Open Thread Friday

I’m traveling today with Christopher Monckton,  after being part of his lecture last night in Half Moon Bay, CA.

Today, we were on KSFO AM 560 in San Francisco  with Brian Sussman.

Feel free to comment  on any if the usual topics we cover at WUWT.

270 thoughts on “Open Thread Friday

  1. Please tell us you have video of CM’s pitch. I would just love to see how my fellow-Brit went down in CA. (Of course, he will not go down, only up!).

    • I’ll keep searching, Harry, but, until I find the audio link (or video), in the meantime, here is a link to the lord a leaping (click on video that will appear on webpage):
      (you’ll get a chuckle out of the mistake by the producer re-titling Monckton as “The Lord of Leaping” — Brenchley will just have to make do without from now on)

      • Harry. Do you read me? 🙂
        (heh, heh — it hasn’t been all that long since I responded to Harry, but I JUST HAD TO SAY IT! lololol — for anyone wondering…. that is an allusion to Climategate (broke on WUWT, Nov. 19, 2009))

      • Janice Moore @ at 11:45 am:
        Thanks for the link to the podcast. The previous podcast with LaVoy Finicum’s widow was interesting also.

      • Well his Lordship did in fact leap into a football stadium by parachute. That was one of his early antics, predating even the famous open mike lecture to the watermelons.
        So he definitely is The Lord-a-Leaping.

      • Hi, OK, you’re welcome. Thanks for letting me know.
        Yes, I listened to the interview with the murdered man’s wife, too. Appalling. It reminded me of the Janet Reno/Bill Clinton thugs who broke into Elian Gonzales’ grandparents’ house in Florida and yanked the little boy (whose mother died helping him escape the Communists of Cuba) out of the closet where he was hiding and sent him back to Castro’s lair. Very glad to hear (in Monckton’s KSFO interview) that Monckton and others are bringing a formal international inquiry to shine a very bright spotlight on the evil that was done in the desert of eastern Oregon that day.

      • Here is the rancher Lavoy Finicum murder to which OK and I were referring (into which Lord Monckton has launched an international inquiry) — widow interviewed in KSFO podcast just above the Monckton and Watts podcast (Dec. 9, 2016).
        CAUTION: Do not watch this unless you are prepared to watch something very disturbing.
        “The Oregonian” — helicopter video with cell phone video synced

        (youtube — about 12 minutes long)

      • Those interested in the Elian Gonzalez case might like to know about the Cuba Archive web-page.
        Cuba Archive, “documents deaths and disappearances resulting from the Cuban revolution and studies transitional issues related to truth, memory and justice. This project seeks to help Cubans attain their rightful freedoms, foster a culture of respect for life and the rule of law, and honor the memory of those who’ve paid the highest price.
        They show pictures of some of the people Castro has murdered; all tragic, many young and beautiful — men and women, both.
        I think they’re doing excellent work, and have donated to them. You can, too. 🙂
        The Middle East Research Institute, MEMRI is another worthy group, by the way and in my opinion. They include videos in translation of hortatory speeches recorded in middle eastern mosques. Very educational.

      • Janice FYI that picture of Elian Gonzalas is about as real as the picture of the Polar Bear/Penguin on the loan piece of ice. You may want a different one to illustrate your point.

      • That photo was on the cover of many nationally known publications NOT sympathetic to the Clinton administration. The burden of proof is on you, iron. You will have to prove it is was not genuine to be believed, here.
        Further, EVEN IF, ad arguendo, it were altered, the testimony of those present firmly establishes that the photo is an accurate representation of what was done.

    • Christopher and Anthony were in the Linda Mar district of Pacifica, CA, on the Pacific coast about 20 miles north of Half Moon Bay.

    • That must be the back of the head of Brainiac Sherry Yee, with Uber DJ computer whizz Katie Greene. I don’t recognize that image of The Sussman; resident KSFO fully credentialed Staff Meteorologist.

  2. How is the reception of your facts based on sound science going over with the flower powered Californians?

    • If skeptics want to win public support for rational enviromental policy we can now force debates.
      The loony left cannot stand the light. Public Policy Debates would gain massive audience and FORCE the left to real debate instead of MSM talking points!
      PLEASE contact the Trump Transition Team and request Policy debates.
      Presedential Public Policy Debates (PPPD) on CAGW and other issues like immigration with people like Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer and David Horowitz debating whomever the left wants to send to embarrass.
      Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming debate would be excellent. The left CANNOT win those debates. So PLEASE email the Trump Transition Team to set these up.
      Edit Reply

  3. Some 7 years ago Monckton was in Vancouver. After his address I gave him a framed cartoon that I had commissioned. Image of someone seeking advice from a wise man sitting on a mountain top.
    The advice was:
    “The Karma of Geophysics will soon overwhelm the dogma of global warming religions.”
    Seems to be working out.
    Bob Hoye

    • The notion of “fake news” is the scariest thing I’ve heard in a long time. I blame the school system for no longer requiring the reading of Orwell’s 1984.

      • Orwell hated communism but rather liked socialism. Why did he think socialism always failed?

        ”Socialism,” George Orwell famously wrote in The Road to Wigan Pier (1936), draws towards it ”with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, ‘Nature Cure’ quack, pacifist and feminist in England.” His tirade against such “cranks” is memorably extended in other passages of the book to include “vegetarians with wilting beards,” the “outer-suburban creeping Jesus” eager to begin his yoga exercises, and ”that dreary tribe of high-minded women and sandal-wearers and bearded fruit-juice drinkers who come flocking towards the smell of ‘progress’ like bluebottles to a dead cat.”

      • commieBob
        I got an email which has a picture of Santa Claus and the caption
        “Before you make fun of children believing in me
        Remember, there are adults who still believe in socialism”
        I can’t find a link direct to tghe picture.

      • “The notion of “fake news” is the scariest thing I’ve heard in a long time.”
        Fake news is nothing new. You have been listening to fake news all your life. The Leftwing news media around the world, is in the business of pushing their political ideology using lies and half-truths, not telling the truth. Telling the people the truth would harm their leftist political agenda, so instead you get “Fake News”.

    • Looks like a major effort. Suggestions: 1. contact Anthony to get it added to WUWT’s blogroll, 2. add the URL to your personal info when you write a comment here — that way, your name will become a link to your website.

    • OMG: I am a 71 year old engineer/statistician/physicist who has been totally bummed out by the misuse of climate data and the whole anti-CO2 cabal. Your website and the links you provide are the absolute best resource for sound reason and logic that I have ever seen.
      (Apologies to WUWT, your’s is an even handed presentation of facts, but this new site is a TERRIFIC primer for anyone who needs support in explaining the facts)
      My cars are both Prius’s and I meticulously conserve energy and water. Quite honestly I am most angry about the money and resources being (ab)used on CO2 abatement, when this money should be used to clean up the serious problems in today’s world: air pollution in China, India, and now Paris; conservation of the finite fossil fuels in or earth; the abuse of the oceans to where a giant floating island of plastics and non biodegradable junk has been created; and many others. The money spent on trying to reduce airborne fertilizer; AKA: CO2 is a sin and a wasteful diversion of money and resource!
      I have a friend who knows Rep Lamar Smith. I have already sent him a link to this website and an additional link to Climate Change in 12 minutes. I will make sure that I ask him to forward it!

      • Looks good William – thanks for your efforts.
        Additional to the comments on changing the tinyurl links, I would suggest links opening in a new tab, so that your site may be read in parallel with your references. The same suggestion would go for WUWT, although a conversion job would admittedly be a mammoth task for the latter.

      • Actually the reference is to the many diffuse areas of plastic and marine refuse where ever any giant circulation coagulates it. The problem is real. the pictorial evidence is unimpressive

    • Looks good and useful.
      You might ask for suggestions regarding security from some of those who run a popular blog or site.

    • Excellent work. Nice clean, easy to navigate page format, good clear writing. One minor suggestion / complaint: Many people (including me) do not like tinyurl and other URL obscuring shortening methods, and they will either not see or disregard your explanation for using them. WRT that explanation, you should add something like “If you want to check the URL first, [j]ust copy & paste links into your browser search box & enter.” A useful trick which I didn’t know – thanks – but, still, better to use a standard href with link text, so the reader can simply mouse over the link and see the actual URL in their browser status bar.

    • 1saveenergy: Great to see another website devoted to REAL climate info. I have considered doing that myself but just don’t have time.
      I clicked your “Contact” menu item and got a blank page. I wanted to comment on your point regarding a single number (global average temperature) where you reference an accuracy of 0.01 degrees. In the interest of maintaining scientific accuracy on your site, you might note that, at least for the HADCRUT4 data set, a 95% confidence interval is included. The width of the interval varies by month, but averages about 0.3 degrees C, and I think it’s about 0.18 degrees C for annual values.
      I am an engineer that likes to look at data before drawing conclusions, which is why I long ago fell off the CAGW wagon. I just want to make sure those of us who believe in real data don’t get accused of manipulating it.

    • Thanks for all the positive comments, it’s taken a lot of time & work checking & re-checking facts then trying to put it into an accessible format; lots more info to be added in the future…. plus a similar site on energy next year.

      • For over a half century I have watched this drift so was pleased to see at your beginning the emphasis on problem solving. A geologist a few years ago commented to me about an even older (circa 1950) project that was an example of excellent problem solving. The project’s director was my major mentor. The geologist suggested that it could never happen again. I hope not, but we have to strongly educate all about the fallacy of solutions looking for problems.

      • HDH
        Remember Victor Borge’s comment about his uncle
        “inventing the cure for which there was no disease”?

    • Sorry, I misposted this to William. Try again!
      Alan Ranger December 9, 2016 at 7:33 pm
      Looks good – thanks for your efforts.
      Additional to the comments on changing the tinyurl links, I would suggest links opening in a new tab, so that your site may be read in parallel with your references. The same suggestion would go for WUWT, although a conversion job would admittedly be a mammoth task for the latter. (This is just a personal preference, not a criticism BTW). From your site:
      “A neat often used trick is to just show the anomaly, so a small amount looks enormous.”
      Just one to add to this – the datum for the anomaly is also often used to try to indicate some sort of “normal” or correct or optimal value. But it is physically quite meaningless and only has a significance (exists) in the statistical treatment of the data points. A classic example is
      Blue legs good; red legs bad.

    • Nice job, 1saveenergy.
      Trouble is, we engineers have a different mind set … see Dilbert and search on line for engineering jokes. My wife and one of my very good engineering friend’s wife used to exchange engineering jokes they thought applied to us and paste them on our refrigerators to prove to us that our minds were a bit bent.
      The poly sci types out there might not get past your first page.
      But I have it bookmarked.

    • ““It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.”
      Paul Watson, a founder of Greenpeace’
      “If we want a good environmental policy in the future we’ll need to have a disaster.”
      Quote by Sir John Houghton, lead editor of first three IPCC reports”. (From your page1)
      That disaster was the last 8-16 years years!

    • @ 1saveenergy
      I have only had a quick glance thus far but here are a couple of observations: There is a lot of work there, well done indeed.
      One correction needed: On the link to CO2 Carbon Dioxide (it’s not carbon) – under Quick Links, you state that: “CO2 is a very tiny trace gas, currently just 0.000397 % of the atmosphere…” which is two too many zeros. It should be (rounded up) currently 0.04%.
      Just a minor observation: it might be worth reducing the number of double-exclamation marks (!!) – but that’s only a personal fad of my own 😉

  4. This in from reliable sources:
    The Trump EPA transition team “has asked the agency to list employees and contractors who attended United Nations climate meetings, along with those who helped develop the Obama administration’s social cost of carbon metrics”
    Oh this is going to be fun!
    Also, not to be remiss, greetings to Lord Monckton, happy you could help spread the word to more people here in the States.

      • You are right! A simple permanent transfer to a suitable work location – such as a new office building about 75mi straight N of Fairbanks, AK [no septic or sewer system, just outhouses] – would be appropriate. While there studies of the local climate would be encouraged. If the transfer is refused, their resignations would be accepted.

    • It would be nice to come up with 20 questions to ask each and every one of these internal government activists who have been pushing the climate scam. And, if the answer to any of the question is “I don’t know”, then the response is “you’re fired”.
      Time for these swamp critters to find a real job.

    • Trump will never make it to the ‘Whitehouse’, the fix is in.Beware.
      Obama orders review of cyber attacks on 2016 election – adviser
      President Barack Obama directed US intelligence agencies to conduct a full review of cyber attacks and foreign intervention into the 2016 election and deliver a report before he leaves office, homeland security adviser Lisa Monaco said on Friday. Monaco told reporters the results of the report would be shared with lawmakers and others. Obama leaves office on January 20. (Reuters)

      • Not without reason has Trump placed recently retired Marine and Army general officers in positions of power. The armed forces would stay out of a civil war, except for National Guard troops enforcing martial law in some places.
        The main enemy would be militarized federal law enforcement agencies, but even many of their minions would not fire on American civilians.

      • Chimp, the National Guard is under a dual reporting structure of State and Federal Officials. I’m sure that most of them would just say screw-off to Obama

      • Well, even if the Russians were the ones who supplied Wikileaks with all the stolen Hillary/Democrat emails (Wikileaks head, Julian Assange says it was not the Russians), all the Wikileaks emails did was expose the truth. The truth is what defeated Hillary, not Russian hackers. And there is no evidence whatsoever that Russian hackers compromised any ballot system in any state.
        This is all an effort to undermine Trump’s legitimacy, just like the recount effort, and just like the left emphasizing that Trump didn’t win the popular vote. The Left never stops attacking. If they get hammered in an election, like the last one, they just doubledown on the attacks. That’s the only thing they know to do.

      • @ TA
        Exactly the same has happened in the UK over Brexit, too. The losers will not give up – until it’s all over. They don’t understand the word ‘democracy’ or the democratic will of the people.

  5. I’ve been watching the CFSV2 daily surface global temperature anomaly estimate drop to its lowest point all year, and the lowest since July 2015, driven primarily by a big drop in the Northern Hemisphere over the last several days. Details here:
    There will probably be a large rebound before too long, but the GFS is forecasting even more of a drop over the next week, as can be seen here:

  6. I think we are going to need a fake science news section. There is plenty of material already out there.

    • Fake news.
      Today I read a blurb about Hillary speaking for first time since she lost. She blasted “fake news” stories.
      (I don’t think she mentioned that internet video that caused the Benghazi attack though.8-)

      • If Hillary had been elected she would be doing something about fake news, not just talking about it. Of course, in her mind, fake news is anything that doesn’t go along with the way she and the Left see the world. In other words, she has not problem censoring your speech if you disagree with her. She and Merkel see eye to eye on this. Hillary would turn the U.S. into Germany, by curtailing free speech, if given the opportunity.
        I wish she would go away. But that probably won’t happen, even if she were to want it to, because there is still the matter of a few unfinished criminal investigations pending. We may see a lot of defendant Hillary Clinton in the future.

      • Well, if they lock her up at least she won’t be on tv all the time offering her opinions. That would make a big differnce to me. She really inconveniences me, because every time she comes on tv I have to start looking for another channel to watch.

  7. I’m waiting for Colorado University’s Sea Level Research Group
    to update to release 2016 #5, maybe it won’t happen until 2017 #1 anyway Jason3 should be on board sooner or later and when that happens, it would be surprising if there weren’t some upjustments made to the data. Over the years they’ve bumped the rate of sea level rise up by nearly a millimeter per year.

  8. Mark from the Midwest: Is this the article you were referring to?
    Trump Memo Reveals Plans For Massive Shake-Up At Energy Department
    Hinting at a broad shake-up at the Energy Department, Trump’s team has submitted a list of 65 questions requesting information on everything from how to keep aging nuclear plants online to a list of employees and contractors that attended the United Nations climate meetings.

      • Cute, Chimp. 🙂 Just to help out Mr. Fine (in case he is unavoidably detained from responding here), I’m pretty sure he meant to use the word: “polymath.”

      • Churchill was just another Bullshit Politician,smoked the finest cigars,drank the finest whiskey,and sat back and ordered that protesters to his policies to be shot on the streets.He would have been well aligned with the Glow-bull warming crowd of today.

      • The quality of ANY French is a controversial subject ! They can’t even pronounce an ordinary Irish name properly. Well at least the Swiss French can’t.

    • My favourite Churchill quote “But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new dark age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science…” Sounds like Climategate

      • Renewables are indeed a dog’s breakfast. Ask Finland.
        Finland set to become first country to ban coal use for energy
        Finland could become the first country to ditch coal for good. As part of a new energy and climate strategy due to be announced tomorrow, the government is considering banning the burning of coal for energy by 2030.
        “Basically, coal would disappear from the Finnish market,” says Peter Lund, a researcher at Aalto University, and chair of the energy programme at the European Academies’ Science Advisory Council.
        Biodiesel to fuel growth
        By 2015, Finnish paper giants UPM-Kymmene, Stora Enso and Metsa Group had shut more than 30 paper-making machines around the country, most of them located in small towns highly dependent on the companies for jobs and tax revenue.
        But with forests covering 78 percent of Finland’s land surface, they are unquestionably one of the country’s most important resources.
        Metsa Group is not alone in hoping trees can mean new growth in two senses.
        Another group, Finnpulp, plans to build a new pulp and biorefinery in the eastern town of Kuopio, while Chinese Sunshine Kaidi New Energy Group plans to invest a billion euros in a refinery making renewable diesel from wood materials in the northern Finnish town of Kemi.
        Finland’s leading forestry giant UPM is already in the business.
        Video games like Angry Birds generate only a fraction of the revenue Nokia used to achieve
        Last year in the southeastern town of Lappeenranta it launched a biorefinery that turns resin, a side product from making pulp, into diesel.
        “It’s the world’s first facility to produce wood-based diesel,” UPM’s head of biofuels Sari Mannonen said.
        She anticipates growth especially in western Europe, where the EU’s climate targets urge replacing fossil fuels with new green options.
        Read more at:

  9. I remember when KSFO went to a (realatively)conservative talk format. The reaction by the San Jose Mockery News and the San Francico Comical was classic indignation.

  10. The upcoming battle over EPA Administrator-Designate Scott Pruitt’s confirmation will be an all out war with the usual suspects going high order. They will be aided and abetted by the mainstream media and alarmist blogs and social media. One infuential outlet is The Christain Science Monitor which has a propensity to bombard readers with one-sided reports of newly published studies purporting to support alarmist claims of everything from shrinking polar ice and sea rise to polar bear extinction to increased tornadoes, droughts and other extreme weather events to coral reef die off and on and on. Their go to climate scientist for comment is none other than Michael Mann. I been engaging the editors for almost 2 years trying to get them to return to their usual journalistic standards and at least include in their reports the views of well qualified and experienced climate scientists who challenge the CAGW theory, the climate models and the conclusions of these studies. I have made some progress in tempering their fear mongering headlines, but lately they are ramping up the scare stories. I think if more pressure were brought to bear by someone other than a lowly subscriber, they could be pushed toward more balanced coverage. Let me suggest that you follow the Monitor’s reporting at and use your platform to address the studies they highlight and the claims made by quoted “scientists”. A letter to the editor ( would be powerful. Being called out by a widely read source like Wattsupwiththat and by credible people who contribute to your blog and comments on it may well be the key to getting the Monitor to change the balance, tone and perhaps the thrust of their coverage of climate change. Thanks to you and anyone who pitches in on this effort to inject empirical evidence and reason into the public discussion of climate change.

  11. I may be beating a dead horse here, but I really believe the WUWT site would greatly benefit from a clickable resource page that presents a succinct top ten case against global warming for use by the average Joe and Jill for every day use when confronting or dissuading Warmists.
    This would be in the form of one or two easy sentences for each major point followed by a reference that could be used if ever challenged.
    JoNova does have something excellent and close to my suggestion here but it becomes more of an education page rather than concise consecutive points useful in cocktail party, water cooler, or other casual situations.
    Armed with such an easily accessible tool, so many more skeptics could be turned loose challenging GW believers.

    • I heartily support this suggestion.
      It might include a list of actual temperatures related to the 15 hottest ever years to show the increase was tiny.
      Demonstrate how changing the scale and the time period can produce warmist or realist temperature graphs for just 1 degree C rise since 1880.
      Past 10,000 years of temperature.
      A brief summary of the 97% debunk. Statements by astronauts.
      A graph of temperature maxima and minimums separately to show that overnight temperatures are warming because of UHI.
      And of course sea temperatures.
      And sea level rise.
      And whether extreme weather and drought is increasing.
      Polar bears.
      Al Gore predictions.
      Explain differences between satellite and other measures.
      This needs to be part of the Trump list.

      • Yes, that is very good and worthy of further study by me, and inclusion of some of its points into my document referenced below. But… still needs to be more succinct, for easy memorization, for quick reference at the “water cooler. Or wherever evil must be confronted…
        The idea is that one could spout off 10 or more significant points one after another as needed.

      • The problem remains that most of the provided info is without any attribution. In a top ten list that would be vital should a warmist opponent call BS or disbelief. At least one could reply: “I’ll send you the science tonight. “Hear me now, believe me later.”

      • Arbeegee
        you say “The problem remains that most of the provided info is without any attribution.”
        Top of my Quick facts page states –
        ( For more info, verification & external links; follow the page links )

      • @1saveenergy: Sorry save, while I truly love your page, as I began to run through your items point-by-point, I found the information that backed most specific points to be of a general nature or missing. If you disagree, later when I have more time, I will specify what I mean. That said, I don’t want to take too much away from that page as it is perhaps the best I’ve seen so far.

    • I would love a top 10 “arguments”. I have to search and search for something I remember from a year ago. A case in point is Nils-Axel Mörner’s disappearing tree on the Maldives. And the Graph which shows global drought is declining overall, etc.

    • Suggestions:
      1. WUWT Reference Pages tab at top of this page — from the comments here, it appears that some of you have not fully made use of that resource.
      2. Articles from WUWT (just a sample):
      (Summary on page 89 of the WUWT 10th Anniversary anthology)
      Sample comment from the accompanying thread:
      Klimate Kip:

      ” … I’m literally going to make cardstock copies of this, spiral bind them and hand them out like a passionate religious zealot to all my “science is settled” warming friends!

      ( )
      (Summarized in 10th Ann. anthology at 775-76)
      (Summarized in anthology at 1,624-27)
      5) Anthony’s presentation:
      Best wishes to you all in getting the truth out there!

      • Hi Janice. I’ve just scanned your info links above, and while they present a whole range of great info for me to digest, it still is not what WUWT requires, in my vho. As constructive and respectful criticism, first, the information needs to be found as a stand-alone button at the top of page, not requiring a proper site search and evaluation of the returned hits. After all, we are talking about the very nut of what global warming skepticism is all about, and it should be front and centre and totally easy to access.
        Second, there should be no preambles or other distracting text included. Just the facts, ma’am. As suggestion, the first sentence would be a bolded bold claim. The second (and maybe third), a modifying or explanatory sentence. The last included item: one or two linked attributions that directly support and reveal the science of the statement made should anyone wish to prove the statement or delve into the item further.
        Again, primary here is quick finger tip availability, and easy form for reference and memorization. Further I would rank the points in order of importance or impact. Further, after the Top 10, I would continue with another 10 or 20 similarly presented points for benefit of the truly obsessed skeptic.
        Right now this info is scattered throughout a massive site. This list would be dynamic in the sense that rankings or info would change as new science and emphasis comes to light.
        These are my considered suggestions and I’m sure there are folks out there who are in better position to sharpen and impove these ideas immeasurably.

    • While not the same as what I am asking for above, I often send out my 20 page compilation of top anti-GW arguments to the Great Unwashed as necessary. Here are the topics I felt most important. Let me know where you might disagree or I am incorrect.
      Climate Change Models Do Not Reflect Empirical (ie: actual real-world) Evidence.
      No Significant Temperature Increases For Last 18 Years
      CO2 Warming Is Not Occurring
      Greenland Ice Cores show CO2 does not cause temperature rises
      New OCO2 CO2 Satellite Data Shows Warmth Causes Atmospheric CO2.
      CO2 is a Life Sustaining gas and the Earth’s Friend
      Global Warming Hurricane Predictions Just Plain Wrong.
      Global Warming Has Not Caused Insurance Calamities – Just the Opposite.
      The Earth Has Had Much Warmer Periods, Even Relatively Recently
      No overall Ice Cap Melting; Antarctic Ice at Record Levels
      The Earth Has Been Warming Since the “Little Ice Age” Less Than A Thousand Years Ago
      GW Predicted Tropical Hot Spot Just Not There
      “Weather” is not Global Warming nor Climate Change
      Sun Radiance Is Better Correlated To Warming, Not CO2
      Sun Radiance May Point To Global Cooling
      Arctic Soot From Asia May Cause Arctic Melting
      Warmer Is Better For Earth’s People
      Warmists rely on Bad Science (Heat Island Effect)
      The “97% Scientific Consensus” Was Manufactured
      Warmist Beliefs Rely On Scare tactics (Examples)
      Al Gore’s Temperature Hockey Stick Proven Bogus
      Global Warming Dollars Prove Irresistible

      • anybody want to have a go at this? With all the usual frustrations of working in a group!!
        A much needed task nonetheless.

      • Haven’t read yet, but yes, that’s the ticket. WUWT needs its own version of that since this is the Source of all Sources.

      • Having now skimmed: Wonderful info but, again, not what WUWT needs, imho. The explanations are overly inconsistent in size; often refer directly to the necessity of a link (not useful in an immediate discussion), or include impractical-to-present info such as: “J. Geophys. Rsch., VOL. 110, A08105, doi:10.1029/2004JA010866, 2005”.

      • Let me add that ranking is important partly because in a discussion, you never know when you might be cut off, so you’d want to hit’em with your best shot.

      • IMHO, leading with lesser points will each be individually discounted so that an irrefutable total is not built up in a person’s mind. On the other hand, after leading with an irrefutable point, those same lesser points do build a greater total.

  12. Curious that the ocean surface temperature has not been updated. Updates are normally made on Monday and Thursday.
    Another curious issue. A few days ago the December 5 ocean surface data was replaced/revised with an image which had been changed to show warming. The next day the warming image was replaced with the original image.
    Could just be a technical/computer issue, time will tell.

      • If Stokes the Stupid is missing it, Dec 6 & 7 are probably cool or average temperature days.
        Hey Stokes: what’s the name of the law of thermodynamics for solving the temperature of some gas?
        Whenever you learn it tell us. You, all these fake temperature people: what’s the name of the law of thermodynamics, for solving the temperature of some gas?
        What’s it’s formula? What’s the factor in the formula you claim alludes to there being a green house Uh…. Uh… Uh.. fect?
        Tell it if you know. You don’t.
        Neither does that hack Toneb, and he claims to be a retired meteorologist.
        For that matter I have never met anyone in my life who
        (a) believes in the green house effect
        (b) can name the law of thermodynamics for solving the temperature of a volume of gas.
        As many times as I have asked, and I’ve asked every single prominent person who ever told me they believed in it – not one has told me, the correct answer.
        I say,
        you can’t give it either.

      • It may be a technical glitch or more time is needed to “adjust it”. As William Astley said, “Time will tell.”
        But my impression of Nick Stokes is not that he would deceive others himself but rather that he is more willing to “give the benefit of doubt” to those who do the adjusting than they deserve.

      • “Nick, do you use ‘raw data’ or just the crap “
        I get my data, in this case, as shown at the link page: NOAA High Resolution SST data provided by the NOAA/OAR/ESRL PSD, Boulder, Colorado, USA, from their Web site at
        I believe it is the same data that William Astley showed. It is AVHHR data posted almost in real time (usually).
        What data do you use?

      • “Neither does that hack Toneb, and he claims to be a retired meteorologist.”
        Ah, the shouting Sky-dragon slayer again.
        If you care to examine the IGL’s.
        You will find they do not involve radiation.
        You do know that heat moves by 3 methods?
        1) Conduction.
        2) Convection.
        3) Radiation.
        Does heat get to Earth from the Sun via 3)?
        Are the IGL’s involved?
        And how does heat escape Earth?
        Answers on a postcard to …

    • It’s a ‘Technical Issue'(cough),data adjustments take time.
      The ‘Raw’ incoming data is never made available to the general public unless you pay ‘Mega Money’ or are part of the Clim-astrology Scam.

      • Ideal Gas Law @ 11:23
        Can we please stop with the childish and demeaning name calling (eg. “Stokes the Stupid, etc”).
        One of the great things about WUWT is that everyone can have a say and be treated with respect. I certainly do not agree with 99% of what Nick says but please let him have his say and if you want, politely refute his comments. Let’s keep WUWT on a different plane from most of the internet rubbish sites out there.

      • + INFINITY Alistair. Applies to all. G, Tb, M, etc. Rude posts cause me to scroll quickly through or move on. Nuff said. (tho sometimes humorous. A slippery slope – tho also humorous.)
        Sorry for the driveby.

    • The cult of CAGW is going to be faced with their worst nightmare.
      D. Trump’s Presidential inauguration at the same time at the coldest winter in decades.
      The irony will not be lost if there are any CAGW protestors.

      Polar vortex redux? U.S. forecasters say it could hit next week
      CHICAGO (Reuters) – Forecasters are sending chills down some spines with a prediction that much of the northern half of the United States could see frigid weather next week similar to life-threatening lows the polar vortex brought to parts of the country in 2014.
      Chicago, the largest city in the Midwest, is bracing for temperatures in the teens next week, according to an AccuWeather forecast, which showed a low of 17 Fahrenheit (minus 8 Celsius) for Wednesday and Thursday.
      Further north in Minnesota, Minneapolis-St. Paul NBC affiliate KARE forecasted temperatures dropping to 10 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 12 Celsius) on Tuesday of next week, then 8 degrees (minus 13 Celsius) on Wednesday.

  13. Hi Anthony,
    Ellen and I attended Christopher Monckton’s presentation to the Butte County Tea Party on the 5th of December. I commented on the experience at my Sierra Foothill Commentary blog. My post includes a link to a video of his presentation on YouTube. In addition to examining global warming issues, he expounded on UN Agenda 21 and 2030, plus some comments on President Obama’s birth certificate. It was a fascinating talk, full of humor and insight.

  14. Must be an interesting travel companion. I’d love to spend an evening over a pint or three discussing things with Lord Monckton – though I’m sure my conversation would eventually roll around to his Hailwood replica Ducati.

  15. Good news for advanced nuclear reactors with Peter Thiel, Paypal owner or something, backing Transatomic Power’s design of the molten salt reactor, biggest advancement in 60 years, and also on Trump transition team as manager or something. Hopefully some paltry few millions will get behind those three companies leading the way into our molten salt energy future – Moltex Energy, Transatomic Power, and Terrestrial Energy and hopfully we will out-design the Chinese crash development program.

  16. Every time someone mentions climate change as a serious concern in pop media I hear the subtext, “Look at how caring I am. Look at how concerned I am for the future. Look at how I’m engaged with weighty, important matters. Look at how I am recognizing the importance of science.”

    • and the opposite. You don’t “believe” in CAGW so you don’t want clean air, clean water, and don’t care about the lives of others, especially children and grand children. Clutching to pearls with mouth agape…shame!

      • Yeah… it’s as if “you are dealing not at all with them as individuals, but with slogans, catchwords, and the like that have taken possession of them”.

  17. Hi Anthony,
    Ellen and I attended Christopher Monckton’s presentation to the Butte County Tea Party on the 5th of December. I commented on the experience at my Sierra Foothill Commentary blog. My post includes a link to a video of his presentation on YouTube. In addition to examining global warming issues, he expounded on UN Agenda 21 and 2030. It was a fascinating talk, full of humor and insight.

  18. A fake news (and I mean REAL fake news: Infowars) site here in the US posted an interview with Lord Monckton yesterday claiming that he’s found the mathematical Fatal Flaw in the IPCC temperature models.
    I don’t trust Infowars and am disappointed that Monckton was willing to legitimize them by talking to them.
    Anyway, I’d like to see the actual math. I figure all of it will eventually turn up here on WUWT.
    I am impatiently waiting…

    • Would you trust NPR, NBC, CNN, or the LATimes to give you unbiased climate related news? You shouldn’t.
      InfoWars articles are another piece of information that in this Age of Dishonest Journalism has to be critically evaluated, just like NPR, NBC, etc.

  19. A fake news (and I mean REAL fake news: Infowars) site here in the US posted an interview with Lord Monckton yesterday claiming that he’s found the mathematical Fatal Flaw in the IPCC temperature models.
    I don’t trust Infowars and am disappointed that Monckton was willing to legitimize them by talking to them.
    Anyway, I’d like to see the actual math. I figure all of it will eventually turn up here on WUWT.
    I am impatiently waiting…

  20. My Real Science comment:

    “Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.” -Noel Brown, ex UNEP Director, 1989

    A joke. The sea remains the same. NO CHANGE! No noticeable change as maybe it’s risen a half inch when the Prophets of Doom like Hansen talked about 75 meters. 17 years after the doomsday year 2000 and by now according to the fear mongering leftists the seas should have flooded half the country. And it should be hot as h-ll. But the temperatures are … just the same. And even today the Chicken Littles keep at it, squawking and squawking, repeatedly CRYING WOLF. Go outside and see for yourself that there’s no climate crisis. I don’t think there’s any appreciable *change* in the climate either.

      • I couldn’t be sure that “h*ll” would make it through WUWT without moderation, though it would probably be fine in Tony HELLers site! And thanks for the book link. Looks like a good read. It looks like a good read. Free is good!

      • “It looks like a good read.” I just had to say that a third time. /s
        I’ll add this while I’m at it.
        Here’s a problem in their treatment of models. On the one hand we got the Chicken Littles saying this:

        “The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.” -Prof. Chris Folland, UK Meteorological Office
        — — — — — — — — — — — —

        On the other hand they say this:

        “Rather than seeing models as describing literal truth, we ought to see them as convenient fictions which try to provide something useful [propaganda].” -David Frame, Oxford U

        See the problem?

    • The poor old Maldives can’t even manufacture a dilemna yet put their hands out for aid. Or have they gone beneath the sea but no one is game to share the pictures! What about it Leonardo?

  21. Here is southern Oz it’s been freezing for three days , please can we have some globull warming ?

  22. I’m an opportunist, and so … [not meaning to hijack, but if I am, then my bad, tell me and I’ll quit] … since this is an OPEN thread, I wonder if any of the technically savvy inhabitants here could clarify something for me about … “effective emission height” … [I know] the physical non-entity used as a simplified explanation of the latest, most sophisticated explanation of the CO2 greenhouse effect.
    Assume that the simplified idea is valid, and educated me about whether I am thinking incorrectly about the internal consistency of this simplification, and does the internal consistency itself fail to support the premise?
    As I understand it (via the alarmist argument), supposedly additional CO2 concentrations force the effective radiation height of Earth’s atmosphere “higher up”, which is colder, thus causing radiation to leave more slowly, thus, causing the lower levels to cool more slowly and maintain more heat (elevated temperature).
    I’ve read that the increasing height “reduces” the mass of air above — I don’t get that at all.
    But more importantly, I don’t get how an “increased height” of a mathematical fabrication does not obey the laws of mathematics and also increase in surface area or volume, thereby creating a greater surface area and greater volume over which/through which radiations leaves this now-higher level, thereby changing little or nothing temperature-wise in the layers below. In other words, wouldn’t greater surface area/greater volume over which to radiate … offset any increased warming caused by increased CO2 concentration?
    Doesn’t “increased height” mean the same as “increased height all the way around a circumference”, which means “increased radius of the non-physical spherical shell defining the effective radiation height”, which still has to obey the formula for area/volume of a sphere?

    • I’ve read that the increasing height “reduces” the mass of air above — I don’t get that at all.
      It doesn’t reduce the mass of the air above per se, that stays the same. But increasing the height moves the effective emission height closer to the TOA (Top of Atmosphere). Since there is now less atmosphere between the effective emission height and the TOA, you could say that there is less mass between the two. But the way you phrased the question, it seemed to me you thought the mass of the atmosphere was somehow changed, which it isn’t. Draw a line on a piece of paper. What’s the mass of paper between the line and the top of the paper? Now draw another line higher up. Is the mass of the paper between that line and the top of the paper less than between the first line and the top of the paper? Of course it is. Has the mass of the paper changed? No.
      and also increase in surface area
      The amount the effective emission height moves creates a larger surface area, but that effect is minor in comparison to the original surface area. Remember a kilometer is a huge difference in comparison to the thickness of the atmosphere, but it is just a sliver in comparison to the radius of earth + atmosphere. So yes there’s a larger surface area, but in the context of all the other processes going on, pretty minor.

      • The amount the effective emission height moves creates a larger surface area, but that effect is minor in comparison to the original surface area.
        It seems that even a minor radial increase in the resulting spherical-volume shell would result in a significant volume increase within that shell, since the total expanse of that shell is around the entire circumference of the atmosphere. I get that the spherical shell between Top Of Atmosphere and effective-emission height shell is now “skinnier”, but isn’t the atmosphere BELOW the now-higher emission-volume shell fatter ?, with more room into which the atmosphere can now expand ?, … in effect creating a cascading effect of increasing volumes of layers all the way down to Earth’s surface ?, giving MORE room for all the processes to work to distribute the resultant increase in heat from added CO2?
        So yes there’s a larger surface area, but in the context of all the other processes going on, pretty minor.
        … and this has been measured or modeled and shown to be correct within the context of the idealized, non-physical “effective emission height” ? [just curious, NOT challenging (^_^)]
        Don’t hate me — I’m just trying to get it straight.

    • RK, the effective emission height or effective radiation level does indeed rise with more CO2. There are two opposing consequences. Higher in the troposphere is colder, so a less energetic emitter. (The radiating height is inferred from the TOA observed IR frequency and the radiosonde determined temperature lapse rate). But this is also over a larger surface, a bigger emitter. Neither of these opposing effects is the major one causing added CO2 to more effectively prevent radiative cooling. Below the emitting level there is a larger volume of atmosphere which is scattering coolong IR by absorption and re-emission, lengthening the time until its eventual escape at the radiating level. The effective rate of cooling slows as the ‘trapping’ volume increases. The emitting surface increases by r^2, while the ‘foggy to IR’ trapping volume increases by r^3.

      • Doesn’t the … “trapping volume” … now have more room to work ? … with convection? (if it still happens here) and other processes that distribute heat ?
        Of course. But those are secondary processes, or feedbacks, which are separate and distinct from the direct warming of CO2 increases. Other examples abound. Water vapour for instance. The warmer the air is, the more water vapour it can hold. The direct effects of CO2 are well understood. The feedbacks are largely in dispute. Even the IPCC admits this.

    • This is how I understand effective emission elevation. In the lower troposphere IR emission from the earth’s surface and greenhouse gases only a short distance, a matter of metres, before re absorption. Due to the atmospheric density most of the IR radiation in the lower troposphere is thermalized through collision with molecules non-radiative in the IR spectrum (O2, N2). This occurs because the mean time between molecular collisions at this atmospheric density is much less than the mean time that an excited greenhouse gas molecule remains in the excited state. So most excited molecules in the lower troposphere get no chance to re radiate.
      The effective emissions layer occurs at an elevation (around 1/10 bar) where the atmospheric density has decreased to the point where significant excited greenhouse gas molecules are able to re radiate or radiate to space before colliding with other gas molecules. And note that this elevation is primarily a function of total pressure, not the partial pressure of the constituent greenhouse gases. Thus, the effective emission height and the top of the troposphere are intimately related. And since the emmissions height is primarily a function of total pressure, the minuscule change from the increase in CO2 results in a correspondingly minuscule change to the height of emissions.

      • Why is the result, then, not theorized as minuscule warming, instead of something we need to really worry about?

        The warmist “scientists” invoke positive feedback in their models to inflate the effect of rising CO2 concentration. Some (eg. Hansen) also posit the fabulous “tipping point” without a shred of paleological evidence for abrupt changes from warm regimes to yet warmer regimes.

    • For CO2 to somehow affect climate and cause global warming it must somehow increase the insulating effects of the atmosphere. A good measure if insulation is how it retards temperature going from a warm inside to a cooler outside. In the troposphere that change is on average linear with respect to altitude and can be characterized by a lapse rate. It gets cooler as we go higher in the Earth’s atmosphere. It turns out the the lapse rate can be derived from first principals and has been confirmed by observation. The lapse rate in the troposphere is a function of the heat capacity of the atmosphere and the pressure gradient and has nothing to do with the LWIR absorption characteristics of so called greenhouse gasses. The increase in CO2 over the past 30 years has failed to have a measureable increase in the dry lapse rate in the troposphere so CO2’s increasing the lapse rate cannot be a cause of global warming. Bummer. So the AGW cconjecture had to be changed.
      Based on energy equilibrium, the Earth from space looks like an equivalant black body radiating at a temperature of around 0 degrees F at an equivalant altitude of around 17K feet. The 17 K feet and the lapse reate cause the Earth’s surface to be roughly 33 degrees C warmer than it would be without and atomsphere. 17K feet is at the mass midpoint of the atmosphere. What a coincidence. So to warm the planet, if more CO2 does not actually change the lapse rate, it must raise the equivalant altitude.
      If we knew exactly how adding more CO2 to the atmosphere raised this equivalent radiating altitude then we could compute an exact value for the climate sensivity of CO2. But the IPCC, after more than 20 years of effort has been unable to make such a calculation. In their first report the IPCC published a wide range for their guess as to the climate sensivity of CO2 and in their last report they published the exact same values. So after more than two decades of effort the IPCC has learned nothing that would allow them to narrow the range of their guesses one iota. Gee, maybe it is because CO2 has no effect on climate and the climate sensivity of CO2 is really 0.0.

      • so CO2’s increasing the lapse rate cannot be a cause of global warming.
        CO2 doesn’t increase the lapse rate. The lapse rate stays the same. CO2 causes the height at which the effective emission layer is found to increase. Since this coincides with the effective black black body temperature of earth, that is no found at a higher altitude. It is about -18 C. Since the place in the atmosphere where -18 C occurs is now at a higher altitude, we follow the exact same lapse rate down to the surface and arrive at a higer surface temperature since we had to go further to get there. There are of course other effects, but there is no change to the lapse rate.

      • davidmhoffer: Please tell us exactly how does the effective radiating altitude change as a function of the CO2 amount in the atmosphere. Such information should allow one to compute a single value for the climate sensitifity of CO2 which for more than two decades the IPCC has been unable to do. Currently that altitude is at the mass midpoint of the atmosphere which seems to be quite a coincidence if it is really a function of CO2. In coming up with your global warming formula you also need to take in consideration that more CO2 in the atmosphere will cause the dry lapse rate to decrease a little, which is a cooling effect, and the O2 percentage to drop slightly because we are talking about CO2 caused by the burning of fossil fuels which converts O2 to both CO2 and H2O.

      • davidmhoffer: So you are name calling now.
        Yes. If you’ll note carefully, the person I called a moron was me.
        Please tell us exactly how does the effective radiating altitude change as a function of the CO2 amount in the atmosphere.
        As the concentration of CO2 increases, the chances that a photon emitted at any given point will be absorbed by another CO2 molecule increase. So, for the effective odds for a photon to escape to be the same after CO2 increases, the effective release point has to be at a higher altitude.

      • When we are talking about CO2 we are talking about just the 15 micron band where H2O does not dominate. Remember that a good absorber is also a good radiator. In the troposphere, until you get to the tropopause, conduction and convection dominates over LWIR absorption band heat transfer. The equivalent altitude of the Earth’s radiating to space is roughly 17k feet which is the middle of the troposphere and no where near the tropopause. Because of the low emisivity of the atmosphere the actual radiation comes from an even lower altitude. I would think that adding CO2 might make the upper atmosphere a more efficient radaitor to space which would have a cooling effect. Then again maby the absorption and radaition aspects balance out. You have provided a possible mechanism that you say might be important but you have not provided a formula showing how the altitude of the Earth’s effective radaition to space changes with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. Such a formula would allow one to specifically calculate the climate sensivity of CO2 which the IPCC during all of their existance has been unable to do.

      • Such a formula would allow one to specifically calculate the climate sensivity of CO2 which the IPCC during all of their existence has been unable to do.
        The formula is P=5.35*ln(C1/C0). The derivation can be found in multiple sources, including the IPCC. It has been there since at least AR3, I haven’t read AR2 or AR1, so it may be there as well. It yields 3.7 w/m2 which when applied to the EBB of earth, via SB Law, in turn yields an effective temperature change of about one degree C due to direct effects of CO2 doubling. Various sources come up with slightly different numbers, but they are all pretty close. Physicists on both sides of the debate do not quibble with this number. What they DO quibble with, and what the IPCC has not been able to quantify, is what the net effects of feedbacks are.
        Get your facts straight. You repeatedly demand to know “how it works” and when I explain it, you instead demand a formula. Do you actually want to know? Or do you just want answers that fit with your preconceived notions? Well now I have given you the formula. I only answered because when I was starting out on my own research of climate change (which incidentally turned me into a vocal skeptic) my questions in blogs like this were usually ignored, and I felt a lot of gratitude toward those few who took the time to help me out.
        Now I am trying to pay it forward, and am greeted with snark. I’m not inclined to answer you further.

      • I would think that adding CO2 might make the upper atmosphere a more efficient radaitor to space which would have a cooling effect.
        Forgot this in my response above. Where, exactly, do you suppose the energy the CO2 radiates to space is coming from? Magic? Perpetual motion perhaps? The energy radiated comes from energy absorbed by CO2 that would otherwise have exited unimpeded to space. If you think blocking energy that would have otherwise escaped to space, and transferring some of it to the atmosphere, and radiating some of it toward earth, instead of letting it escape, makes for a more efficient radiator, be my guest.

      • davidmhoffer Concerning your formula, What is P? Where does the number 5,35 come from? What is C1? What is C2? How is this formula derived? Where is there a variable that stands for the effective altitude of radiating to space? What is the EBB and the SB Law? A researcher found that such calculations were too great by a factor of more than 20 because the doubling of CO2 would result in a slight decrease in the dry lapse rate in the troposphere which is a cooling effect.
        Yes, how it works is what it is all about. The AGW conjecture is notorious for being based on only partial sceince. If CO2 really affected climate, the increase over the past 30 years should have caused at least a measureable change in the lapse rate in the troposphere but such has not happened. The IPCC has been assuming that H2O provides a strong positive feedback which apifies the effect of CO2 because warmer temperatures cause more H2O to enter the atmosphere and molecule per molecule, H2O is a better absorber of IR radaition then is CO2. But H2O is also a major coolant in the troposphere causing the lapse rate to decrease which is a ciooling effect, The feedback is really negative as it has to be for the Earth’s climate to have been as stable as it has been over at least the past 500 million years, enough for life to evolve because we are here.
        The AGW conjecture contends that the the Earth’s surface is 33 degrees C warmer then it would be wihtout an atmosphere because of the heat trapping action of so called greenhouse gases. But the convective greenhouse effect which is caused by gravity and the heat capacity of the Earth’s atmosphere, as derived form first principals,and accounts for all 33 degrees C. The radiant greenhouse effect has not been observed on earth nor any planet in the solar system with a thick atmosphere.

      • davidmhoffer In the troposphere heat transport by means other than LWIR absorption band radiation dominates. For example, at a pressure of one bar, In the time that a CO2 molecule holds onto an LWIR photon the CO2 molecule will have had on the order of a billion interactions with other molecules sharing energy with each interation. LWIR absorptioon band radiation is relatively unimportant in the troposphere.

      • willhaas;
        You don’t know what P is, even though my answer makes is clear what P is. You want to know what C2 is even though it isn’t even in the formula. You state clearly that you don’t know what EBB and SB Law are, but you are certain these things that you don’t know what they are have been debunked by someone or other but you don’t know who it is.

      • davidmhoffer I am sorry, instead of C2 I ment to type C0. Please go ahead and answer my questions. It is customary when preseting equations to define the variables that one uses.

  23. I’ll leave this reply for Willis here, the comments were closed down after I posted it and I’m unsure if it was published…
    Hi Wills, nice to hear from you again, sincerely it is 🙂
    I’ve always appreciated your interest in this subject, it’s a fascinating subject can we agree on that? alrighty then let’s move on…
    What gets to me every time when this issue of the sun and the planets are brought up for discussion is the misunderstandings and the so called poisoning of the well of the subject, and come on Willis lets be straight with one another about it, you do more than your fair share.
    I agree with the logic that you have mentioned above, looking at it from your prospective, that’s fine, can you ever say with a straight face that I have ever made such a claim? okay let’s move on…
    Uranus does not have 4 poles, that is a ridiculous thing to say and another misunderstanding, Uranus has a polarity [N] negative and [P] positive, does the sun have 4 poles? ridiculous, I’m throwing that one out.
    On Uranus’s orbit your understanding is a little weak, also I DO NOT make orbital calculations of a planet by taking it’s sidereal/orbital parameters and try to make them fit solar activity because of similar coincidental cyclical timing, I’m throwing that one out as well, that’s actually quite insulting dude…
    Uranus has the most unusual orbit, it’s poles rotate very near it’s axis plane facing the sun, it’s sidereal period is equal to the suns Hale cycle (sorry the Spark cycle) it never goes out of phase like you claim, but of course you decided to use the worse form of astronomical calculations to make a back handed remark, please dude, don’t be putting any satellites up any time soon.
    Uranus is a very fascinating planet, in fact it was dubbed “Dumbo” simply because it didn’t conform to expectations of the scientists at the time, a bit ironic,
    I’m not going to throw you in the deep end or bury you with vast amounts of calculations and I’ll do my best here to give you a reasonable understanding of my view, I’m sure you have a beautiful ex-fiancée looking for your attention.
    The stage that I’m at with understanding planetary orbits and the methods I’ve developed over the years to understand if there is a Solar/planetary interaction, that is my question after all, The results from the observations I have, scream out that there is a Solar/planetary interaction, I can now show you a pattern of Solar Activity from any time spanning 8000 years, 4000 into the future and 4000 into the past, this is due to software limitations, the software I use was bought in 1993-94 I have calibrated it with the real world and it has helped me forecast comets coming into view of the Soho satellites with astounding accuracy, I understand the limitations of the software and I understand how to improve the accuracy…
    I have no problem bundling up all the spreadsheets, software and sending it to you, talking you through the process of collecting orbital data and showing you the method for calculating these orbital patterns that match Solar activity for yourself and reproduce my results, it’s a cheat for you at my expense, but I’m fine with that…
    Now, getting to what my view is on what’s going on, I’ve a lot of thoughts on this but I’ll break it down for clarity’s sake, one quick point: looking at the historical sunspot record, do you notice the dips in sun spot activity during the peak of the two main cycles of activity? there’s a dip in the 70’s (cycle 20) and in the 1800’s (cycles 5 and 6 I’m not convinced about cycle 5 just a note), studying my results and pouring over the data for months on end I realized the cause of this was a polarity break down taken place, what I mean by this is that the suns polarities speed up over time and reverse at such a fast pace that they cancel each other out, to a point where the activity does not manifest itself as sunspots, that is the key to what is going on, the suns polarities interact with each other on the solar plane, the equator of the sun as they reverse, the suns polarities when at rest at the geographical poles produce very little activity, when the polarities begin to wobble and continue to rotate and reverse over time, speeding up and slowing down, when they reverse too fast solar activity drops of as well as when they do not reverse, this is the interaction the sun has with the planets.
    Yes there are relativistic and gravitational effects between the sun and the planets you have said as much yourself, but let me remind you about some very basic physics, a small magnet can move a much larger one, there are enormous polarities interacting within the solar system, continuously nudging and effecting the timing of bodies in their orbits, and I can show you proof of this pattern, I have on occasion, if this was untrue there should be no matching pattern between the planets and the Sun.
    Where the solar dynamo is concerned, I’m going by observational evidence that the dynamo occurs from the inside out and is a result of the rotating and reversing poles and is NOT caused from the outside in because of the difference between the suns equator in relation to it’s poles, in which sunspots cause the magnetic poles to reverse, this is a scandalous interpretation in my view.

  24. And remember, TIME IS RUNNING OUT TO
    Available to the residents of the U.K.
    and to other Europeans here:
    U.S. and Canadian buyers, please see this WUWT thread to order (until Dec. 26th):

  25. It’s just occurred to me that Hansen’s recent statement that mitigation is not immediately urgent, but can be phased in over a lengthy period, is consistent with the implementation of a “nuclear” CO2-reduction strategy. I suspect he made this statement after consulting with a member of Trump’s team, which may be planning to unveil that plan.
    Hansen is Gore’s advisor on climate-related matters. Gore’s visit to Trump is consistent with what I speculated about Hansen, namely that a “nuclear” CO2-reduction strategy is in the works.

  26. My thoughts have been lately on the disciplined decline of the solar EUV proxy F10.7.
    Each month goes by and the predicted line gets shifted down a little more as the past months numbers kept falling short of prediction.
    It is now (9 December 2016) hitting values of 70-ish (FLUXADJ), values not seen since 2010, and about a year ahead of schedule in its decline to minimum.
    You can FTP Download the Oct 2004 to current F10.7 flux value data here:
    And then plot the FLUXADJ column vs julian date for yourself.
    Also the observed South polar Field strength has been collapsing (last 4-5 months) at a higher than expected rate, while the North polar field strength has stagnated. Behavior not explained by simply the tilt angle of the sun as seen from Earth.
    (note: I’ve shown the current data from WSO Stanford. Lief’s plots have not been updated since June-July time frame).
    Interesting times for the sun and wondering what effects these may have on Earth’s temperatures next few years as Solar minimum is approached (mid-late 2020 to early 2012).

  27. Does anyone want to discuss whether greenhouse gases actually warm a planet to a temperature greater than it would be without them?

      • Chimp
        That’s the same as saying that CO2 would only affect climate on a planet earth with no life; i.e. with CO2 levels too low to support vegetation. Once CO2 rises above 200 ppm and sustains robust vegetation on land, its effect on climate falls away to negligible. This decline in CO2 effect on temperatures is probably accentuated by the activity of plants collectively to regulate climate to their own advantage, Gaia-Daisyworld style.

    • Yes, this is an open thread but his subject has been beaten to death here and at other popular websites (Roy Spencer, Tony Heller’s etc.).

  28. The Weather Channel has been giving names to “winter storms” (winter weather fronts as they bring snow across the country) for a few years now.
    I always thought that was useful as giving names to summer weather fronts as they bring rain across the country.
    A day or two ago they reported on a blizzard that hit North Dakota.
    Guess what they called it?
    Just a no-name “blizzard”.

  29. Anthony, as the world’s premier site on global warming/climate change, you receive hundreds of comments to every article.
    We are all time poor, busy people so, it would be invaluable to read only the comments that create the most reaction, good and bad.
    Thumbs up and thumbs down after each comment achieves that as well as increasing reader participation, one purpose of your wonderful web site.
    How about it?

      • Hi Anthony,
        A thought on that,
        please do not put any thumbs up, thumbs down, like button, or any type of button which could be, and will be used as manipulation. The star system on top is sufficient.
        I think that is partly why this site is so friendly, just the fact you allow the average person to comment and be part of this community if they have something to offer, or just giving them that freedom of speech to say something relevant.
        ( of course a little humor here and there never hurts )
        A Good Thing ( IMHO as a layperson) is Forcing people to read any given article, opinion, long threaded discussion, etc. is much better than being able to hop on a button without actually knowing what is being discussed, let alone being any type of expert and giving some scrupulous person every opportunity to try to discredit someone here, along with sending out their minions to vote something up or down.
        People need to read thoroughly, try to digest that information and form their own opinions.
        We have the ability to skip the foggy stuff.
        Thanks, EJ

    • So how the hell do you determine which are the most reactive articles if everybody is twiddling their thumbs while waiting for the lazy bum’s cheat sheet.
      I read pretty much everything. It is quite apparent that many people read almost nothing.

  30. 1saveenergy December 9, 2016 at 9:54 am
    I’ve just started an information only website
    as an adjunct to sites like WUWT.
    Hope you find it useful in getting the message out.
    Will add more as time goes on, happy to have constructive criticism / more info when I get contact connected.

    I just thought this was worth repeating.
    If I understand correctly, it would be a site compiling and organizing links (with a topical intro) to climate related information without comments on the site itself. A simpler way to find the info wanted without going through a search engine’s, no doubt soon to be introduced, “fake news” filters.

  31. What is “false news”? A rumour purported to be fact? Blatant propoganda? If there is one thing that unites humankind irrespective of race, creed or color is an enjoyment of gossip. The one old saw that really depresses me is ” there is no smoke without fire”. Try a Brritsh summer BBQ and you will appreciate that fallacy.
    It is regrettable that the studies of philiosphy ( how and why we think) and logical argument have been sidelined as esoteric and not of everyday relevance.
    Ad honiem attacks as ” deniers” or “grant chasers” do not enlighten or promote an argument. Selective interpretation of data to bolster a view is not unnatural. But to ignore or dismiss data is corrupt.
    Logical outcomes do not always produce the right resullts. Are photons and electrons waves or particles? It depends on your observation. Quantum mechanics indicates that the four dimensions we can percieve as evolved apes are insufficent for what we can scientifically demonstrate. Hence there must be higher dimensions.
    In some issues ,for example abortion, logic alone cannot denote a pro or anti stance. This is an ethical issue either of personal or state choice and compelling arguments can be made both ways. This is based on philosphical choice.
    Those who instigate ” safe places” and ” no-platforming” do a disservice to reasoned, peaceful debate.
    i would propose that all freshman/undergraduates do a course in philosphy and logic as a minor, no matter what their degree is.

    • “What is “false news”? A rumour purported to be fact?”
      I think the issue currently discussed is fake news. Where people make money by getting clicks for outrageous made up stories.
      And it can cause real problems. As here.

      • And it can cause real problems.
        Well of course it can. Now, when someone is given the power to decide what is fake news and what is real news, it can also cause problems. No link. Any decent history book will do. Pay attention to the parts with millions of deaths.

      • J. Philip Peterson, Thank you for that clip. And a huge THANK YOU for Sheriff David Clarke for telling it like it is.
        I admit I’ve made mistakes in my life and I’m grateful to those who have forgiven me for them.
        The MSM? Their attitude seems to be that we should all forgive them for the mistakes they’ve made that they refuse to admit too. And then keep trusting them to identify what is “fake news” for the rest of us.
        Yeah, right.

  32. “My cars are both Prius’s and I meticulously conserve energy and water.”
    Do you mean you drive a Pius?
    Unless you can provide an independent study that show hauling around batteries in a car is good for the environment, I would suggest that you are more pious than prudent.
    I use the energy and water to make life for my wife and myself better. I know that the environmental impact of such use is insignificant.
    Part of being ethical is focusing on what is important. As we have solved important problems, we have replaced them with with trivial and made up problems.
    As an engineer, I know that every person on the planet having food, clean water, and electricity is not a technical issue.
    I can conserve all I want but it will not change corruption that creates poverty. Cleaning my plate as a child did not feed children in China that Mao was starving.

  33. Stop Press: Incredible perpetual motion system invented:
    “Dr Sheridan Few, Research Associate at the Grantham Institute, Imperial College London, described a phenomenon unique to this technology.
    “There’s the storage of the energy, and the generating of the energy. You can make use of waste cold and waste heat… because you’re putting both electrical and thermal energy in, the amount of electrical energy you get out, can in some cases end up being more than the electrical energy you put in.”
    I wonder what “waste cold” is, but as the Grantham Institute is involved perhaps I shouldn’t bother.

    • Maybe sloppy language and maybe too optimistic to hope to capture much energy at this time. I don’t know. Also, dont know about the Grantham institute or about the practical utility of the particular project -may well be a boondoggle-but electricity can be generated from tempature differentials. See thermocouple. Cold can have value that can be wasted.

    • It’s a steam engine that uses liquid air as the working fluid. It works as storage by using surplus electricity to condense the air. Then it just lets in ambient heat to boil the air and regenerate the electricity. The “waste cold” works if you can pre-cool the air – that then takes less electrical energy to condense. You’d probably still lose on the cycle, but lose less. And if you add any warmth to the boiling phase, that boosts the cycle too.
      I would have thought something like, yes, CO2, might be a better working fluid (under pressure).

  34. Someone should write an article for WUWT picking apart DiCaprio’s plan, to cool Ivanka’s enthusiasm for it.

  35. I have a serious question, when scientists say the planet is “warming”, what is the definition of warming? If it is temperature of the air near the surface why do they the use heat of the ocean to discredit the lack of air warming? If it is the energy contained in the earths atmosphere and below why do they use temperature as the measurement of energy? Since temperature is not a unit of energy and the two do not even have a linear relationship?
    I think every conversation on AGW needs to have warming defined otherwise each side may be using a different definition. I already know one side has changed the definition as needed to fit their arguments.

  36. How come so one ever mentions the job that large trees do blocking IR? It’s always CO2 does this and C02 does that. I can see what trees do. In the fall when the ground gets frosty over night, the ground by trees is less frosty because trees block ground exposure to the night sky. I assume the trees are blocking IR to the night sky and staying relatively warmer. Along those lines, when the great white pine forests were felled in North America it must have been suddenly much colder at night in the winter in those areas, how convenient for today’s warmista chartists.

  37. Fun fact: James Hanson has calculated that if human beings burn all of known fossil fuels, atmospheric CO2 levels will reach 1500 ppm. Indoor pot growing industry pumps their CO2 levels to 1500 ppm to maximize plant growth.

  38. TA wrote on RealClimateScience: “Thanks for this ammunition, Tony. There have been several recent claims of climate change being the cause of glaciers melting. Your article will be a good example of [the] hysteria [voiced] about glaciers [melting] over the decades.
    The article below provides examples of the wild speculation about glaciers melting over the years. Today, some people are still wildly speculating about the demise of glaciers, and blaming it on human activity.

    • From the article above:
      “Tillerson will be paired with former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton as his deputy secretary of state for day-to-day management of the department, one source added.”
      Excellent! I would prefer that Bolton be the nominee for Secretary of State, but I will settle for him being deputy.

  39. Leon0112 December 10, 2016 at 5:13 am
    Fun fact: James Hanson has calculated that if human beings burn all of known fossil fuels, atmospheric CO2 levels will reach 1500 ppm. Indoor pot growing industry pumps their CO2 levels to 1500 ppm to maximize plant growth.

    Let’s look at the Cannabis Generation’s plans to continue to flood this country with drugs. Short list of pathways to destroy sobriety in this country and develop a narco culture and a narco economy.
    How can we get every single American on drugs?
    1. Prescription psychotropics for children in schools — facilitated by Baby Boomer narco-philia and career benefits from public schools; provided by pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies– in all, a 9 billion dollar a year industry
    2. prescription psychotropics for any symptom in the DSM– no physical test is possible for brain chemistry imbalances. Symptoms include shopping binges and overuse of the internet, along with anxieties, depression etc.
    3. Cocaine supplied by Drug Cartels in Central America such as Zetas
    4. Opiods supplied by Drug Cartels in South, Central America, and Afghanistan
    5. Methamphetamines provided by Drug Cartels in Central America such as Knights Templar
    6. Cannabis and synthetic cannabis such a K-2; now finding its way into candies, sports drinks and baked goods; dealers are attempting to proselytize for medical uses and cures in order to get new markets to vulnerable sick people and the elderly; head shops appearing in small towns because huge city populations in one to four counties forced it on the entire state
    7. China’s production of W-18: for prescription drugs, and a cocaine and heroine additive, coming in through Canada to the US. 10 times more powerful than morphine, and very addictive, very deadly
    I think that covers the entire population. Did I leave anything out? Now add to this the coming flood of cocaine and heroin into this country which is slated to aggressively recruit new users in urban and suburban America, and add to that the exponential rise in food stamp use and unemployment, and this is a very dire situation. All brought to you by the counter-culture Cannabis Generation, which never has to ask how people feel about drug houses in their nice neighborhoods, never asks how Americans — now trapped in substance abuse — are becoming less and less and less employable. And the Cannabis Generation never ever has to ask how drugs are linked to crime and never has to notice further descents down the second sexual-drugs-occult revolution involving children. If the question is, “How can we get every American on psychoactive substances?” I hope I have not neglected any of the methods now being used to that end.

    Study: Half of people “remember” events that never happened
    “The study highlights the slippery nature of human memory, and is just the latest in a growing body of research looking into how memories form and how they can be manipulated.
    “The finding that a large portion of people are prone to developing false beliefs is important. We know from other research that distorted beliefs can influence people’s behaviors, intentions and attitudes,” Wade said in a press statement.”
    end excerpt
    Then along comes the Leftwing Media pounding distorted beliefs into easily influenced people to fool them into supporting Leftwing ideologies that ultimately will make them poorer, more ignorant, and will take away their freedoms in the name of helping them.
    When the Main Stream Media distorts the truth they become a danger to our free society. We cannot govern ourselves properly without accurate information.
    This last election has exposed the MSM for what they are, partisan political liars, and this is a very good thing for freedom because the MSM has lost its credibility.
    We should keep the focus on their dishonesty if we value our freedom and way of life. They are down and we should do everything we can to keep them down, where they belong.

    • Nice comment, TA.
      A classic example would be the many people that remember Palin said “I can see Russia from my house.”

    World cities seek $375 bn to fight climate change
    “The world’s big cities will need $375 billion of investment to curb climate change, a large gathering of mayors heard in Mexico on Thursday.
    “It is a lot, but there is no other option. Together we will seek that money,” said the new president of the C40 network of big cities, Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo.
    If that amount is made available “humanity will have a chance of surviving,” she told a gathering of C40 mayors in Mexico.
    The mayors were meeting to plot strategy in the face of climate skepticism from US President-elect Donald Trump.”
    end excerpt
    I would like to have a little of that climate change money myself.
    Where do I go and who do I see to get my check? Answer: There is no place to go anymore. It used to be that Uncle Sucker would pay those bills, but there is a new guy getting ready to run the show and he says “America First” which means we are going to keep that money in the U.S. to help the people of the U.S.
    If those cities need money for climate change, they should try to raise local taxes and justify doing so to their constituents. No more Uncle Sucker. No more giveaways.

    Nanoceramic material for more safe and economical nuclear reactors
    “The researchers anticipate that this unique material will be able to make next-generation reactors more safe and economical overall.
    “It’s a paradigm shift in the field, because so far there has not been a material that actually exploits radiation,” says García Ferré. “With this new material, we benefit from a radiation environment to tailor the evolution of the mechanical properties of the material. In particular, we are able to have a material that, by the end of its lifetime, has similar mechanical properties as when it was first exposed to radiation.”
    end excerpt

    Antarctica has a new explorer testing the water along a critical ice shelf
    “A short metal tube packed with scientific instruments parachuted into the ice-cold waters of Antarctica’s Ross Sea on Tuesday, marking a new frontier in polar research. This ALAMO float and five others being deployed over the coming weeks are the first explorers of their kind to begin profiling the water adjacent to Antarctica’s Ross Ice Shelf and sending back data in real time. Their mission: find vulnerabilities where warmer (but still near freezing) water from the deep ocean may be seeping in under the ice shelf and melting it from below.”
    end excerpt

    Star-starved galaxies fill the cosmos
    “Not all galaxies sparkle with stars. Galaxies as wide as the Milky Way but bereft of starlight are scattered throughout our cosmic neighborhood. Unlike Andromeda and other well-known galaxies, these dark beasts have no grand spirals of stars and gas wrapped around a glowing core, nor are they radiant balls of densely packed stars. Instead, researchers find just a wisp of starlight from a tenuous blob.
    “If you took the Milky Way but threw away about 99 percent of the stars, that’s what you’d get,” says Roberto Abraham, an astrophysicist at the University of Toronto.
    How these dark galaxies form is unclear. They could be a whole new type of galaxy that challenges ideas about the birth of galaxies. Or they might be outliers of already familiar galaxies, black sheep shaped by their environment. Wherever they come from, dark galaxies appear to be ubiquitous. Once astronomers reported the first batch in early 2015 — which told them what to look for — they started picking out dark denizens in many nearby clusters of galaxies. “We’ve gone from none to suddenly over a thousand,” Abraham says. “It’s been remarkable.”
    end excerpt
    They keep finding more and more dark matter out in the great beyond.

  45. @ 1saveenergy
    Really like your Due Diligence Today website. Its a great place to send people who are interested in knowing more about so called climate change and/or carbon polution that the MSM keep banging on about with such alarmism.
    One suggestion. Maybe pick a unusual website name that doesn’t get lost in the ‘noise’ when Googled. It may make your site easier to find.

  46. The current state of so-called skepticism is such that all the real scientists were driven out of it except the ones who believed in the scam or say they believe in it still.
    Gas equations never permitted nor do they permit green house gases to warm the planet they are a refractory substance between a fire and object.
    Fire blankets are refractory substances and there’s no such thing as a thicker refractory blanket, and a warmer object behind it. Bullsh** in the face of any man who says such is possible.
    Prove it.
    We in real science still throw that gauntlet FLAT into the FACE of ANYONE who even MUMBLES that ”the science is real” behind Green House Gas ”theory.”

  47. It looks like the Democrats are going to try to create some sinister link between Putin and Russia, and Trump and his advisors. There is no credible sinister connection but that won’t keep them from pretending there is.
    But the Democrats have some Russian problems of their own. Obama told the Russians, on a hot mike, he would have more flexibilty to deal with them after the election. And Hillary sold 25 percent of U.S. uranium to the Russians.
    So if we are going to explore Russian connections, let’s explore *all* the Russian connections. Hillary probably ought to go to jail for her Russian connection. And she just might.

      FBI and CIA give differing accounts to lawmakers on Russia’s motives in 2016 hacks
      “In a secure meeting room under the Capitol last week, lawmakers held in their hands a classified letter written by colleagues in the Senate summing up a secret, new CIA assessment of Russia’s role in the 2016 presidential election.
      Sitting before the House Intelligence Committee was a senior FBI counterintelligence official. The question the Republicans and Democrats in attendance wanted answered was whether the bureau concurred with the conclusions the CIA had just shared with senators that Russia “quite” clearly intended to help Republican Donald Trump defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton and clinch the White House.
      For the Democrats in the room, the FBI’s response was frustrating — even shocking.
      During a similar Senate Intelligence Committee briefing held the previous week, the CIA’s statements, as reflected in the letter the lawmakers now held in their hands, were “direct and bald and unqualified” about Russia’s intentions to help Trump, according to one of the officials who attended the House briefing.
      The FBI official’s remarks to the lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee were, in comparison, “fuzzy” and “ambiguous,” suggesting to those in the room that the bureau and the agency weren’t on the same page, the official said.”
      end excerpt
      To tell you the truth, I wouldn’t believe anything the U.S. intelligence community tells us right now under Barack Obama. The CIA Director is a shill for Obama. They’ve already lied about it claiming 17 different U.S. intelligence agencies have confirmed this Russian connection, when most of those 17 haven’t even looked into the issue because it is not in their purview.
      This Russian connection the Democrats are trying to create is an attempt on their part to delegitimize the election of President Trump. It’s not going to work, and may backfire on them.

    Hacked emails: Erdogan’s son-in-law imported ISIS oil
    Contrary to his denials, the son-in-law of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is tied to the company accused of importing oil from ISIS, according to an archive of nearly 58,000 emails released by WikiLeaks.
    “Berat Albayrak, who is Turkey’s minister of energy, has insisted he has had no involvement in Powertrans, the company implicated in ISIS oil imports to Turkey.
    The archive, however, shows Albayrak wielded authority in Powertrans beginning in 2012, which was when the government gave the company the right to transport oil.
    There are nearly 30 exchanges between Albayrak and Betul Yilmaz, the human resources manager of Çalık Holding, a conglomerate for which Albayrak served as CEO. The emails show Yilmaz seeking approval from Albayrak regarding Powertrans personnel decisions, such as who to hire and approval of Powertrans salaries.
    Albayrak, in one email, discusses with his lawyer publicly denying any connection with Powertrans.
    The lawyer proposes a statement saying “my client no longer has ties with Powertrans.” Albayrak “corrects” him, saying “what do you mean no longer? I never had ties with this company!”
    Albayrak, 38, has been a member of parliament since June 2015, and minister of energy and natural resources since November 2015.
    One year ago, Russian Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov told journalists in Moscow that Erdogan and his family were “involved” in ISIS’ illegal oil trade and personally benefitting from it.
    “Turkey is the main destination for the oil stolen from its legitimate owners, which are Syria and Iraq,” he said. “Turkey resells this oil. The appalling part about it is that the country’s top political leadership is involved in the illegal business — President Erdogan and his family.”
    end excerpt
    This is a big problem for Trump and us. Turkey is a very important country especially in the situation the world finds itself in now, and Turkey is being run by a corrupt family. Turkey has the ability to cause serious problems for all of western Europe by opening the gates to millions of immigrants, and they have threatened to do so if Europe doesn’t go along with bringing Turkey into the EU. Blackmail doesn’t seem like a good way to start out a relationship.
    Trump will probably get along better with Turkey than Obama but he will have to watch his step because it doesn’t look like Erdogan’s motives are altruistic.

    Trump Team’s Asking for Ways to Keep Nuclear Power Alive
    “President-elect Donald Trump’s advisers are looking at ways in which the U.S. government could help nuclear power generators being forced out of the electricity market by cheaper natural gas and renewable resources.
    In a document obtained by Bloomberg, Trump’s transition team asked the Energy Department how it can help keep nuclear reactors “operating as part of the nation’s infrastructure” and what it could do to prevent the shutdown of plants. Advisers also asked the agency whether there were statutory restrictions in resuming work on Yucca Mountain, a proposed federal depository for nuclear waste in Nevada that was abandoned by the Obama administration.”
    end excerpt

    Delingpole: Polar Vortex the Next Big Thing in Climate Scaremongering
    “Global temperatures are plummeting at a record rate – but if there’s one thing even more likely than a white Christmas, it’s that the greenies will try to blame it on man-made climate change.”
    end excerpt
    The polar vortex in not a new phenomenon.
    “Experts who make their living lying about global warming are about to begin their next big scam, blaming the polar vortex on global warming and declining Arctic ice.
    The polar vortex is a favorite target of climate scamsters, who 40 years ago blamed it on global cooling and expanding Arctic ice.”
    end excerpt

    Sharp YouTube Videos Demolish Progressive Ideology, And The Left Isn’t Happy
    “He believes what took the left 100 years to do in education can be reversed, harnessing the power of the internet in just ten years, perhaps. PragerU’s success demonstrates a growing hunger for the forgotten knowledge and values of America, he says — truth has a way of resonating like a starburst.”
    end excerpt
    Well, maybe there is still hope for the education system and our young people. The Leftwing-brainwashing the kids get in school and in the media has to be countered with the truth.

  52. Apologies if this is the wrong place to ask, but I have a couple of friends who are, at the moment, believers in global warming but due to my constantly bending their ears about the skeptics’ viewpoint are now on a knife-edge, not sure which way to believe. What would be very helpful is if I could point them to a single web page where all the main skeptics’ arguments are spelled out briefly with, say, an accompanying graph or diagram for each argument. I’m thinking of things like illustrating the medieval warm period, the lack of severe storms over the past couple of decades, the lack of acceleration of sea level rise, increasing antarctic ice, etc etc.
    I know there are a few reference pages listed in the menu for WUWT, but they seem to present just the graphs with no accompanying commentary. As my friends aren’t overly scientific, a bit of interpretation of the graphs would be very helpful in converting them to the skeptical viewpoint.
    Thanks for any links anyone can provide.

  53. Cartoonist Scott Adams’ blog had a thread posted 12/11 (yesterday) called “Fake News Versus Misleading News” Commenter “froginthewell” posted:

    Here is one more feature of many “normal” news items: having both sides represented, but choosing the most ignorant and loutish representatives of one side and the smartest representative of the other.
    Maybe there should be a more comprehensive compilation of such tactics.

    I responded:
A subtler version of that tactic is often employed in MSM reporting on climate change news. Quotations from the alarmist side will come from scientists, but quotes from the dissenters' side will come, not from dissenting scientists, but from an Oil & Coal Institute or a well-known conservative think tank. Screwtape-worthy!

Comments are closed.