Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #231


By Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)

State Attorneys General: The chronology of the subpoena of certain records of the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) by Attorney General Claude Earl Walker of U.S. Virgin Islands becomes an interesting study of legal over-reach and pull-back. CEI general counsel Sam Kazman has a good re-cap of events in his summary: “Shake-Up in Subpoena Land.” –

“CEI was originally served with its subpoena on April 7. The document was issued by AG Walker, who had a District of Columbia court clerk issue a DC version, which could then be served on CEI. The subpoena demanded a full decade’s worth of CEI’s work on climate change and energy policy, much of which would have contained confidential information on our donors. It was an outrageous violation of both our First Amendment right and those of our supporters, and CEI made it clear that it wouldn’t comply.”

‘On May 13, in response to our objections, Walker’s local attorney informed us that they rejected our legal arguments, but they would withdraw the DC subpoena. Walker’s attorney gave us no decision about the underlying Virgin Islands subpoena, but she did note that Walker might reissue the DC subpoena if he changed his mind in the future.”

The threat continued. On June 28, the DC Superior Court heard arguments on the motion by CEI for sanctions against Walker under the DC Anti-SLAPP Act. “Walker’s local counsel argued that Walker was conducting an ongoing investigation of ExxonMobil for fraud, and that he had a legitimate interest in CEI documents. In a letter to the Wall Street Journal on June 24, 2016, Walker said that he was subpoenaing CEI for information ‘can shed light’ on whether we ‘broke the law,’ which is more than intimidation, it’s an accusation. This is all the more reason we are continuing to pursue sanctions against Walker. The judge stated that she’d be issuing a ruling in due time.

“One day later, Walker announced that he was withdrawing his Exxon subpoena, as well as an accompanying one to Exxon’s public relations firm. And then the following day–Thursday, June 30–he announced he was withdrawing his Virgin Islands CEI subpoena as well. We immediately informed the court of these developments, pointing out that the withdrawal of the Exxon subpoena was seriously at odds with what his attorney had told the court at the hearing.

According to Kazman, all this serves to show their “case for sanctions against Walker is stronger than ever. Even aside from questions of misrepresentation to the court, Walker’s decision to yank his subpoenas in the face of legal challenges indicates that he had no valid reason to issue them in the first place. And that makes the need for sanctions even clearer—because when a law enforcement officer breaks the law, it’s not enough for him to simply stop behaving badly. A violation like this of the First Amendment needs to be paid for, because that’s the best way of ensuring that it doesn’t happen again.

In addition, on June 27, by a vote of 8-0, the US Supreme Court overturned the federal corruption conviction of former Virginia Governor Robert McDonnell because the prosecutors did not prove that Mr. McDonnell did enough to assist his friend to be guilty of quid-pro-quo corruption. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice John Roberts pointed out that all the actions of which Mr. McDonnell was accused are among the normal duties of any elected official. The prosecutors and the trial judge defined “official act” so broadly that they went well beyond the intent of federal law. Whether or not this decision influenced Mr. Walker in withdrawing the subpoena is unknown. But an 8-0 decision is significant, and it is a warning to state attorneys general that they should be careful in trying to broaden federal statutes to charge political opponents with crimes.

All these developments leave unsettled, thus far, whether the state attorneys general involved, and those who have been urging such legal actions, have violated the Civil Rights Act of 1985, making it a felony to conspire to deprive others of their Civil Rights, including freedom of speech. We shall see what develops. See Article # 4 for Mr. Walker’s explanation of his subpoena and links under Suppressing Scientific Inquiry – The Witch Hunt – Push-Back and Litigation Issues.

The Week That Was: 2016-07-02 (July 2, 2016) Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org) The Science and Environmental Policy Project


Quote of the Week: “As a human being, one has been endowed with just enough intelligence to be able to see clearly how utterly inadequate that intelligence is when confronted with what exists.” – Albert Einstein


Number of the Week: 36% in FY2010 to 21% in FY2015. Down 42%


There will be no TWTW on July 9 – attending the 34th annual meeting of Doctors for Disaster Preparedness. TWTW will resume on July 16.


Atmospheric Temperatures: The June 25 TWTW contained a post by climatologist and former NASA scientist Roy Spencer, in which Spencer forecasted that, based on UAH satellite measurements, 2016 may be warmer than 2015. The data included the UAH Satellite-Based temperature of the Global Lower Atmosphere through May 2016. The data for June are in and Spencer was surprised. Using the Version 6.0 data set, the May-June data show the second largest 2-month drop in global average satellite temperatures since records began in 1979 and the largest 2-month drop in tropical average satellite temperatures. The drop illustrates that we do not know the range in which temperatures will settle once the El Niño and the possible upcoming La Niña are over. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy and Measurement Issues — Atmosphere


Benefits of Increased CO2: The journal, Nature, published an article on the benefits of increased atmospheric CO2. The abstract states: “Our findings reveal that the observed greening record is consistent with an assumption of anthropogenic forcings, where greenhouse gases play a dominant role, but is not consistent with simulations that include only natural forcings and internal climate variability. These results provide the first clear evidence of a discernible human fingerprint on physiological vegetation changes other than phenology and range shifts.”

The findings are based on three decades of satellite observations in the northern extratropical latitudes. Further, Craig Idso examines a February 12 paper, which finds that the greening of global drylands is a result of elevated CO2.

These papers are further evidence that enhanced atmospheric CO2 levels are a benefit to agriculture and the environment. They prompt the question: when will those who are calculating the bureaucratically contrived social cost of carbon (SCC) recognize carbon dioxide’s enormous benefits? See links under Social Benefits of Carbon.


Nuclear Power and the Sierra Club: The planned closure of the last operating nuclear power plant in California at Diablo Canyon, discussed in the June 25 TWTW, continues to prompt questions as to how California will obtain affordable, reliable electricity. The claim that it will be provided by solar and wind is not supported by analysis. The once-held belief that the UK or Germany can rely on solar or wind for reliable electricity has crumbled. Both nations rely heavily on fossil fuels while facing sharp increases in the costs of electricity. Some energy analysists have suggested that the environmental industry will recognize the importance of reliable, affordable electricity. But, this view may be folly.

According to reports, Aubrey McClendon, the late president of Chesapeake Energy, an Oklahoma-based energy company with principal operations in natural gas and natural gas liquids, spent over $25 million supporting the anti-coal effort led by the Sierra Club. McClendon discovered these funds did not buy peace with the Sierra Club, as it mobilized to oppose natural gas.

A letter by Michael Brune, the executive director of the Sierra Club since 2010, published on June 23 in the Wall Street Journal, should remove all suggestions that the Club will support nuclear power.

“The Sierra Club remains in firm opposition to dangerous nuclear power. The article [in the Wall Street Journal] reflects wishful thinking on the part of the nuclear industry but doesn’t accurately represent the position of the Sierra Club.


“It is categorically incorrect to suggest that the Sierra Club considers nuclear power a ‘bridge’ to clean energy. Nuclear power, much like coal, oil and gas, is a bridge to nowhere. In Illinois the Sierra Club is part of a coalition to increase renewable energy and energy efficiency, not preserve nuclear reactors. America’s energy future must be powered by 100% clean, renewable energy like wind and solar—and nuclear in no way meets this requirement.


“The Sierra Club’s successful work to stop and retire coal and gas operations has never precluded our efforts to oppose nuclear power, nor will it ever.”

See Article # 1 and links under Questioning European Green, Questioning Green Elsewhere, and California Dreaming.


The California Duck: The June 25 TWTW had a reference to the California Duck, which was illustrated in the post under Energy Matters. Several readers requested further information. As explained by power engineer Donn Dears in “Nothing to Fear”, the California “Duck Curve” was created by the California Independent Systems Operator (CAISO) to illustrate the impact of mandates for increasing wind and solar, particularly solar.

One must note that the curve is not general, but for a particular day with wind and solar generation varying according to weather conditions. The vertical axis measures power consumption in megawatts, the horizontal axis indexes the hour of the day. As expected, actual production and consumption vary over the course of the day. To keep the electrical grid stable, grid operators are required to balance production with consumption.

The real danger comes with the time of day production from solar, which increases rapidly after about 7 am, reaching a peak around 1 pm, then diminishing rapidly. The risks of over-generation of electricity with increasing government renewable mandates is demonstrated by the descending belly of the duck over the years. As the mandates increase, the strain on the grid system increases because fossil fuel sources (mostly natural gas) must ramp up to meet the evening demand, when consumption is the greatest and solar power becomes negligible. The net effect is that traditional sources, which are designed and built for constant output, do not receive revenues when solar and wind systems are given preference, and are placed under great strain (equipment wearing out very rapidly) to back-up solar and wind when they fail.

Donn Dears states that the California Duck illustrates that the state’s public utilities are in a death spiral. Eventually, the policies will result in either:

1. “The utilities must charge much higher rates than their current rates.

2. The government must take over, e.g., expropriate, the utilities and use tax payer money to subsidize the generation of electricity from fossil fuels, using, what will then be power plants and grid owned by the government.” (p. 71)

Not only is the closing of functioning nuclear power plants an economic waste; but also, it intensifies the utility death spiral and state take-over of utilities. See the book “Nothing to Fear” and links under California Dreaming.


Additions and Corrections: The June 4 TWTW had an analogy of using a diesel engine to illustrate the effects of atmospheric pressure on Venus. The analogy prompted several comments from distinguished physicists – some objecting to the analogy, others supporting it, with qualifications.

Peter Friedman wrote: “You are correct that if you compress an ideal gas in a diesel engine in what is close to an adiabatic process [temperature change with elevation from the surface], it will get warm enough to ignite diesel fuel. But absent the adiabatic process, you can have gases at tremendously high pressure that are not warm. Air systems frequently contain air at over 5000 psi. In a non-adiabatic process, temperature increases caused from pressure increases result in heat transfer, which is driven by the temperature increase. If the time frame is long enough, then the process could in fact be isothermal. [a change in a system, in which the temperature remains constant] I would assume that the development of the atmosphere on Venus happened over a very long time frame making the diesel analogy poor.”

Elsewhere, Will Happer wrote: “I pointed out that Venus has a troposphere, just like the Earth, where the atmosphere is roughly isentropic. My code words for this, probably too laconic, was something like “lots of convention” = Venus has a troposphere. Venus has a roughly adiabatic lapse rate in its troposphere that is comparable to that of the Earth, 9.5 C/km, for dry air, less for real air where the release of latent heat from condensing water slows down the cooling with altitude. The dry lapse rate for Venus is a bit less because the acceleration of gravity is a bit less than on Earth and the specific heat at constant pressure is a bit larger.


“The heat transfer from conduction along a temperature gradient is completely negligible on Venus as it is on Earth. Heat transfer is almost entirely from convection near the surface, but radiation begins to dominate as you approach the tropopause and takes over almost completely in the stratosphere. For both Venus and Earth, the heating with decreasing altitude in the troposphere (or cooling with increasing altitude) is indeed like the adiabatic heating as you push a piston into the cylinder of a diesel engine (or like the cooling with withdrawal of the piston).”


TWTW deeply appreciates the efforts of those who take the time to correct errors or apparent errors it its statements.


Nominated for SEPP’s April Fool’s Award: Among those distinguished persons nominated for the SEPP April Fool’s Award are the following:

Professor Lonnie Thompson, Ohio State University – promoting versions of the Mr. Mann’s hockey-stick with poorly defined ice-core finding.

Bill Ney (The science guy) – promoting a politically contrived version of the major scientific issues involved in global warming/climate change

John Holdren (President Obama’s science advisor)

Angela Merkel, for her efforts to transform an industrialized nation from nuclear and fossil fuel energy to renewable power through an accelerated phasing out of all 17 German nuclear reactors. As a result, domestic energy bills are 48% higher in Germany than the European average

Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin – clearly America’s most climate-crazy state governor

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) – an advocate of RICO use against skeptics

Professor Jagdish Shukla – a leader in the RICO 20 – sending a letter urging investigation of those who do not support his views — contrary to a published paper stating that no global climate models “have been successful in making skillful predictions of Indian Monsoon rainfall. It remains an open question.”

Secretary General of the UN, Ban Ki -Moon – for various reasons including advocating the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and promoting “mother earth day.”

Michael Mann, PhD Distinguished Professor of Meteorology, Director, Earth System Science Center (per the Penn State website) – for his demonstration of non-science by cherry picking Siberian tree data as surrogates to support his pre-known conclusion on the occurrence of dangerous human-caused global warming. Also, he now claims, we do not need data to assess climate change because we can see climate change on TV. [The issues are the causes of climate change, which cannot be seen on TV.]

Dr. Kevin Trenberth – He is one of the RICO 20 “scientists” who advocated using RICO statutes against oil companies.

No additional nominations will be accepted. The voting will close on midnight July 8. To vote, please send your vote to Ken@SEPP.org.


Number of the Week: 36% in FY2010 to 21% in FY2015. Down 42%. According to a June 22 report by the Congressional Research Service: “The federal share of total U.S. crude oil production fell from its peak at nearly 36% in FY2010 [fiscal year 2010] to 21% in FY2015.” This is a decline in the federal share of US crude oil production of about 42%. Further, “Natural gas production in the United States overall dramatically increased each year since 2006, in contrast, production on federal lands declined each year from FY2007 through FY2014.” The oil and natural gas revolution in the United States is not because of Washington’s policies, but in spite of them. See links under Washington’s Control of Energy




Commentary: Is the Sun Rising?

Are we headed for a new solar minimum?

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. June 27, 2016


A spotless sun: Incredible image shows solar activity at its quietest in 100 years – and some say it could trigger a mini ice age

By Ellie Zolfagharifard, Daily Mail, June 27, 2016 [H/t GWPF]


Suppressing Scientific Inquiry – The Witch Hunt

Exxon-Mobil is abusing the first amendment

By Robert Post, Washington Post, June 24, 2016 [H/t William Dwyer]


Robert Post is the dean and a professor of law at Yale Law School.

[SEPP Comment: Apparently, Mr. Post does not grasp the difference between unsubstantiated accusation and physical evidence.]

Suppressing Scientific Inquiry – The Witch Hunt – Push-Back

Shake Up in Subpoena Land

By Sam Kazman, CEI, July 1, 2016


U.S. Virgin Islands withdraws subpoena of Exxon in climate probe

By James Osborne, Fuel Fix, June 30, 2016


The imploding cabal to criminalize climate dissent

By Adam Brodsky, New York Post, June 30, 2016


“New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and his fellow greenies are getting a lesson about the dangers of believing their own propaganda.”

Climate change prosecutors suffer setback as AG pulls Exxon subpoena

Groups targeted were on Greenpeace offender list

By Valerie Richardson, The Washington Times, June 29, 2016


Skeptics Win! AG pulls #ExxonKnew subpoena

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, June 29, 2016


Legal backbone strengthens science and society

By Anthony J. Sadar, American Thinker, June 29, 2016


Exxon Climate Attackers Target Conservative Voices

By Larry Bell, Newsmax, June 27, 2016


Challenging the Orthodoxy — NIPCC

Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming

The NIPCC Report on the Scientific Consensus

By Craig D. Idso, Robert M. Carter, and S. Fred Singer, NIPCC, Nov 23, 2015


Download with no charge


Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science

Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, 2013


Summary: http://www.nipccreport.org/reports/ccr2a/pdf/Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf

Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts

Idso, Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, 2014


Summary: https://www.heartland.org/media-library/pdfs/CCR-IIb/Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf

Challenging the Orthodoxy

UAH Global Temperature Update for June 2016: +0.34 deg. C

Second largest 2-month drop in global average satellite temperatures.

Largest 2-month drop in tropical average satellite temperatures.

By Roy Spencer, His Blog, July 1, 2016


The Tangled Web of Global Warming Activism

Guest Opinion: Dr. Tim Ball, WUWT, June 26, 2016


Defending the Orthodoxy

USGS polar bear researchers publish their rebuttal to 2015 IUCN Red List assessment

By Susan Crockford, Polar Bear Science, June 30, 2016


Link to paper: Polar Bear Outlook Favorable Under Certain Scenarios

By Atwood, et al. USGS, June 29, 2016


“Oddly, the USGS Atwood/Amstrup paper does not mention the Red List assessment or the population size estimate of 22,000-31,000 it contained, even though both Atwood and Amstrup were co-authors of that document., and was clearly written at the same time.”

Questioning the Orthodoxy

Will La Nina Resume the “Hiatus?”

By David Whitehouse, GWPF, June 27, 2016


“It’s clear that the intense El Nino, one of the three strongest on record, is now over and forecasters are expecting a transition to La Nina conditions within a few months. What does this mean for the much-discussed ‘pause’ or ‘hiatus?’”

Another Doomsday Climate Prediction Gets Postponed …Effect On Gulf Stream “Smaller Than Expected”

By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, June 26, 2016


Hijacked! How Obama and the Left Killed NASA: The journey from the Moon to radical activism

By Art Harman, Capital Research Center, June 30, 2016 [H/t Thomas Wysmuller]


Remember that claim “global warming is causing cherry trees to bloom earlier” ? – Never mind, light pollution is likely the cause

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, June 29, 2016


After Paris!

As its NSG bid fails, India says Paris Climate Agreement ratification may be delayed [Nuclear Suppliers Group]

By, Indrani Bagchi, The Times of India, June 24, 2016 [H/t GWPF]


India to delay signing Paris agreement (Thank China)

India wants to be in the Nuclear Club — that’s the bargaining chip for signing the Paris agreement.

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, June 28, 2016


After Brexit!

5th Carbon Budget Based On Assumption that UK Remains In The EU

Editorial, GWPF, June 30, 3016


Brexit spells end to EU leadership in climate diplomacy

Political upheaval has likely pushed climate change down priority list, experts warn

By Staff Writers, Reuters, June 30, 2016


Thank you, America!

Comment by Lord Monckton on Brexit [H/t Mark Duchamp]

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, The Euro Probe, June 25, 2016


Brexit and climate change

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. June 25, 2016


Brexit reporting — nobody mention “Switzerland” or “Norway”

By Jo Nova, Her Blog, June 26, 2016


Brexit victory boosts climate skeptics

By Lorrie Goldstein, Toronto Sun, June 26, 2016


The EU’s “Climate-Political Nightmare”! Germany’s Flagship Daily ‘Die Welt’ Comments On Brexit

By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, June 30, 2016


UK Move To Set CO2 Target Faces Challenge

By Pilita Clark, Financial Times, Via GWPF, July 1, 2016


The Administration’s Plan

U.S., Canada and Mexico vow to get half their electricity from clean power by 2025

By Juliet Eilperin, Washington Post, June 27, 2016 [H/t Timothy Wise]


Social Benefits of Carbon

Elevated CO2: A Key Driver of Global Greening Observations

By Craig Idso, Cato, June 30, 2016


Link to paper:: Elevated CO2 as a driver of global dryland greening

By Lu, X., Wang, L. and McCabe, M.F, Nature, Scientific Reports, February 12, 2016


Good news! Climate study finds human CO2 fingerprint in Northern Hemisphere greening

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, June 29, 2016


Link to paper: Human-induced greening of the northern extratropical land surface

By Jiafu Mao, et al. Nature Climate Change, June 27, 2016


Seeking a Common Ground

Climate polarization requires long, deep look at our worldviews

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. June 30, 2016


Towards reconciling climate sensitivity estimates from climate models and observations

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. June 28, 2016


[SEPP Comment: Using surface measurements is unlikely to produce satisfactory results.]

Review of Recent Scientific Articles by CO2 Science

Does Global Warming Cause Coastal Reef Islands to Disappear?

Testut, L., Duvat, V., Ballu, V., Fernandes, R.M.S., Pouget, F., Salmon, C. and Dyment, J. 2016. Shoreline changes in a rising sea level context: The example of Grande Glorieuse, Scattered Islands, Western Indian Ocean. Acta Oecologica 72: 110-119. July 1, 2016


“Based on these findings, Testut et al. conclude that ‘this island expansion during a period of rising sea level demonstrates that sea level rise is not the primary factor controlling the shoreline changes.” Quite to the contrary, they note that their findings highlight “the key role of non-climate factors in changes in island area, especially sediment availability and transport. And they also cite evidence of real-world island rotation, ‘underscoring the highly dynamic nature of reef islands.”

Biases in CMIP3 and 5 Simulations of the Indian Ocean Basin Mode

Tao, W., Huang, G., Hu, K., Gong, H., Wen, G. and Liu, L. 2016. A study of biases in simulation of the Indian Ocean basin mode and its capacitor effect in CMIP3/CMIP5 models. Climate Dynamics 46: 205-226. June 29, 2016


Warming Trumps Ocean Acidification in a Calcifying Green Algae

Campbell, J.E., Fisch, J., Langdon, C. and Paul, V.J. 2016. Increased temperature mitigates the effects of ocean acidification in calcified green algae (Halimeda spp.). Coral Reefs 35: 357-368. June 28, 2016


Models v. Observations

Hurricane Main Development Region of North Atlantic – Climate Model-Simulated Sea Surface Temperatures Are Too Cool

And Those Too-Cool Surface Temperatures Create Obvious Problems for Researchers

Guest Post by Bob Tisdale, WUWT, June 27, 2016


Measurement Issues — Surface

Statistical Analysis Shows Germany’s June Mean Temperatures Completely Stable

German June Temperature Data – Statistical Analysis

By The Indomitable Snowman, No Tricks Zone, July 1, 2016


Study Finds More Evidence ‘Urban Heat Islands’ Are Warming Up Weather Stations

By Michael Bastasch, Daily Caller, June 17, 2016


Link to paper: From urban to national heat island: The effect of anthropogenic heat output on climate change in high population industrial countries

By Murray and Heggie, Earth’s Future, June 27, 2016


Measurement Issues — Atmosphere

Record Warm 2016? What a Difference One Month Makes

By Roy Spencer, His Blog, July 1, 2016


What Goes Up…

By Patrick Michaels, Cato, July 1, 2016


Changing Weather

Record breaking N. American winters not due to climate change

By Judith Curry, Climate Etc. June 27, 2016


Link to paper: Tropical Pacific impacts on cooling North American winters

By Sigmond and Fyfe, Nature Climate Change, June 27, 2016


Changing Climate

640,000-year-old cave stalagmites in China help scientists understand how last seven ice ages ended

Dating stalagmites and measuring oxygen isotope levels allows researchers a clearer picture of past climate.

By Léa Surugue, International Business Times, June 29, 2016 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


The Asian monsoon over the past 640,000 years and ice age terminations

By Hai Cheng, et al. Nature, June 29, 2016


Changing Seas

Discovery: Wind-blown Antarctic sea ice helps drive ocean circulation

Study first to quantify influence of Antarctic sea ice

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, June 28, 2016


Super-slow circulation allowed world’s oceans to store huge amounts of carbon during last ice age

By Staff Writers, Cambridge UK (SPX), Jun 30, 2016


Changing Cryosphere – Land / Sea Ice

Comparing the Kobashi and Alley Central Greenland Temperature Reconstructions

By Andy May, WUWT, June 25, 2016


[SEPP Comment: Corrections of estimates to Greenland’s 4000-year temperature history that appeared in last week’s TWTW.]


Greenland’s three melt surges rival 2012 record

By Staff Writers, National Snow & Ice Data Center, June 22, 2016 [H/t Climate Etc.]



Study Finds Non-Greenhouse Role for CO2 in Ice Age Cycles

By Marlo Lewis, CEI, June 30, 3016


[SEPP Comment: If one examines earlier than the last glacial maximum, one virtually eliminates any possible human influence, such as carbon black.]

Changing Earth

Active volcanoes get quiet before they erupt

By Brooks Hays, Washington (UPI), Jun 24, 2016


The Correlation of Seismic Activity and Recent Global Warming

By Arthur Viterito, Journal of Earth Science & Climate Change, Apr 20, 2016


[SEPP Comment: This is not to say that causation is established.]

Acidic Waters

Hoegh-Guldberg’s Coral Sophistry Triggers Sagan’s Science Baloney Alert!

Guest essay by Jim Steele, WUWT, June 27, 2016


Communicating Better to the Public – Make things up.

Warning from the past: Future global warming could be even warmer

By Staff Writers, Science Daily, from Niels Bohr Institute, June 23, 2016


Unable to link to paper.

[SEPP Comment: Do we know with such great precision existing conditions 56 million years ago, that we can use them to forecast the future?]

Communicating Better to the Public – Do a Poll?

Climate Change in the American Mind: March, 2016

By Anthony Leiserowitz, Edward Maibach, Connie Roser-Renouf, Climate Change Communication, June 2, 2016


Questioning European Green

Germany waters down climate protection plan

By Markus Wacket and Caroline Copley, Reuters, June 30, 2016


“Red Blood On Green Hands”: Germany’s ‘Energiewende’ Turns Into a Wrecking Ball …”The Rescue That Isn’t”

By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, June 27, 2016



Without Subsidies, Drax Would Be Broke

By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, July 1, 2016


Questioning Green Elsewhere

Wind Turbines In China Aren’t Working And It’s Becoming A HUGE Problem

By Andrew Follett, Daily Caller, June 29, 2016


“China has poured more than $80 billion building new green energy in 2014 alone, while the U.S. spent a “mere” $34 billion. More than one-in-three wind turbines currently installed worldwide are in China. Even with this enormous number of turbines, China still produces less electricity from wind than America, indicating the country is so over-saturated with turbines that it is damaging the power grid, potentially leading to blackouts.”

Non-Green Jobs

Manufacturing, Jobs or Grants to Americans

By Donn Dears, Power For USA, June 28, 2016


Robots in Manufacturing

By Donn Dears, Power For USA, July 1, 2016


[SEPP Comment: More than hitting a switch.]

The Political Games Continue

Dem Party Platform Calls For Prosecuting Global Warming Skeptics and Ending Use of Fossil Fuels by 2050

By Alan Carlin, Carlin Economics and Science, July 1, 2016


Dem Platform Embraces Climate Change

By Daniel John Sobieski, American Thinker, July 1, 2016


Litigation Issues

SCOTUS Overturns Bribery Conviction of Fmr. Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell

By Lawrence Hurley, Newsmax, June 27, 2016


EPA and other Regulators on the March

Controversial body’s glyphosate research isn’t reliable, critics say

By Taryn Phaneuf, Legal NewsLine, June 23, 2016


“We factor risk every day. Cars are obviously a hazard but we don’t set the speed limit to 5 miles per hour because of that. We can measure parts per quadrillion so it is easy to find traces of glyphosate in anything. But that’s one drop in 11,000,000 gallons of water. It cannot be harmful yet evidence of existence is used as reason for concern. That is homeopathy, not science.”

[SEPP Comment: The agency in question is the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).]

‘Home Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards’ Hearing: Some Reflections (Part II)

By Mark Krebs, Master Resource, June 30, 2016


[SEPP Comment: Second of two parts. Should a three-year simple payback rule determine whether a regulation to save energy is needed or not? Such a rule would be a welcome relief too all but ideologues and those who are paid to participated in the current proceedings. No more endless pages showing of results of vague computer models!]

Energy Issues – Non-US

Counting the cost of air pollution

By Staff Writers, WNN, June 27, 2016 [H/t Toshio Fujita]


Link to report: Energy and Air Pollution

By Staff Writers, EIA, 2016


Household fuels exceed power plants and cars as source of smog in Beijing

By Staff Writers, Princeton NJ (SPX), Jun 30, 2016


These countries have the deadliest air pollution. (Surprisingly, Georgia is No. 1.)

By Brad Plumer, Vox, June 27, 2016


Analysis: US crude exports rerouted since 2015

By Staff Writers, Argus, June 30, 2016


AMA issues warning about “Energy Efficient” LED Streetlights

Guest essay by Eric Worrall, WUWT, June 27, 2016


China’s Idled Wind Farms May Spell Trouble for Renewable Energy

By Staff Writer, Bloomberg, June 28, 2016 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


Washington’s Control of Energy

Natural Gas Production Declines on Federal Lands

Gas production on federal property declined each year between 2007 and 2014

By Ali Meyer, Washington Free beacon, June 27, 2916 [H/t Timothy Wise]


Link to report: U.S. Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production in Federal and Nonfederal Areas

By Marc Humphries, CRS, June 22, 2016


TransCanada files $15 bn suit over US rejection of Keystone pipeline

By Staff Writers, Ottawa (AFP), June 25, 2016


White House to defend fracking authority

By Daniel J. Graeber, Washington (UPI), Jun 23, 2016


[SEPP Comment: In spite of the law?]

Oil and Natural Gas – the Future or the Past?

Expanded Panama Canal reduces travel time for shipments of U.S. LNG to Asian markets

By Staff Writers, EIA, June 30, 2016


Nuclear Energy and Fears

Expert says most nuclear fuel melted at Fukushima nuclear plant

By Staff Writers, London (XNA), Jun 28, 2016


Climate goals call for speedier expansion of nuclear power

By Staff Writers, WNN, June 22, 2016


How the nation’s largest nuclear power plant stays cool in Arizona’s summer heat

By Derek Staahi, KPHO TV, June 24, 2016 [H/t Toshio Jujita]


[SEPP Comment: Contrary to the article, it is not heat that makes swamp coolers ineffective, but humidity. The Sonoran Desert in the Palo Verde region has two rainy seasons, summer and winter. The summer rainy season begins in July with temperatures generally cooling from May – June. But, it is in July that swamp coolers become ineffective.]

Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind

A populist revolt against wind? It’s happening!

By Lisa Linowes, Wind Action, June 27, 2016


How the London Array blows away the competition in green energy

The Thames estuary is home to the world’s largest offshore wind farm – a model for exploiting the potential of Britain’s gusty coastlines

By Kit Buchan, The Guardian, UK, June 28, 2016


[SEPP Comment: Reliability reports after one year of operation and cost of operating and maintaining back-up will be interesting.]

Wind should stand on its own power

By Chris Tomlinson, Longview New-Journal, Via Wind Action, June 19, 2016


Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Energy — Other

The U.S. Navy’s Less Than Great ‘Green’ Fleet Development

By John Miller, The Energy Collective, June 27, 2016


[SEPP Comment: The US does not need the expensive “green” fleet.]

Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Vehicles

The rise of the electric car

By Martin Livermore, The Scientific Alliance, July 1, 2016


Volkswagen reaches $14.7B settlement for emissions cheating

By Timothy Cama, The Hill, June 28, 2016


California Dreaming

Closing Diablo Canyon: California Rolls the Dice with Renewables (and Natural Gas)

By Revis W. James, Real Clear Energy, June 27, 2016


“The proposal does not even pretend to find enough carbon-free replacements. It says that 2,000 gigawatt-hours will come from carbon-free resources and 2,000 gigawatt-hours will come from efficiency. That’s ambitious. However, last year the Diablo Canyon reactors produced 18,500 gigawatt-hours, four and a half times more than the specified replacements. That’s a very big gamble.”

Renewable California

By Roger Andrews, Energy Matters, June 30, 2016


[SEPP Comment: More reasons why the closure of Diablo Canyon nuclear plant may be little more than raw politics.]

Why plans to replace Diablo Canyon with 100 percent clean energy could fall short

By Lauren Sommer, Wind Action, June 27, 2016


Interesting: California Hitting New Heights with Renewables in 2016

By Roger Sowell, Introduced by Anthony Watts, WUWT, June 24, 2016


When nuclear is closed in California, what takes its place?

By Nicholas Thompson, His Blog, June 29, 2016


Blackout California

By Roger Andrews, Energy Matters, June 23, 2016


Environmental Industry

107 Nobel laureates sign letter blasting Greenpeace over GMOs

By Joel Achenbach, The Washington Post, June 29, 2016 [H/t Clyde Spencer]


Link to web site: Support GMOs and Golden Rice

By Staff Writers, Support Precision Agriculture, No Date


‘There has never been a single confirmed case of a negative health outcome for humans or animals from their [GMO] consumption.

Congressman Bob Gibbs column: Biotechnology is feeding millions, saving lives

On July 1, Vermont’s food labeling law will take effect, causing massive production and packaging issues across the agriculture and food industries.

By Bob Gibbs, U.S. House, New Philadelphia Times, June 25, 2016


Other Scientific News

New paper demonstrates the gravito-thermal greenhouse effect on Jupiter is due to pressure, not greenhouse gases

By Staff Writers, The Hockey Schtick, June 15, 2016


Link to paper: Peering through Jupiter’s clouds with Radio Spectral Imaging

By de Pater, Sault, Butler, DeBoer and Wong, Science, June 3, 2016


Previously unknown global ecological disaster discovered

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, June 28, 2016


Russian physicists create a high-precision ‘quantum ruler’

By Staff Writers, Moscow, Russia (SPX), June 28, 2016


The 17 equations that changed the world

By Andy Kiersz, World Economic Forum, April 4, 2016


Tackling intractable computing problems

By Aaron Dubrow, NSF, June 29, 2016


Other News that May Be of Interest

European Research Libraries Say ‘Neighboring Rights’ Oppose Open Science

Declaring that ‘the current copyright framework is unfit for the digital age,’ the chief of Europe’s research libraries speaks out against “neighboring rights’—related rights—for publishers.

Increasing ‘the Burden of the Transactions of Licenses’

By Porter Anderson, Publishing Perspectives, June 27, 2016 [H//t Clyde Spencer


Rediscovering Gaia’s Riches

By Staff Writers, The American Interest, June 28, 2016 [H/t GWPF]


The Gambler’s Fallacy Proves Classical Statistics (Frequentist & Bayes) Fails

By William Briggs, His Blog, June 28, 2016




Worse than we thought – tides!

By Staff Writers, Climate Change Predictions, June 29, 2016


“Global sea levels have risen faster than previously thought over the past century, suggesting that climate change is having a greater than expected impact on the rising oceans, a study has found.

Previously, researchers gathered tide gauge records from around the world, averaged them together from different regions and then averaged those rates together again to create a global estimate, said Dr Eric Morrow of Harvard University.

“But these simple averages aren’t representative of a true global mean value. Tide gauges are located along the coasts, therefore large areas of the ocean aren’t being included in these estimates and the records that do exist commonly have large gaps,” he said.”

Independent, 15 Jan 2015



1. The Sierra Club Still Opposes Nuclear Power

It is categorically incorrect to suggest that the Sierra Club considers nuclear power a “bridge” to clean energy.

Michael Brune, Executive Director, The Sierra Club, Letters, WSJ, June 23, 2016


“’Green Groups Ease Opposition to Nuclear Power’ (Business & Tech, June 17) gets it wrong. The Sierra Club remains in firm opposition to dangerous nuclear power. The article reflects wishful thinking on the part of the nuclear industry but doesn’t accurately represent the position of the Sierra Club.


“It is categorically incorrect to suggest that the Sierra Club considers nuclear power a “bridge” to clean energy. Nuclear power, much like coal, oil and gas, is a bridge to nowhere. In Illinois the Sierra Club is part of a coalition to increase renewable energy and energy efficiency, not preserve nuclear reactors. America’s energy future must be powered by 100% clean, renewable energy like wind and solar—and nuclear in no way meets this requirement.


“The Sierra Club’s successful work to stop and retire coal and gas operations has never precluded our efforts to oppose nuclear power, nor will it ever. Decades of evidence around the world clearly demonstrates that nuclear power remains a dirty and extremely dangerous energy source, and we will continue our efforts to block new reactors from being built and replace existing ones with 100% clean, renewable energy.”


2. Climate Denial Finally Pays Off

A series of Journal editorial page-bashing ads shows the climate cause in mid-crackup.

By Holman Jenkins, Jr. WSJ, June 28, 2016


Link to IPCC AR5

By Staff Writers, IPCC, Various dates 2013 & 2014


SUMMARY (lightly edited): The author writes: “No contributor has written more frequently on the subject of climate change on these pages—45 times over the past 20 years according to the “study” behind a recent series of ads (at $27,309 a pop) assailing the Journal’s editorial page for its climate coverage.

“Yet how ploddingly conventional my views have been: I’ve written that evidence of climate change is not evidence of what causes climate change. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change agrees, in its latest report estimating with less than 100% confidence that a human role accounts for half the warming between 1951 and 2010.

“I’ve written that it would be astonishing if human activity had no impact, but the important questions are how and how much. The IPCC agrees, estimating that a doubling of atmospheric CO2 from pre-industrial times would hike temperatures between 1.5 degrees and 4.5 degrees (Celsius), notably an increase in the range of uncertainty since its last report.

“I’ve said science has been unable to discern signal from noise in the hunt for man-made warming. Yup, that’s why the IPCC relies on computer simulations. Indeed, the most telling words in its latest report are a question: “Are climate models getting better, and how would we know?”

“I’ve said it’s difficult to justify action on cost-benefit grounds. The Obama administration agrees, acknowledging that its coal plans will cost many billions but have no meaningful impact on climate even a century from now.

“So how many columns out of 45 win approval from the Partnership for Responsible Growth, the new group paying for the Journal-baiting ad? Only two, describing the superiority of a carbon tax, the option the Partnership exists to plump for, compared to other climate nostrums.

“Here’s what else I’ve learned in 20 years. Many advocates of climate policy are ignoramuses on the subject of climate science, and nothing about the Partnership for Economic Progress—founded by former Democratic congressman Walt Minnick plus a couple of big donors—breaks with this tradition.

“Only a nincompoop would treat a complex set of issues like human impact on climate as a binary “yes/no” question—as the Partnership and many climate policy promoters do. Only an idiot would ask an alleged “expert” what he knows without showing any curiosity about how he knows it—a practice routine among climate-advocating journalists.

“So Tom Gjelten, host of a recent NPR discussion of the Journal ad controversy, is completely satisfied when Matt Nisbet, a professor of communications studies at Northeastern University, explains, “On the fundamentals of climate science, there is absolutely no debates. The overwhelming majority of scientists . . . strongly agree that climate change is happening, that it’s human-caused and that it’s an urgent problem.” “Notice that he doesn’t cite any science but an (undocumented) agreement of people who agree with him, while conflating three very different questions.”

After stating that Prof. Nisbet covered up by saying “there is some disagreement on the pace of climate change, the severity, its specific impacts”, Jenkins states:

“By then the damage is done. The discussion proceeds on the basis that anybody who takes part in this disagreement about pace, severity and specific impacts is a denier and enemy of science.

“Here’s what you also won’t learn from most climate reporting: Climate models that predict significant warming presume natural feedbacks that magnify the impact of human-released carbon dioxide by 100% to 400%. Models that presume no dominant feedbacks see warming of only about one degree Celsius over the entire course of a doubling of atmospheric CO2. Who knows what future scientific advances will reveal, but models that assume minimal feedback are more consistent with the warming seen so far—and remember, we’ve been burning coal for 200 years and accumulating temperature records for longer than that.

“The U.S. political system gets a bad rap but has rationally concluded that it can’t sell large costs on this evidence. More to the point, never has it been the case that major legislation or policy departures are adopted only when all opposition and dissent are silenced. The premise of the assault on Exxon, the Journal, other campaigns against “deniers,” is worse than foolish. The climate crowd has turned to persecuting critics as a substitute for meaningful climate action because, as President Obama has acutely observed, voters won’t support their efforts to jack up energy prices.

“Functionally, whatever advocates tell themselves, these attacks end up churning the waters and propagandizing for those niggling little things that actually can be enacted, having no impact on climate but lining the pockets of organized interests who return the favor with campaign donations.

“That’s how our political system behaves, on climate and most other subjects—which perhaps explains why voters are so tired of the people who man our political system.”


3. Obama’s Climate Policy Is a Hot Mess

The president hails the Paris Agreement again—even though it will solve nothing and cost trillions.

By Bjorn Lomborg, WSJ, June 30, 2016


SUMMARY (lightly edited): “When President Obama flew to Ottawa, Canada, on Wednesday to meet with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, promoting their climate-change policies was near the top of the agenda. “The Paris Agreement was a turning point for our planet,” the leaders’ joint statement said, referring to the climate pact signed with fanfare in April by nearly 200 nations. ‘North America has the capacity, resources and the moral imperative to show strong leadership building on the Paris Agreement and promoting its early entry into force.’

“Attracting rather less attention than the Ottawa meeting was a June 22 hearing on Capitol Hill. Testifying before the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy extolled the Paris Agreement as an “incredible achievement.” But when repeatedly asked, she wouldn’t explain exactly how much this treaty would actually cut global temperatures.

“The Paris Agreement will cost a fortune but do little to reduce global warming. In a peer-reviewed article published in Global Policy this year, I looked at the widely hailed major policies that Paris Agreement signatories pledged to undertake and found that they will have a negligible temperature impact. I used the same climate-prediction model that the United Nations uses.

“First, consider the Obama administration’s signature climate policy, the Clean Power Plan. The U.N.’s model shows that it will accomplish almost nothing. Even if the policy withstands current legal challenges and its cuts are totally implemented—not for the 14 years that the Paris agreement lasts, but for the rest of the century—the Clean Power Plan would reduce temperatures by 0.023 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100.

“President Obama has made grander promises of future carbon cuts, beyond the plan’s sweeping restrictions on the power industry, but these are only vaguely outlined now. In the unlikely event that all of these extra cuts also happen, and are adhered to throughout the rest of the century, the combined reduction in temperatures would be 0.057 degrees. In other words, if the U.S. delivers for the whole century on the very ambitious Obama rhetoric, it would postpone global warming by about eight months at the end of the century. “

After stating that the Paris Agreement has similar problems – grand promises with expensive programs accomplishing little, Lomborg goes on:

“The costs of the Paris climate pact are likely to run to $1 trillion to $2 trillion annually throughout the rest of the century, using the best estimates from the Stanford Energy Modeling Forum and the Asia Modeling Exercise. Spending more than $100 trillion for such a feeble temperature reduction by the end of the century does not make sense.

Some Paris Agreement supporters defend it by claiming that its real impact on temperatures will be much more significant than the U.N. model predicts. This requires some mental gymnastics and heroic assumptions. The group doing climate modeling for the U.S. State Department assumes that without the Paris Agreement emissions would be much higher than under any realistic scenario. With such an unrealistically pessimistic baseline, they can then magically show that the agreement will cut temperatures by 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit—with about 1.5 degrees of the drop coming from a reduction of these fantasy carbon emissions.

The Climate Action Tracker, widely cited by Paris Agreement fans, predicts a temperature reduction of 1.6 degrees by the end of the century. But that model is based heavily on the assumption that even stronger climate policies will be adopted in the future—98% of the assumed reductions come after the current Paris Agreement promises to expire in 2030.

Even this wishful thinking won’t achieve anything close to the 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) reduction that has become the arbitrary but widely adopted benchmark for what will be essential to avoid the worst effects of global warming.

“The Paris Agreement is the wrong solution to a real problem. We should focus more on green-energy research and development, like that promoted by Bill Gates and the Breakthrough Coalition. Mr. Gates has announced that private investors are committing $7 billion for clean energy R&D, while the White House will double its annual $5 billion green innovation fund. Sadly, this sorely needed investment is a fraction of the cost of the same administration’s misguided carbon-cut policies.

“Instead of rhetoric and ever-larger subsidies of today’s inefficient green technologies, those who want to combat climate change should focus on dramatically boosting innovation to drive down the cost of future green energy.

“The U.S. has already shown the way. With its relentless pursuit of fracking driving down the cost of natural gas, America has made a momentous switch from coal to gas that has done more to drive down carbon-dioxide emissions than any recent climate policy. Turns out that those who gathered in Paris, France, could learn a little from Paris, Texas.”

Mr. Lomborg, president of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, is the author of “Cool It” (Knopf, 2007) and “Smartest Targets for the World” (Copenhagen Consensus, 2015).


4. Attorneys General Are Right To Pursue Exxon Mobil

Exxon Mobil and the CEI are attempting to argue that the First Amendment protects them from producing the information that can shed light on whether they broke the law.

By Attorney General Claude Earl Walker, U.S. Virgin Islands, Letters WSJ, June 24, 2016


“Regarding your June 16 editorial “The Climate Police Blink” about the U.S. Virgin Islands’ investigation of Exxon Mobil Corp. and its third-party subpoena to the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), an organization that Exxon has funded, and which questions the science behind climate change: The Virgin Islands, along with other attorneys general, is seeking information to determine whether Exxon Mobil misrepresented what the company privately knew and publicly said about climate change. If it did, that could constitute fraud and violate our laws and the laws of other jurisdictions. Exxon Mobil and CEI are attempting to argue that the First Amendment protects them from producing the information that can shed light on whether they broke the law—a proposition the courts have routinely rejected. You write that the subpoena demanded CEI’s “donor names” and “threatened its donors,” but this is incorrect. The CEI subpoena did not request the names of any donors or any information unrelated to Exxon. Its requests regarding funding are limited to funding directly or indirectly by Exxon, and only until 2007. Any suggestion that we have asked for anything akin to a list of current donors is simply false.”


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
July 3, 2016 7:52 pm

From the article: “According to Kazman, all this serves to show their “case for sanctions against Walker is stronger than ever. Even aside from questions of misrepresentation to the court, Walker’s decision to yank his subpoenas in the face of legal challenges indicates that he had no valid reason to issue them in the first place. And that makes the need for sanctions even clearer—because when a law enforcement officer breaks the law, it’s not enough for him to simply stop behaving badly. A violation like this of the First Amendment needs to be paid for, because that’s the best way of ensuring that it doesn’t happen again.”
These Leftwing AG’s, and all the others involved, need to pay for their attempts to take away the First Amendment rights of U.S. citizens.
And make no mistake, that is exactly what they were trying to do. They had no legal case, and this is just pure harrassment and an attempt to silence their political opposition.

July 3, 2016 8:19 pm

They forgot to mention that the court sanctioned (fined) CEI for filing an anti-SLAP without first conferring with the other side. It’s a minor issue but whitewashing it makes me wonder what else they aren’t saying. Honesty and full disclosure are a better policy.

Reply to  Thomas
July 4, 2016 1:13 am

It comes to me as quite an alien thought that you can be fined for filing a case.
I understand that justice (not the judge hopefully) is expensive, and someone has to pay the fees of lawyers and judges, but that the one bringing up a case is fined immediately for doing that in a timely manner is beyond my understanding.
I hope the sanctioned fee or fine can be added to total damages should the court case be successful.
Anyway, for me it is completely clear that the campaign against Exxon is a misguided attempt to prove hearsay spread by environmentalists. They need an enemy, and in the modern society there are not many institutions that can be rumoured to be behind the surprisingly strong scepticism towards usefulness of expensively mitigating assumedly catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. Some people use the word witch-hunt, I’d like to call this just a hysteric period in history. It will be replaced with another hysteria no later than in 30 years. But it takes up to 60 years before the generation holding this hysteria is completely gone.

July 3, 2016 8:30 pm

I always read your interesting compilation. Thank you so much for your service.

July 3, 2016 9:50 pm

Hmm, should you correct errors in comments about…errors ?
“TWTW deeply appreciates the efforts of those who take the time to correct errors or apparent errors it its statements.” ….”it it’s” = “in it’s” ??
Things that make you go..”Hmmmmmmm”

July 3, 2016 9:54 pm

…Bill Ney should be Bill Nye ?
“Bill Ney (The science guy) – promoting a politically contrived version of the major scientific issues involved in global warming/climate change”

Robert from oz
July 4, 2016 12:38 am

In Oz a newly elected senator (a female version of Donald Trump) was asked about her views on climate change .
She says she wants to see empirical evidence to prove that man is responsible because from what she knows on the subject the science is far from settled .
One of her hopefull candidates is apparently quite versed on the subject and is sceptical , if she gains enough senate seats she may be a thorn in the side of the greens and the Labour Party .
Here’s hoping and next election she will get my vote .

Reply to  Robert from oz
July 4, 2016 1:30 am

You are right to vote her. See my misdirected response below.

July 4, 2016 1:29 am

She says she wants to see empirical evidence to prove that man is responsible because from what she knows on the subject the science is far from settled .

I think the question is overly simplified is you ask if ‘man is responsible’ or not. It is not a question about ‘if man is responsible of some climate change’.
The question should be rather ‘what is the expected return on investment of different suggested mitigation methods’. What is an efficient way to fight back. The question is, on the given money and other resources we have, how do we get the best result. And for that question the answer is invariably:what ever else you do, keep the economy well, because if the climate sensitivity is low, there is no need to mitigate, if it is high, we cannot effectivily mitigate without doing much more harm than the unmitigated scenario would be. Keeping economy well we are best adapted to take the possible blows.
I’m more and more inclined climate related risks should be handled via insurance like methods: options and warrants that provide of way to channel money based on expected and real damages. This would be much more efficient way to create some climate justice than the political left’s ideas that basically would stop Western growth leading to a global regression while still giving the third world an excuse to use more coal.

Reply to  Hugs
July 4, 2016 1:35 am

I’m informed in English economic regression is called recession. Sorry about that and missing little words.

Robert from oz
Reply to  Hugs
July 4, 2016 2:25 am

Why should I pay for increased insurance when 1 molecule in 1500 is supposedly heating the planet , show me the evidence if I want to look at models I will look elsewhere .

Robert from oz
Reply to  Hugs
July 4, 2016 2:32 am

Might have been a bit harsh below but how to plan for future natural climate when we don’t know if we’ll need snow shoes or sunblock seems a tough one .

Reply to  Hugs
July 4, 2016 8:18 am

Don’t worry about it, Hugs, your English is just fine.

Reply to  Hugs
July 4, 2016 12:21 pm

You are not supposed to pay the insurance, but people who are afraid or see probable their seafront estate is sinking should be able to do so. If you believe the other way, you become the seller of the insurance. This kind of weather warrants already exist to some extent.

July 4, 2016 1:57 am

Just bouncing around a stupid thought here.
But, regarding this map of the missing warming during the hiatus period – has anyone ever noticed that the regions that showed a remarkable reduction in warming during winter months (Dec, Jan, Feb) were precisely the regions where advances in building construction technologies and a push towards energy efficiency will have lead to a reduction in the contribution of heated buildings to the UHI.
And that this dramatic result comes from HadCrut.
Look at the location of the very dark areas – this effect is seen only on land and primarily in Northern Europe, the Post-Soviet regions, Alaska and Canada.
Is it possible that Celotex expanded polyurethane panels and tripe glazing have cooled the world.
Or at least – cooled the stations which measure the warming of the world.
I know that this appears to be an imbecilic proposal on the face of it.
BUT – perhaps such an effect made some degree of contribution.
And we do see a remarkable correlation which only exists during winter months and only in those areas where vast improvements in thermal management of buildings has occurred over the relevant timespan.
And – there is currently no other more sensible explanation for this remarkable observation.
And – if I can’t entertain this UHI related idea here, then where could I mention such a thing?
Have a look. It’s an amusing thought, if nothing else:

Robert from oz
July 4, 2016 2:28 am

Can I say Frog , your guess is just as good as any shonky scientist . But that’s just my opinion .

Robert from oz
July 4, 2016 3:26 am

Just read Pauline Hansons climate policy for Australia and she nails it , basically everything people here have been saying about renewables ,coal , etc and more .
Very interesting reading and now she defiinatly has my vote .

July 4, 2016 7:32 am

En la opción 1 y 2, pregunte cuales son los vuelos durante el día de Vienna a Paris

July 4, 2016 9:17 am

“Our findings reveal that the observed greening record is consistent with an assumption of anthropogenic forcings, where greenhouse gases play a dominant role, but is not consistent with simulations that include only natural forcings and internal climate variability. These results provide the first clear evidence of a discernible human fingerprint on physiological vegetation changes other than phenology and range shifts.”
The “We can’t explain it, so it must be humans” assertion. Argumentum ad Ignorantiam.

Mickey Reno
July 4, 2016 2:37 pm

Thanks for your hard work, Ken.

July 5, 2016 2:03 am

Politico Magazine
From the Democratic Platform Drafting Committee:
“…As a representative of Clinton’s campaign, I was proud that we came together as Democrats to articulate the boldest climate vision ever to appear in our party’s platform.”
“The 2016 draft platform moves decisively beyond an “all-of-the-above” energy strategy, calling for rapidly accelerating the transition to clean energy, getting half our electricity from clean energy sources within the next decade, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions more than 80 percent by 2050.”
“…it does not include their preferred amendments to enact a carbon tax and immediately ban all oil and gas production through hydraulic fracturing.”
Democratic Platform Debate http://tinyurl.com/hqn2fdj

Verified by MonsterInsights