Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup

SEPP_logoThe Week That Was: 2014-07-12 (July 12, 2014) Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org) The Science and Environmental Policy Project ###################################################

Quote of the Week: Nature is full of infinite causes that have never occurred in experience. Leonardo da Vinci [H/t Timothy Wise] Number of the Week: 1 in 78,664,164,096

THIS WEEK: By Ken Haapala, Executive Vice President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)

Due to the Ninth International Climate Change Conference (ICCC-9) sponsored by The Heartland Institute, The Week That Was will be less comprehensive than usual.

Over 600 people attended the Heartland Conference, ICCC-9, held in Las Vegas, Nevada, from July 7 to 9. There were over 60 speakers. Most spoke for about 12 minutes on the 21 different panels covering different issues on the science of human-caused global warming/climate change and the policies being implemented by governments, supposedly to address global warming. Keynote speakers had about 25 minutes. There were numerous awards given to scientists for their long service in insisting that the fear of global warming/climate change be based on rigorous science, rather than politicized science.

The schedule did not permit attending all the panel presentations, and this discussion will focus on scientific issues. Virtually the entire program is available on the internet: http://climateconference.heartland.org/


Some of the Awards: Fred Singer presented the Fredrick Seitz Memorial Award to Sherwood Idso for his pioneering work on the enormous benefits of enhanced atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) for humanity and the environment. Virtually all food crops and most other plants grow better in an atmosphere richer in carbon dioxide than today’s atmosphere. As human emissions increase atmospheric carbon dioxide, we can look forward to a world more bountiful than the one today and a more robust environment in general.

In his long career, the late Fredrick Seitz exemplified that best a dedicated scientist can offer and after long service was recognized as President Emeritus of Rockefeller University, a premier medical research institution. He was the founding chairman of the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) and supported the formation on the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC).

Arthur Robinson presented the Courage in Defense of Science Award to Willie Soon. Long an outspoken critic of the UN International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Soon has demonstrated unusual courage in maintaining his views in spite of outrageous accusations from the climate establishment. His professional career has probably suffered from his public statements, but his integrity is intact.

The EarthFree Institute presented the Speaks Truth to Power Award to Patrick Moore. Moore gave a striking keynote address “Confessions of a Greenpeace Drop-out” presenting some of misguided policies of the environmental industry that are detrimental to humanity and the environment. Moore’s comment that we should view the Canadian oil sands as a natural oil spill that needs to be cleaned up will outrage his former colleagues in Greenpeace.

Former FBI agent and IRS person of special interest, Gary Aldrich presented the Climate Science Whistleblower Award to Alan Carlin who, when with the EPA, challenged its finding that carbon dioxide emissions endanger human health. Several commentators thought Carlin’s acceptance speech to be particularly moving.

Calvin Beisner presented Roy Spencer with the Outstanding Evangelical Climate Scientist Award. In a Senate hearing, Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse tried to attack Spencer’s scientific findings through Spencer’s religious beliefs. The senator only succeeded in disgracing himself and the senate. Spencer and his collogue, John Christy, have endured significant personal criticism for their willingness to publicly post their calculations of atmospheric temperatures from satellite measurements. They have given the nation and the world the only transparent, reliable temperature record, which is also the most comprehensible in existence. If religious beliefs give them the moral compass to take such actions, so be it.

The Heartland Institute presented the Lifetime Achievement in Climate Science Award to S. Fred Singer, President and Chairman of the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP). Singer conceived and directed the independent Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) project. He recruited an international array of superb scientists to write the initial NIPCC report, which was published by the Heartland Institute. The NIPCC project has grown significantly and now is a counterbalance to the government-funded IPCC, which ignores significant science or buries it below politically motivated exaggerations.


NIPCC v. IPCC – Physical Science: Bob Carter and Fred Singer, co-authors/editors of the NIPCC reports, and contributing author Willie Soon stressed the major differences between the NIPCC report on the physical science and the IPCC report on the physical science. The NIPCC report includes science the IPCC report ignores or buries. The high confidence the IPCC expresses about its work in Summary for Policymakers is not substantiated by the physical science.


NIPCC v. IPCC – Biological Impacts: NIPCC co-author/editor Craig Idso discussed the enormous benefits to the biosphere from increasing concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Craig Loehle focused on the shoddy methods used in the IPCC report to make claims about species extinction. Cold tolerance, not heat, is the limiting factor in species range.


Temperature Measurements: Several speakers, including Anthony Watts and Larry Gould, addressed the addressed the flaws in the surface temperature record. Some of these were discussed in the July 5 TWTW. Watts presented the final report of the surface stations project, which examined poor siting and bias adjustments by NOAA and NASA-GISS [Goddard Institute of Space Studies.]

The government agencies which maintain the records have been less than transparent in their mathematically manipulation of them, creating considerable concern in their reliability. Yet, the US stations are considered to be the gold standard. It is time to move to a new standard, the satellite record, which is maintained by two independent groups. These records are the most comprehensive available. They include the atmosphere over areas where there are no surface instruments, such as the oceans which cover 71% of the earth’s surface.


Models: A number of speakers, including Roy Spencer, emphasized that the models are overestimating warming trends, some by a great amount. There has been no warming trend for at least a decade. Thus, the models should not be used as a basis for policy, yet they are, particularly in the EPA finding that greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, endangers human health.


Getting Colder? Some speakers focused on the possibility of the planet cooling. Joe D’Aleo addressed the recent record of colder, snowier winters in the US and the Northern Hemisphere. Howard Hayden gave a historic overview of the current climate period, a short time of warming in an age of glaciation and Fred Goldberg discussed the early 21st century reduction in Arctic ice extent was not unusual and the ice is rebounding. If the current trend of Arctic ice continues, it will dash the dreams of those who hope to profit from trans-Arctic sea routes.


The Sun: German scientist Sebastian Lüning and Russian scientist Habibullo Abdussamatov presented their thoughts that the sun has become dormant and that this lessened activity will result in a cold period that may be similar to the Little Ice Age. If so, then climate change will be a real threat to agriculture production and to humanity. The very opposite of what current western government policies are designed to prevent.


Sea Levels: On separate panels, Fred Singer of SEPP and Tom Wysmuller of the Right Climate Stuff Team presented their research on sea level rise in the 21st century. Singer thinks it will be in the order of 7 to 8 inches (18 to 20 cm). He thinks that the West Antarctic ice sheet (in the Ross Sea) will continue to melt for the foreseeable future, even though snow and ice on the continent of Antarctica are accumulating. Wysmuller calculates that sea level rise will be even less, a maximum of 5 inches (13 cm). Both calculations are far less than the projections by the IPCC and orders of magnitude less than the alarmist US National Climate Assessment.


Changing pH: In his presentation on the biological impacts of increasing carbon dioxide, Craig Idso touched on the impacts of the possibility of a lowering of ocean pH. Idso does not foresee a problem from a slow lowering of pH, should it occur. The waters will not turn acidic as many alarmists claim. Further, far too many of the experiments used to claim dramatic results actually shock the system, which any aquarium owner knows should not be done.


Prediction: In 2000, geologist Don Easterbrook predicted a cooling period will start in a few years and stated that thus far his prediction appears to be happening. Easterbrook based his prediction on projecting well-defined patterns of warming and cooling into the future. In his view, the term pause is a misnomer because the term assumes continuous warming is the normal. We may be in a phase change towards a cooling. Based on the Greenland ice core record, between about 9,000 to 700 years ago (the latter the start of the Little Ice Age) the climate was about 2.5 to 5.5 deg F warmer than today. Glacial advances and retreats match changes in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO). Then, the question is what drives the PDO? Easterbrook thinks that, based on the isotopes of Carbon and Beryllium in the ice cores, solar changes, total solar insolation, solar magnetism, and associated changes cosmic ray intensity (Svensmark hypothesis), change the PDO. Low sunspots are associated with lower solar insolation and solar magnetism and greater cosmic rays. It will be interesting to see if Easterbrook’s prediction holds. His views are similar to those of Lüning and Abdussamatov


Success: The general commentary at the closing of the ICCC-9 was that the conference was enormously successful. The mood was pronouncedly upbeat. A lot of work needs to be done to sway the public, the political process, and the politicized scientific institutions. The NIPCC project is succeeding in bringing together independent scientists who openly question government-funded science, in spite of the personal attacks. These scientists realize that it is not who asserts a scientific theory or relationship, but how and why they claim to know it. Nature, not man, is the judge.


A New Paradigm? Since the recording of his talk is not available, Ken Haapala’s presentation is outlined below.

After questioning the assertions that carbon and carbon dioxide are pollutants that must be taxed, Haapala expressed wonderment that the Department of Agriculture is one of the eleven government agencies involved in declaring that carbon dioxide emissions have a social cost. It is as if the Department of Agriculture does not recognize CO2 is critical for photosynthesis, which is vital for green plants and virtually all life on this planet and it does not recognize the pioneering work of Sherwood Idso, and others. The Department of Agriculture should be praising of the social benefits of carbon.

To address this madness, Haapala referenced the Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn, who asserts progress in scientific knowledge is not linear – but occurs in spurts. Up to the 1970s, most understanding of climate change was limited to geologists. It is normal and natural, and sometimes abrupt.

Kuhn states that often significant progress occurs when one concept (or mind-set) used in viewing a puzzle of natural science is replaced by another concept that better explains the puzzle. He calls the concepts paradigms. The paradigms include the way in which data and experiments are conducted and interpreted. For example, when the paradigm of a static surface of the earth was replaced by plate tectonics, our ability to explain the earth’s history expanded greatly.

In the 1970s, some scientists began speculating about the influence of increasing CO2 in the atmosphere. Some thought it would cause cooling others thought it would cause warming. The very influential Charney Report estimated that a doubling of CO2 would increase the earth’s average temperatures by 1.5ºC to 4.5ºC. After this report, the focus of research has been on future warming from increasing CO2. A new paradigm was widely accepted. The paradigm could be as stated in the title of an article by scientists from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies: “Atmospheric CO2 Is the Principal Control Knob Governing Earth’s Temperature.”

In the 35 years since the Charney Report, five major IPCC reports have produced no improvement in understanding of the temperature impacts of a doubling of CO2. Research has not been fruitful. Something is very wrong.

Based US government reports, SEPP calculated that from Fiscal Year (FY) 1993 to FY 2013 total US expenditures on climate change amount to more than $165 Billion. More than $35 Billion is identified as climate science. The White House reported that in FY 2013 the US spent $22.5 Billion on climate change. About $2.Billion went to US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). The principal function of the USGCRP is to provide to Congress a National Climate Assessment (NCA). The latest report uses global climate models, which are not validated, therefor speculative, to speculate about regional influences from global warming.

Much of the remaining 89% of funding goes to goes to government agencies and industries claiming they are preventing global warming/climate change, even though they do not understand the natural causes of climate change and, likely, far overestimate the influence of CO2. These entities have a vested interest in promoting the fear of global warming/climate change.

It is time for the government to stop funding irrational fear of global warming/climate change based on a concept of climate that is not substantiated by the physical evidence. If we are to progress in our understanding of climate change, the paradigm must be changed from one that earth’s temperatures are largely controlled by atmospheric CO2, to one which recognizes that climate change is normal and predominately natural. Human CO2 emissions have little, if any, influence on temperatures and other climate trends.


Number of the Week: 1 in 78,664,164,096. Congress sent the US Internal Revenue Service asking about emails targeting conservative and pro-Israeli groups. The emails were on 7 different disk drives, all of which crashed that month.

According to the person who made the calculations (unknown), the odds of a disk drive failing in any given month are roughly one in 36. The odds of two different drives failing in the same month are roughly one in 36 squared, or 1 in about 1,300. The odds of three drives failing in the same month is 36 cubed or 1 in 46,656.

The odds of seven different drives failing in the same month is 37 to the 7th power = 1 in 78,664,164,096. Whether or not the calculations are accurate is not the major issue. The major issue is the IRS claiming they cannot produce the emails due to multiple disk drive failures.

H/t Melissa!



For the numbered articles below, please see this week’s TWTW at: www.sepp.org. The articles are at the end of the pdf.

1. Confessions of a Computer Modeler

Any model, including those predicting climate doom, can be tweaked to yield a desired result. I should know.

By Robert Caprara, WSJ, Jul 8, 2014


2. A Climate Activist Bags Himself

Tom Steyer ruined the planet before he offered to save it.

By Holman Jenkins, WSJ, Jul 8, 2014


3. Shipping Firms to Add Arctic LNG Route

China, Japan Companies to Carry the Fuel From Siberia to East Asia

By Mari Iwata and Wayne Ma, WSJ, Jul 9, 2014


[SEPP Comment: At least governments are not guaranteeing the success – or as of yet!]



Suppressing Scientific Inquiry

Climate Science Paper Censored By American Meteorological Society Journal

By Ben Webster, The Times, Via GWPF, Jul 8, 2014


Challenging the Orthodoxy – ICCC-9

International Conference on Climate Change

By Donn Dears, Power For USA, Jul 8, 2014


Challenging the Orthodoxy

Science Recommends Climate Model Re-Start

By Dennis Avery, Canada Free Press, Jul 7, 2014


Why the former Ice Age became global warming, then climate change

By Anthony Sadar, Washington Examiner, Jul 7, 2014


In defence of Nigel Lawson, and his fellow climate sceptics

By David Whitehouse, The Spectator, UK, Jul 8, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


Defending the Orthodoxy

Congress’s head-in-the-sand approach to climate change

Editorial, Washington Post, Jul 6, 2014 [H/t Timothy Wise]


[SEPP Comment: This team is hardly the Right Stuff!]

Questioning the Orthodoxy

Just because it sounds good …

By Bjorn Lomborg, The Australian, Jul 11, 2014


Climate Change Hysteria and the Madness of Crowds

By Charles Battig, American Thinker, Jul 7, 2014


Are Polar Bears Really Endangered?

By Susan Crockford, Polar Bear Science, Jul 5, 2014


Adélie Penguin Census Shows Seabirds Are Thriving

Considered a Bellwether of Climate Change, the Antarctic Seabird’s Population Is Generally on the Rise

By Robert Lee Hotz, WSJ, Via GWPF, Jul 10, 2014



Problems in the Orthodoxy

UN climate proposal paves way for rich-poor discord

By Alex Morales, Sydney Morning Herald, Jul 9, 2014


Economic Survey reiterates India’s stand on climate change, sustainability Survey says India won’t agree to any binding cuts on emissions as it has not utilized its share of earth’s carbon space

By Neha Sethi, Live Mint, India, Jul 9, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


India won’t agree to any binding cuts on emissions as it has not utilized its fair share of the earth’s carbon space and still has to provide minimum standards of living to its entire population, the Economic Survey said, reiterating the nation’s stand in international climate change negotiations.

Only 20% [of Likely US Voters] Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over

By Staff Writers, Rasmussen Reports, Jul 9, 2014 [H/t Marian Coombs]


Seeking a Common Ground

IPCC and treatment of uncertainties

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. Jul 11, 2014


Models v. Observations

Global warming computer models confounded as Antarctic sea ice hits new record high with 2.1million square miles more than is usual for time of year

Ice is covering 16m sq km, more than 2.1m unusual for time of year

UN computer models say Antarctic ice should be in decline, not increasing

By David Rose, Mail, UK, Jul , 2014 [H/t GWPF]


Measurement Issues

Data Set Changes Makes It Hard to Tell Real Story

By Joseph D’Aleo, ICECAP, Jul 11, 2014


Understanding adjustments to temperature data

By Zeke Hausfather, Climate Etc. Jul 7, 2014


[SEPP Comment: View from the Berkeley project.]

NASA Launches Carbon Mission to Watch Earth Breathe

Press Release, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Jul 2, 2014 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


Changing Weather

‘Polar vortex’ might make summer comeback

By Laura Barron-Lopez, The Hill, Jul 11, 2014


Changing Climate

Welcome back to the 1950s and soon the 1960s/70s (and then 1800?)

By Joseph D’Aleo, ICECAP, Jul 11, 2014


Changing Earth

Rewriting the history of volcanic forcing during the past 2000 years

By Staff Writers, Desert Research Institute, No Date [H/t GWPF]


[SEPP Comment: If volcanic aerosols [small particles] have less of a cooling effect than previously estimated, the climate models need to be re-worked. The models incorporate a high cooling effect to counter-balance their high warming effect for CO2.]

Lowering Standards

Is it ‘cos he’s a green?

By Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, Jul 7, 2014


[SEPP Comment: BBC promoting the green agenda.]

BBC in deep water over climate change censorship row

By Raymond Snoddy, MediaTel, Jul 9, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


He added, much more contentiously, that Lord Lawson’s views on climate change: “are not supported by the evidence from computer modelling and scientific research and I don’t believe this was made sufficiently clear to the audience.”

[SEPP Comment: Computer modeling does not give scientific evidence, unless the models have been validated. Climate models have not been validated, therefore are speculative.]

In apologising for having Nigel Lawson on to discuss climate change, the BBC has breached its charter

Rational debate is poisonous to climatic correctness

Editorial, Spectator, UK, Jul 12, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


Communicating Better to the Public – Exaggerate, or be Vague?

Inside the Ring: Hot air in Beijing on Climate Change

By Bill Gertz, Washington Free Beacon, Jul 10, 2014 [H/t Timothy Wise]


[SEPP Comment: To cut a largely meaningless deal with China, the US envoys may give away critical information!]

Communicating Better to the Public – Go Personal.

Study: Rich Republicans Are the Worst Climate Deniers

We already knew about the “smart idiot” effect. Now, meet the “rich idiot” effect.

By Chris Mooney, Mother Jones, Jul 10, 2014


[SEPP Comment: Could it be that they are more knowledgeable about what constitutes risk than the others?]

Questioning European Green

Post Climate Change Act 2008, the UK’s Economy is Going Backwards

By Sierra Rayne, American Thinker, Jul 9, 2014 [H/t Timothy Wise]


EPA and other Regulators on the March

Convicted felon designed EPA’s playbook for faking science

By Ron Arnold, Washington Examiner, Jul 8, 2014


Link To report: EPA’s Playbook Unveiled: A Story of Fraud, Deceit, and Secret Science

Bu Staff Writers, US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, Mar 19, 2014



EPA Is Desperately in Need of Budget Cuts. Here’s a Few Places to Start.

By Nicolas Loris, Daily Signal, Jul 10, 2014 [H/t Timothy Wise]


EPA Fast Becoming The Green IRS

Editorial, IBD, Jul 10, 2014


EPA chief McCarthy mocks The New York Times in staff memo

By Laura Barron-Lopez, The Hill, Jul 10, 2014


House Republicans threaten to subpoena EPA over carbon rules

By Timothy Cama, The Hill, Jul 9, 2014


GOP senators slam EPA on wage garnishment

By Timothy Cama, The Hill, Jul 10, 2014


Energy Issues — US

CHP Creates More Energy Confusion

By Donn Dears, Power For USA, Jul 11, 2014


[SEPP Comment: A lesson learned – be cautious about using EPA energy efficiency numbers.]

Washington’s Control of Energy

Revealed: How environmentalists were allowed to draft Obama’s White House energy policy

A trio of activists from the Natural Resources Defense Council wrote a 110-page draft that became Obama’s latest global-warming plan

Two lawyers and a graduate of a Berkeley program advocating a ‘sustainable environment and a just society’ crafted the document in 2010

The move is seen as revenge against the second Bush administration for allowing energy producers to advise the White House in secret meetings

The document’s lead scientific author now helps run a global-warming super PAC run by billionaire liberal Tom Steyer

By David Martosko, Mail, UK, Jul 7, 2014


For the sake of American prosperity and security, President Obama needs to approve Keystone.

By Bobby Jindal, National Review, Jul 10, 2014 [H/t Timothy Wise]


Carbon Schemes

Drax wins huge grant from EU for CCS

By Sam Dodson, World Coal, Jul 8, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


Environmental Industry

Holding Greenpeace accountable

By Paul Driessen, WUWT, Jul 6, 2014


Global governance: funding the NGO monster

By Richard North, EUReferendum.com, Jul 7, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


Other Scientific News

Blazing World Record: Strongest UV Rays Measured in South America

By Becky Oskin, Live Science, Jul 8, 2014 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


Earth’s Magnetic Field Flip Could Happen Sooner Than Expected

Changes measured by the Swarm satellite show that our magnetic field is weakening 10 times faster than originally predicted, especially over the Western Hemisphere

By Kelly Dickerson, Scientific American, Jul 9, 2014 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


[SEPP Comment: The satellites were launched on Nov 22, 2013. The author is drawing conclusions based on 6 months of observations?]

Scholarly journal retracts 60 articles, smashes ‘peer review ring’

By Fred Barbash, Washington Post, Jul 10, 2014


Other News that May Be of Interest

A well-deserved, overdue encomium for Dr. Bruce Ames

By Staff Writers, ACSH, Jul 9, 2014


Link to other article: Mutagens and Multivitamins

By Megan Scudellari, The Scientist, Jun 1, 2014




Phunny Physics

By William York, Via Climate Etc. Jul 6, 2014


[SEPP Comment: An amusing essay on Newton’s bylaws.]

In pictures: Climate change could make red hair a thing of the past if Scotland gets sunnier

A DNA expert has made the bold claim that ginger hair gene could die out if Scotland climate improves.

By Staff Writer, Daily Record, Jul 5, 2014 [H/t GWPF]


[SEPP Comment: Why are Scandinavians blond?]


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
July 13, 2014 6:52 pm

Regarding IPCC certainties mentioned above.
IPCC AR5 TS.6 – Key Uncertainties
Wow, what an eye opener. Allow me to paraphrase.
“Hey, all you skeptics, guess what? You were/are correct! (Aren’t you usually?) When it comes to major climate systems virtually certain to make a critical difference, to have major influence, (clouds, precipitation, wind, tropospheric warming, stratospheric cooling, ocean temps >700m, carbon/heat >2000m, circulation, abrupt climate changes, sea levels) there is a high probability – that we have not got a clue!!”
“Oh, and by the way, we find no evidence connecting AGW and drought, cyclones, or similar extreme weather.”
“We also have pretty much no idea what the Antarctic ice sheet and ocean interface are up to.”
“Sorry ‘bout that true believers, politicians, and media hypsters.”
Paleoclimate reconstructions and Earth System Models indicate that there is a positive feedback between climate and the carbon cycle, but confidence remains low in the strength of this feedback, particularly for the land. {6.4}”
Say what?! IPCC has low confidence in the CO2 feedback strength and has felt that way for a while! ???
In Antarctica, available data are inadequate to assess the status of change of many characteristics of sea ice (e.g., thickness and volume). {4.2.3}
On a global scale the mass loss from melting at calving fronts and iceberg calving are not yet comprehensively assessed. The largest uncertainty in estimated mass loss from glaciers comes from the Antarctic, and the observational record of ice–ocean interactions around both ice sheets remains poor. {4.3.3, 4.4}”
“IPCC AR5 TS.6.3
• In some aspects of the climate system, including changes in drought, changes in tropical cyclone activity, Antarctic warming, Antarctic sea ice extent, and Antarctic mass balance, confidence in attribution to human influence remains low due to modeling uncertainties and low agreement between scientific studies. {10.3.1, 10.5.2, 10.6.1}”
Summary: There is no evidence to blame any of these “…aspects…” on human activity.

July 13, 2014 6:58 pm


July 13, 2014 7:01 pm

A weather smidgeon here, a weather smidgeon there, here and every where soon seems to be the math will find it to be taken together as climate.
So goes the work of us little smidgeons you see.

July 13, 2014 9:02 pm

Polar Vortex summer version prelude to brutal winter and potential major energy issues – Joseph D’Aleo
… The combination of that warm pool, an El Nino Modoki (central Pacific biased), easterly QBO and other teleconnections suggest this next winter will be like last one but with the cold biased further east…
Any of you pros want to discuss this? Is polar vortex a pretty sure event to repeat this coming winter? I’m blown away with PVST (Polar Vortex Stress Disorder) already, can hardly think straight.

July 13, 2014 9:08 pm

Does the IRS pattern of behavior differ from that in current climate science. It Is one of the most repressive things this country has ever seen.
Endemic, is another word that comes to mind.
On a positive note, I have viewed most of the presentations from the conference. What an outstanding group of brave and talented people. I hope we will have access to the presentations that were provided. There is a treasure of great knowledge sharing.
Thank you all (including you Mr. Haapala) for doing what you do! Our futures depend on it………

M Simon
July 13, 2014 10:19 pm

Habibullo Abdussamatov? A solar connection to climate? That is heresy. And besides measurements of TSI do not support it.

July 14, 2014 1:49 pm

We are living in the new 1930s of a nascent ecofascism. Somewhere, in high school or University, perhaps, the future eco-Hitler is already planning to write his/her AGW mein kampf. The issue could be decided one way or the other over the next couple of decades. The green AGW reich may or may not still be stoppable.

July 14, 2014 8:29 pm

I wonder how we can be so far apart on such a critical issue. Regardless of how good AGW thinks the science is that supports run-a-way warming, the amount of co2 put into the atmosphere continues unabated and the temps have not risen. Something is majorly wrong with the Theory.

July 15, 2014 12:31 pm

Mr Watts
I was reading an attack on Dr Tol in a climate blog, and I thought I would respond to the comment. I don´t like to plug what I wrote but since there´s a comment about you near the bottom of the post I thought I would be fair

Brian H
July 17, 2014 4:55 am

Obviously, Scandinavians are at risk of death from exposure if they bare much of their skin below the neck outdoors. Their heads are the only available real estate for generating Vitamin D, so their hair must be as close to UV-transparent as possible.

Brian H
July 17, 2014 5:22 am

Interesting factoid: Blacks’ skin is UV-reflective, whites’ is absorptive. So in a UV camera, blacks appear silver or white, whites look black.

%d bloggers like this: