for people who are in the first or second generation of their family to reject traditional religious practices and dogma. The doomsday cult of climatism rushes in to fill the psychological vacuum left behind, to provide meaning, certainty, and a feeling of belonging.
Not everyone has a cult response to the theory of anthropogenic climate change. There are honest scientific seekers of truth who are willing to follow the data, (or the models), wherever they lead. When the data goes against man-made climate catastrophe, they will follow it. Those left behind will find an interpretation of events that makes them even more right, and more certain that their prescription to avoid catastrophe must be implemented.

September 13, 2013 1:54 pm

“The louder the rhetoric became, the clearer it was that their credibility was approaching zero”
Anonymous comment on Baghdad Bobs peer -reviewed propaganda about ultimate victory when the USMC at the airport were evident by peering over his shoulder and viewing them.
It’s behind you Pachauri; the game is up!

September 13, 2013 1:54 pm

MattS says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:35 pm
somehow – I imagine the folks at IPCC doing just that! No wonder [their] work always smells of ……

September 13, 2013 1:55 pm

their ! (sorry)

DD More
September 13, 2013 2:46 pm

What’s the chance that the Climategate III emails get cleaned up and on-line for everyones inspection / review at about the same time as AR5? The C-gate I & II kind of proved they knew it was a ‘cat in the bag’.

September 13, 2013 3:05 pm

Be under no illusions here. This is an intergovernmental body. The governments, particularly the EU and American, saw a chance to introduce a whole new class of taxation, be “lobbied” by a completely new set of rent seekers, introduce a largely un-elected world government on the model of the EU, to which they could retire to when their own people dumped them, and bring on a control mechanism that even the most ardent communist could only dream about.
That the EU and USA government are now “questioning” the process is purely because they see the writing on the wall and are covering their own backsides. The IPCC was always and ever just a bunch of very expensive bought and paid for Useful Idiots.

September 13, 2013 3:15 pm

I love the analogy of a pig in a poke, and cat out of the bag – genius

September 13, 2013 3:17 pm

You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
Abraham Lincoln

September 13, 2013 3:36 pm

Rogerio Maestri:
re your post at September 13, 2013 at 3:17 pm.
I think the version of PT Barnum is more appropriate: i.e.
You can fool some of the people all of the time, and that’s enough to make a living.

September 13, 2013 3:37 pm

Refreshing to hear someone tell it like is, no ifs and buts and maybes.
The truth, I think, is that most people don’t give a flying f… about climate or the science, but they are beginning to smell a rat, and they are beginning to understand the astronomical costs and utter uselessness of the unicorn projects started by our idiot politicians.
It won’t be long now before it’s all over.

September 13, 2013 3:47 pm

Saw this on Powerline blog. With two weeks to go until the slow rollout of the next IPCC climate science report begins, there’s a fresh embarrassment for the climateers from right inside their own camp: a Nature Climate Change article entitled:
“Overestimated global warming over the past 20 years.”

September 13, 2013 3:52 pm

The turmoil in the Middle East is due in no small part to high food prices. High food prices are due to high grain prices. High grain prices are due to tight supplies created by the climate policy of using food grains for fuel instead of food.
So in a real sense the disasters taking place in Egypt, Libya, Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East are due to the policy demands of climate extremists.

September 13, 2013 4:18 pm

On a lighter note NSICD site down to weather and flooding. Who would have predicted that?
Or should they have?

September 13, 2013 4:20 pm

I have always been somewhat nonplussed at the IPCC’s three Projections for low, medium and high potential CO2 scenarios.
Meaning the supposed climate outcomes for three adjoining and increasing levels of CO2 as we move into the far future.
Those three projections linked to three bands of increasing CO2 levels cover the full range of supposed outcomes up to about 6 C. increase in global temperatures by late in the 21st century .
The IPCC’s apparent need for three adjoining and increasing CO2 projections to cover it’s arse in every potential future situation completely negates any claims by the IPCC that it can predict or project future CO2 levels and the supposed consequent future climate outcomes.
For the life of me, what earthly use are such sequential CO2 and temperature projections with all possibility’s likely, to a politician and his / her advisers when they are trying to set policy?
What strategy other than throwing a dart at the entire board of the IPCC’s projections can the politicals follow to arrive at what they might perhaps suppose to be the best and correct outcome when every possibility is covered by those three projections?
For the politicians and policy creation the overlapping three projection scenario’s create a situation where they really haven’t a clue as to which projection is the correct or most likely possibility
In that case the whole IPCC exercise is worse than useless. It is extremely dangerous, far more so than if no such body as the IPCC was ever created as it gives both an utterly wrong impression that the future of the global climate can be predicted and a dangerously misplaced sense that something can be done about that future by taking certain actions.
And when the future resolves itself to something completely different in outcome to that accepted by the politicals based on one of the chosen IPCC projections , the actions taken could in the future prove instead of helping, to be very damaging and extremely serious in consequences for a very large number of Earth’s citizens.
Exactly as we are seeing with the increasing unaffordability of the deliberately and artificially created increasing cost of energy.
Energy that keeps people warm, comfortable and fed and energy that drives productivity and creates employment and increases standards of living.
But now we have increasingly unaffordable energy for an increasing number of citizens all due entirely to the corrupted science and policy advocacy of a corrupt and biased CAGW advocacy touting IPCC.
And a global climate where despite all the sacrifice made by so many at the counseling and insistence of the IPCC and it’s adherents has made not one single iota of detectable difference to the patterns and trends of the global climate.
Above all the IPCC has become quite dangerous because it promises much and that “much” has proven to be totally wrong and extremely damaging to people, to nations, to the political systems and the consequent instabilities and deep financial problems created in many nations implementing the IPCC’s reccomendations and the global environment with bio-fuels, wind turbines and etc

September 13, 2013 4:22 pm


Monty Python – Dead Parrot Sketch – 1969
‘E’s not pinin’! ‘E’s passed on! This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! ‘E’s expired and gone to meet ‘is maker! ‘E’s a stiff! Bereft of life, ‘e rests in peace! If you hadn’t nailed ‘im to the perch ‘e’d be pushing up the daisies! ‘Is metabolic processes are now ‘istory! ‘E’s off the twig! ‘E’s kicked the bucket, ‘e’s shuffled off ‘is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin’ choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!!

AR5 has been shafted by the recent deluge of knob reducing climate sensitivity papers. When will this charade be over!

September 13, 2013 4:47 pm

Mark says:
September 13, 2013 at 12:54 pm
Governments don’t buy what the IPCC is selling. The IPCC reports what politicians order it to in order to advance the their political agendas and everybody involved gets rich at our expense.
Wrong! Its not about money but power. Money and power are not the same thing. They have completely different “chemistry”. Your being rich does not negatively impact my being rich (it actually enhances it). You having power on the other hand is a direct threat to my power.

September 13, 2013 5:05 pm

Tropical storm Sandy was not a hurricane at landfall. Sustained wind speeds actually measured at the surface were well below the threshold that qualifies for the term hurricane.
NOAA declarations are based on aircraft estimates, and are usually over-stated.

Bill Illis
September 13, 2013 5:09 pm

The theory of global warming is between 50% to 75% exaggerated/wrong.
It is that simple.
25% to 50% right means it is not a big enough problem that we have to do anything about it.
It is that simple.

Chuck Nolan
September 13, 2013 5:15 pm

Rogerio Maestri says:
September 13, 2013 at 3:17 pm
You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
Abraham Lincoln
“I’ll let you be in my dream if I can be in yours.”
Bob Dylan said that.

September 13, 2013 5:18 pm

Here is my slightly edited (removing Australia) reply that was a response on WUWT about Australia’s now defunct approach about 2 and a half years ago:
GOVT: “We have bought a pig.”
Concerned Taxpayer: “That is a poke. How do you know there is a pig in it?”
GOVT: “We have bought a pig. The pig is within the poke. We have a consensus about the pig, so there is no need to check inside.”
Concerned Taxpayer: “Fifty BILLION dollars of taxpayer monies will be paid for this particular pig – wouldn’t it be fiscally prudent to verify the quality of the pig that is, supposedly, in the poke?
GOVT: “We have bought a pig. The pig is within the poke. Your questions are very troubling – are you questioning the Govt.? You should take our word for it – we are very smart and talented and we have in mind the best interests of the planet and all the creatures on it. And we have a consensus about the pig, so we shall not waste any time checking inside the poke.”
Concerned Taxpayer: Of course, if the poke is opened and there isn’t a pig there or if the pig is of poor quality or undersized, I can understand that would be embarrassing to the Govt. and many wonderful people would then lose their very important Govt. jobs and that would certainly be a sad turn of events, however, I am willing to risk it to save fifty billion dollars of taxpayer’s monies. Open the poke and let us all see that there is a pig in it, please.”
GOVT: “We have bought a pig. The pig controls the weather. We shall control the pig and therefore we shall control the weather by default.”
Concerned Taxpayer: “Would you like to buy a bridge?”

Jeff Alberts
September 13, 2013 5:28 pm

“Now we know it contains a cat.”
Actually it contains a very poor computer model of a cat. One that looks suspiciously like a guy in a cat suit with a little sign that says “Mee-effing-ow!”

Crispin in Waterloo
September 13, 2013 5:43 pm

@Tim Ball
“Instead of admitting their claim of 90+ percent certainty that human CO2 was the cause was wrong, they raised the claim to 95 percent certainty.”
This is incorrect. Please read the AR5 statement carefully (and not people’s claims about the claim). It says that they are 95% certain that humans are responsible for “more than half” of the recent warming (excluding the most recent non-warming of course). This is a major change in ‘message’ that has largely gone unnoticed.
The previous (AR4) claim was that they were 90% certain that humans were responsible for ‘most’ of the recent warming.
90% certainty about most and 95% certain about half are very different claims. They have backed wa-ay off the earlier claim and will, in due course, say that of course point out they didn’t say, “95% confidence in most, read the report!”

September 13, 2013 5:45 pm

This from my blog . . . http://cartoonmick.wordpress.com/about/
This is a fictional tale and any relation to persons living today is purely coincidental.
Prince Tony said climate change was “crap”, and he firmly believed any changes in Earth’s climate were not caused by human activity.
He was not concerned in our survival on Earth, as our immediate future did not appear to be at risk.
But he was interested in his own survival and immediate future at the helm of his powerful realm.
For him to survive, he must keep his “Powerful Big Business” friends happy by allowing them to continue polluting at a minimum cost to themselves.
He devised a fiendish plan, a solution for the happiness of his “Powerful Big Business” friends.
He would pay them to pollute.
Their continued pollution would not affect the earth’s climate, contrary to the opinions of the climate scientists who had not yet been arrested and imprisoned.
As the years went by, Prince Tony found it harder to breathe, but he was not worried, as all around him had similar problems.
The food shortages had not troubled him either, for there was enough left to feed those who had not yet drowned in the rising oceans.
He had authorised his “Powerful Big Business” friends to cut down and burn as many trees as they wished, regardless of the naysayers and increasing sand storms.
His “Powerful Big Business” friends suggested he not alarm himself over the eastern skies which became darker each day, as this was a minimal risk factor and would one day disappear.
Yet the dark clouds grew, the sun was rarely seen and people died from the cold whilst others starved to death.
Undeterred, Prince Tony, in his infinite wisdom, increased the taxes to raise more money to pay for his food and warmth.
But no monies came, there were no people left, no “Powerful Big Business”, for all had perished in the climate change which he believed was not of mankind’s making.
. . . . and as the dark clouds sank slowly in the west, our lonely Prince Tony finally realized that climate change was not “crap”, it was his plan which was “crap”.

September 13, 2013 5:47 pm

“You cannot determine human causes if you don’t know or understand natural causes”
The standard problem with conventional socialism, it’s completely hopeless at understanding nature…

September 13, 2013 5:47 pm

In science, the term observer effect means that the act of observing will influence the phenomenon being observed.
What might the opposite effect be ?

David S
September 13, 2013 6:47 pm

And yet the president plans to press on with schemes to thwart climate change:
“Obama Prepares Campaign to Combat Climate Change
President Obama is expected to appeal to Americans about the perils of rising temperatures and the economic benefits of dealing with climate change”
From Scientific American June 24, 2013
The problem is that we live in a society similar to that depicted in Orwell’s 1984. Reality no longer matters. The truth is whatever government says it is. Anyone who disagrees could be sent to a re-education camp. The only solution to this is to vote out all the crooks who currently run things and replace them with people who are dedicated to the truth and the Constitution. And there aren’t many around like that.

Crispin in Waterloo
September 13, 2013 7:00 pm

A Russian lady, after the fall of communism, said that communism was wonderful, if they could just invent people who didn’t need to eat.

Martin 457
September 13, 2013 7:03 pm

Why do I think of Schrodingers cat?
Put them all in a round room and tell them to piss in a corner.

kadaka (KD Knoebel)
September 13, 2013 8:13 pm

I do not see how that could be true. Cats do not squeal like piglets when poked. Nor would the shape seen on the outside look like a piglet, but could pass for a rabbit. As I’ve mentioned to my mother before, once dressed with the feet, head, and tail lopped off, how could you tell the difference when roasted and served for supper?
Is a more-historical sack needed than common cloth, like tight-woven thick burlap, or perhaps canvas? Did people used to try to sell pigs in duffel bags? Makes more sense than wrapped in a blanket, but not much.

September 13, 2013 8:15 pm

It is time for outrage? I’ve been outraged for years. Perhaps it is time for complete disgust and utter disdain.

September 13, 2013 8:44 pm

cartoonmick says:
September 13, 2013 at 5:45 pm
This corrects your blog . . .
This is a fictional true tale and any all relations to persons living today are deliberately relevant and true.
Dictator Hussein lived across the blue water from St Abbott the fair and noble man, and Dictator Hussein did read from his teleprompter (not being able to speak without it), and said what he was told to read from the prompter and say only what he was told to say, because he was ignorant and knew nothing and could think of nothing original nor knowledgeable. And thus, everything Hussein said “was crap”, and he firmly believed any changes in Earth’s climate were caused by human activity because Hussein was a hate-filled man and hated all that which was good and all that contributed to Man. And Hussein genuflected to the priests in his government-funded ivory towers and gave them more money and promoted their religion because their religion glorified him and promoted his hatred for all that was good for Man.
He was not concerned in our survival on Earth, as his priest and his government was not at risk because Hussein had the control of the press in the rooms and the priests in the ivory towers. Yet Hussein’s people hated Men and said aloud that they wanted all Men to be killed and to leave the face of the earth. To kill Men and to cause harm and to murder children was his desire and was Hussein’s vote and his medicine – And he forced all to kill the children and to kill the old and the poor. And Hussein denied others their charities and their religions, and Hussein denied all others a voice and their freedoms and yet Hussein demanded their money and their time and their loyalty and their children to serve him and his religion.
For Hussein was only interested in his own survival and immediate future at the helm of his powerful realm, for he knew that no one could speak who would criticize him or his beliefs, because he denied all others their religions in public and in private and their doctor’s office.
For him to survive, he must keep his “Powerful Big Business” friends happy by allowing them to continue polluting by paying Hussein’s businesses from the government, at great profit to Hussein’s businesses and at no cost to themselves. Anf thus did the government unions and the government-funded businesses that funded Hussein’s elections were given the government’s money and paid no taxes themselves tot he government, yet while they demanded ever more money from Hussein’s government.
He devised a fiendish plan, a solution for the happiness of his “Powerful Big Business” friends and his unions who funded his elections and his ivory towers who who gave him their writings and his religions its texts and its dogma.
He would pay them to pollute. He would pay them to lie. He would pay them to travel. He would pay them to build and to buy and to write and to read and to teach. But all at a price,: Should they ever not write what Hussein wanted, should they ever say what Hussein wanted to be quiet, should they research what Hussein wanted to confound, should they ever find what Hussein wanted hidden, should they ever think what Hussein wanted filtered and forbidden, they would be cast out and receive no funds and be ostracized and be cursed and be derided and condemned. And Hussein priests in Hussein’s ivory towers did do his binding and condemned those who thought the unthinkable and who wrote the unwriteable and who taught the heresy.
And their continued pollution of Hussein’s priests would pollute the earth’s climate and would destroy the earth sciences, contrary to the opinions of the climate scientists who had not yet been arrested and imprisoned. Yet those not fired and those not ridiculed and those who thinking the unthinkable were condemned and were cursed into silence by Hussein’s priests..
As the years went by, Hussein’s followeres and Hussein’s priests found it harder to breathe and harder to eat, and they no more trips and no more money because they had stopped the people whopaid their taxes and had fired those who tought and and ridiculed those who were right-thinkning and were honest, but Hussein was not worried, as all around him had faced similar problems but were on permanent government security and permanent government salaries to fund whatever Hussein wanted and to live as Hussein wanted to live. Yet the poor died. And the old died. And the starving died. And the thirsty died. And the cold died. And the ones who could pay the electricity died. But Hussein was happy, for Hussein was not starving and Hussein was not poor and Hussein was not thirsty and Hussein was not old. And Hussein’s government paid the electricity and Hussein’s friends played basketball and Hussein entertaied him and Hussein’s friends were rich and were powerful on Hussein’s government contracts and the taxpayer’s money.
The food shortages had not troubled him either, for there was enough CO2 from nature to feed those who had not yet drowned in the 6 inch higher ocean. But none drowned, for none but Hussein’s friends could go to the ocean to play, but none Hussein’s friends could afford the food to feed their family.
And Hussein had paid his “Powerful Big Business” friends to cut down and burn as many trees as they wished to make their palm oil into fuel, and to burn as much corn as they could to make the sugars to make the cars run poorly, regardless of the naysayers and increasing sand storms and increased erosion and starving people who could not eat the burned corn and the palm oil.
His “Powerful Big Business” friends suggested he not alarm himself over the eastern skies which became darker each day, as this was a minimal risk factor and would one day disappear. For Hussein’s friend would always afford their trips and their pleasures. And despite the increasing cold Hussein’s friends burned their corn and burned their palm oil flying to the still warm beaches away from the colder plains and the snow-covered ice fields where the poor lay starving and freezing.
Yet the dark clouds grew, the sun was rarely seen and people died from the cold whilst others starved to death.
Undeterred, Hussein in his racist hatred and his infinite wisdom from the priests and the lairs in the ivory towers, increased the taxes to raise more money to pay for his food and warmth.
But no monies came, there were no people left, no “Powerful Big Business”, for all had perished in the climate change which he was told to say was mankind’s making.
. . . . and as the dark clouds sank slowly in the west, our lonely Hussein was too stupid to realize to finally understand that climate change was not “crap, ”that CO2 was fertilizer and was released for the good of Man, and that true heroes are not told what to say and true heroes are not told what to read from the teleprompter. Yeah, it was Hussein’s plan which was “crap”.

September 13, 2013 9:32 pm

The arithmetical reality brought about by electoral politics driven by fractional reserve lending, is the concentration of power – i.e. government becomes the single largest actor in the economy/society. This dynamic is driven by the diminishing marginal utility of debt.
The point at which the diminishing marginal utility of debt drops below 1, that is the point where the majority of society is dependent on government. This is also the point at which, inherently, the electoral process can no longer serve the purpose of substituting one set of politicians for another in the hope of achieving a government that is either moral or driven by reality.
The logic of AGW inscribes itself within this dynamic as one of the myriad possible dynamics aimed at not only maintaining but expanding the power and the reach of government.
When the debt dynamic is allowed to go beyond 1:1 parity, the only way a political/monetary change can be brought about is through violent dislocation. Violent dislocations would happen spontaneously in the locale of the entities driving monetary policy. In an attempt to prevent the natural social conflagration at home however, the monetary authority will induce macro instability (monetary instability) overseas. Macro instability (rise in prices for example) will induce micro fractures that take the form of religious, ethnic and territorial disputes that will eventually degenerate in all out war.
Keep your eyes peeled for what we are about to precipitate in the East particularly in India, Thailand, Malaysia, Taiwan, China, South Korea and Japan. Time frame is a bit difficult to pin point but I suspect the next five years will do it.

September 13, 2013 9:33 pm

“In Greek mythology, the Sirens (Greek singular: Σειρήν Seirēn; Greek plural: Σειρῆνες Seirēnes) were dangerous and beautiful creatures, portrayed as femme fatales who lured nearby sailors with their enchanting music and voices to shipwreck on the rocky coast of their island.”
Hard to deny the premise, and warning.

September 13, 2013 10:03 pm

While many people are venting, can I add a small one? I’ve just seen, in Melbourne Australia, a replay of an interview between some called DoctorOz (who is American by sound) and the EPA’s Lisa P Jackson.
America, I feel sorry for you. Here is a person prescribing changes for other Americans when she appears unable to prescribe a correct weight loss diet for herself.
The summing up of the talk by this duo was something like this – “Americans now have a greater personal empowerment than before to produce a better future for new generations” …. “Yes, and that is why the EPA is so important to help them.” A personal empowerment is not compatible with a dictatorial EPA, is it?
Jackson was head over heels in puppy love with the GHG theory. At that level, Administrators ought to be impartial about personal belief mechanisms & stick to known data.

Gary Kendall
September 13, 2013 10:20 pm

If I recall correctly, clause 8 of the Rules for the IPCC as handed down by the UN General Assembly states that reports shall be agreed by the Governments before publication. Surely this automatically makes the IPCC a political group, NOT the scientific group that they pretend to be { with regrettable success.}

September 13, 2013 10:35 pm

Bill Kruse says:
September 13, 2013 at 12:14 pm
Going back to J. Hansen in 1988,
In 1988, the warming was only into it,s 11th year, yet they were able to state without a doubt that co2 was the ‘all and everything’ of climate change. Now that there has been at least 16 years of no further warming, with 7 of those years cooling to boot, the IPCC should be ashamed for maintaining their warmimg stance.

September 13, 2013 11:07 pm

Dialing Back the Alarm on Climate Change
“The big news is that, for the first time since these reports started coming out in 1990, the new one dials back the alarm. It states that the temperature rise we can expect as a result of man-made emissions of carbon dioxide is lower than the IPPC thought in 2007.”

September 14, 2013 12:52 am

re the advert for your ridiculous propaganda web site which you posted at September 13, 2013 at 5:45 pm.
Your falsehoods are not funny. They waste space on WUWT. Leave them on your blog.

September 14, 2013 1:13 am

Nineteen pages of confusing prose in the SPM to tell us we have been taken for a ride.
Gotta to hand it to Al Gore though. He rode the wave profitably, got out just before the blow out, selling to Al Jazeera, and got a Nobel prize.

Peter Carroll
September 14, 2013 4:14 am

Nice article. But I thought the expression “the cat is out of the bag” came from the Royal Navy of Nelson’s era when the so-called cat o’ nine tails was used to mete out punishment aboard ship. Kept in a baize bag, the “cat” was only taken out so that the bosun or one of his mates could lash the unfortunate miscreant. The expression therefore means that a situation has gone so far that it cannot be recalled – – punishment has been decided upon by the captain and is about to be administered.

September 14, 2013 5:05 am

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) official Ottmar Edenhofer:” But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.”

Gail Combs
September 14, 2013 6:13 am

Mark says: @ September 13, 2013 at 12:54 pm
Governments don’t buy what the IPCC is selling. The IPCC reports what politicians order it to in order to advance the their political agendas and everybody involved gets rich at our expense.
Yes that is EXACTLY what happened. CAGW has ALWAYS been political and not science and we neglect the politics at our peril.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” ~ H. L. Mencken
“The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe.” ~ Daniel Botkin emeritus professor Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara.
The question then become WHAT do political leaders want and WHY they have intentionally promoted this universal fraud?
The general run of the mill person may not understand ‘The Science’ but they do understand robbery, fraud and the loss of jobs and freedom so that is a link we all need to understand too.
So here is the connection to the POLITICS:

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established by the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988 to assess the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant for the understanding of human induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for mitigation and adaptation.

So it never was about understanding the climate. It was really about ‘options for mitigation and adaptation. ‘ and this is the change wanted by the Globalists like the UN, the World Bank, and the WTO.
Pascal Lamy, Director General of the World Trade Organization (WTO):

Pascal Lamy: Whither Globalization?
The reality is that, so far, we have largely failed to articulate a clear and compelling vision of why a new global order matters…..
All had lived through the chaos of the 1930s — when turning inwards led to economic depression, nationalism and war. All, including the defeated powers, agreed that the road to peace lay with building a new international order — and an approach to international relations that questioned the Westphalian, sacrosanct principle of sovereignty….
In the same way, climate change negotiations are not just about the global environment but global economics as well — the way that technology, costs and growth are to be distributed and shared…..
Can we balance the need for a sustainable planet with the need to provide billions with decent living standards? Can we do that without questioning radically the Western way of life? These may be complex questions, but they demand answers.

“Global governance requires localising global issues” — Lamy
…Over the past 70 years we have constructed the legal and institutional framework to manage closer economic integration at the regional and global level. And, of course, the WTO is one part of this scheme with responsibility for the governance of international trade relations….
I see four main challenges for global governance today….
The first one is leadership…
The second one is efficiency….
The third one is coherence….
The last challenge that I see is that of legitimacy — for legitimacy is intrinsically linked to proximity, to a sense of “togetherness”. By togetherness, I mean the shared feeling of belonging to a community….

This last, ‘Legitmacy’ is the KEY needed to get those to be governed to ‘Buy-in’ to a change in governance from local and national governance to an unaccountable global bureaucracy.
Finding a universal ‘Enemy’ to lend ‘Legitmacy’ to Global Governance is what the think tank called ‘The Club of Rome’ did.

“The need for enemies seems to be a common historical factor. Some states have striven to overcome domestic failure and internal contradictions by blaming external enemies. The ploy of finding a scapegoat is as old as mankind itself – when things become too difficult at home, divert attention to adventure abroad. Bring the divided nation together to face an outside enemy, either a real one, or else one invented for the purpose. With the disappearance of the traditional enemy, the temptation is to use religious or ethnic minorities as scapegoats, especially those whose differences from the majority are disturbing.”[Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider. The First Global Revolution (The Club of Rome), 1993. p. 70]
“Every state has been so used to classifying its neighbours as friend or foe, that the sudden absence of traditional adversaries has left governments and public opinion with a great void to fill. New enemies have to be identified, new strategies imagined, and new weapons devised.”[Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider. The First Global Revolution (The Club of Rome), 1993. p. 70]
“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.” [p. 115]

What is the actual goal? Agenda 21 and move us into ‘Low energy’ Transit Villages. Private ownership of land does not fit into the UN’s Plans. “Private land ownership is a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice…. Public control of land use is therefore indispensable….” ~ 1976 Report of Habitat I: United Nations Conference on Human Settlements
This is the latest gambit in the move toward ‘Globalization of which CAGW is just a part. From a Freedom of Infromation Act request by Judicial Watch
Excerpt from the 133 page FOIA document obtained from the Department of Defence entiled: AFSS 0910 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND TREATMENT

This lesson will focus on awareness and current issues… It will also provide information that describes sources of extremism information, definitions, recruitment of DoD personnel, common themes in extremist ideologies, common characteristics of extremist organizations, DoD policies, and command functions regarding extremist activities….
D. Extremist Ideologies
1. Introduction
• As noted, an ideology is a set of political beliefs about the nature of people and society. People who are committed to an ideology seek not only to persuade but to recruit others to their belief. In U.S. history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements. The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule….
2. Ideologies
a. Nationalism – The policy of asserting that the interests of one’s own nation are
separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations.
Many nationalist groups take it a step further and believe that their national culture
and interests are superior to any other national group…..
b. Supremacy –
c. Separatism –
d. Anarchism – A political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful,
or undesirable ……protesters wreaking havoc at political conventions and anti-globalization rallies.……

So NATIONALISM now heads the top of the Department of Defense list of EXTREMISM???
You just can’t make this stuff up.

tony nordberg
September 14, 2013 10:59 am

With regard to the consequences of their blatant advocacy, the past four Chief Scientific Advisors to HM Goverment are making an appeal for the public to go easy on personal chastisement they are receiving as a result of their bringing science into disrepute;

Bill Parsons
September 14, 2013 1:33 pm

Note from the year 2020: In retrospect, politicians handled the situation pretty well after they discovered their mistake. Once that cat was out of the bag, they did what our leaders do best: They passed even higher taxes, and helped the rest of us adapt to even bigger government. Now, roast suckling cat is on every restaurant’s menu, along with cat chop smothered in (of course) green salsa. And everyone in America can enjoy their favorite cat barbecue joint, within easy walking distance. Now, pass me some of that Obamasauce. Who says fairy tales don’t come true? Everyone can live happily ever after.
Yes we can!

September 14, 2013 3:22 pm

Dr. Tim Ball said: “For 17 years global temperatures have declined…”
Smoothed HadCRUT3 and UAH if similar smoothing is applied suggest to me that the lack of warming started in 2001.
Also, 17 years seems to sound like a statement that it started cooling in 1997. The world is warmer so far in 2013 than it was in 1997 and every previous year covered by any of the major global temperature indices.

Gail Combs
September 14, 2013 6:17 pm

Jeff Alberts says:
September 13, 2013 at 5:28 pm
“Now we know it contains a cat.”
Actually it contains a very poor computer model of a cat…..
Actually I thought it was Schrödinger’s cat.

September 15, 2013 8:33 am

Dr. Tim Ball said:
Arctic summer ice, supposedly all gone by 2013 has recovered by 60 percent in one year. Severe weather has not increased. Damage done by policies already implemented, such as green jobs and alternate energies, is already evident.
How was the 60% figure determined? According to NSIDC, the extent on 21 Aug 2012 was 5.83M km2, and on the same date last year it was 4.34M km2. That’s an increase of 34%, not 60% – and 2013 will still come in near the low end of the 1981-2010 average. I’d refer you to the web site, but it is down due to the massive, unusual rainfall Colorado has been receiving the last few days. A bit of irony there. And of course, the figure that is most important, sea ice volume, continues to decline.
And as to the “damage” done due to green jobs and alternate energies – some clarification would be helpful on what you mean by that.

September 15, 2013 9:18 pm

@ author:
“Arctic summer ice, supposedly all gone by 2013 has recovered by 60 percent in one year.”
Look, somebody has made a video just for you. Well, for you and the Daily Mail:

Gail Combs.
September 18, 2013 5:01 pm

Chris says: @ September 15, 2013 at 8:33 am
….And as to the “damage” done due to green jobs and alternate energies – some clarification would be helpful on what you mean by that.
Well, you can start with the birds and bats and endangered raptors chopped up by the useless wind turbines.
Then you can look at it two ways. The short answer is The most recent analysis shows that his administration has created only 2,298 permanent green jobs, according to the Institute for Energy Research, which used data from the Energy Department’s Loan Programs Office to reach this conclusion. And that scattering of jobs has cost dearly. IER says Washington has spent $26.32 billion to create those few positions. That means each job has cost taxpayers $11.45 million.
Or you can start counting the cost to people like the people of Antelope Valley, CA who were forced out of their homes by underhanded means to clear the land for the Biggest Solar Project in the World which just this year was sold to Warren Buffett.
Or the people starving in third world countries thanks to the BIOFUEL RIP-OFF:
ADM profits soar 550 percent as ethanol margins improve
Cornell ecologist’s study finds that producing ethanol and biodiesel from corn and other crops is not worth the energy
ADM is the largest donor to both political parties:
Mother Jones:…whether the issue is possible price-fixing in Bulgaria or influence-peddling in Washington… no other U.S. company is so reliant on politicians and governments to butter its bread. From the postwar food-aid programs that opened new markets in the Third World to the subsidies for corn, sugar, and ethanol that are now under attack as “corporate welfare,” ADM’s bottom line has always been interwoven with public policy…
Then there is THE OTHER TAX PAYER RIP-OFF we will pay for the rest of our lives and so will our children.
As Obama Promised: Energy Prices to Soon Skyrocket hitting everyone in the pocket and causing what jobs are left to flee to China and India.

Obama’s war on coal hits your electric bill
The market-clearing price for new 2015 capacity – almost all natural gas – was $136 per megawatt. That’s eight times higher than the price for 2012, which was just $16 per megawatt. In the mid-Atlantic area covering New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and DC the new price is $167 per megawatt. For the northern Ohio territory served by FirstEnergy, the price is a shocking $357 per megawatt…. These are not computer models or projections or estimates. These are the actual prices that electric distributors have agreed to pay for new capacity. The costs will be passed on to consumers at the retail level.

That doesn’t include the original taxpayers rip-off by bankrupting companies. This is the amounts of direct taxpayer funding each received from the Obama Administration. The 19 asterisked companies have already filed for bankruptcy. The others are near bankruptcy. It would be interesting to see the before and after net worth of the principles of each of these companies. An IMF report says … the top earners’ share of income in particular has risen dramatically. In the United States the share of the top 1 percent has close to tripled over the past three decades, now accounting for about 20 percent of total U.S. income (Alvaredo and others, 2012)
This is what American taxpayers lost with no show of benefits in return.
1.Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
2.SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
3.Solyndra ($535 million)*
4.Beacon Power ($43 million)*
5.Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
6.SunPower ($1.2 billion)
7.First Solar ($1.46 billion)
8.Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
9.EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
10.Amonix ($5.9 million)
11.Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
12.Abound Solar ($400 million)*
13.A123 Systems ($279 million)*
14.Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
15.Johnson Controls ($299 million)
16.Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
17.ECOtality ($126.2 million)
18.Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
19.Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
20.Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
21.Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
22.Range Fuels ($80 million)*
23.Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
24.Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
25.Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
26.GreenVolts ($500,000)
27.Vestas ($50 million)
28.LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
29.Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
30.Navistar ($39 million)
31.Satcon ($3 million)*
32.Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
33.Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)

Brian H
September 19, 2013 5:54 am

The poke (bag) is coming apart, and the pig is about to bust out of it.

Brian H
September 19, 2013 6:17 am

JimS says:
September 13, 2013 at 11:52 am
I always enjoy a well written article backed by facts and applied basic logic. Thank you mister Ball.

FYI; Dr. Ball may well be the first person to obtain a doctorate in the field which subsequently dubbed itself Climate Science. I doubt there have been very many others since.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights