Collapse of Global Warming Deception Triggers Variety of Bailouts and Revisionism

Guest opinion: Dr. Tim Ball

We will see an increasing number of people changing their positions on global warming as the global warming ship sinks. It will take various forms including; articles appearing that subtly shift previously held positions; reevaluation of data; or finding new evidence that allows a change and perhaps worst of all those who say they knew the science was wrong all along but did not consider it important to speak out; dredging up a sentence or two from their writings that they claim showed they knew. The level of inventiveness will astonish as rats desert the sinking ship.

I am not well disposed to any of these people since the evidence was there all along. They chose not to see it, for a variety of reasons none of which are valid and as the old proverb says there are none so blind as those who will not see. I admit I hold some animosity to this group as I head to Vancouver for my first of two trials [although I received three lawsuits all from the same lawyer and all from members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)] trial for speaking out against the misuse of science for a political agenda and the scientific deception and corruption this engendered. When I realize that if even a few of these people had spoken out I would likely not have suffered the lawsuits, personal attacks, death threats and career limiting denial of funding, loss of speaking opportunities, and having my wife cry now if someone knocks on my door at four on a Friday afternoon because that is the time that all three court summons were delivered. The timing was deliberate as I only had 48 hours to respond.

I am glad Mr. McCarter finally saw the light as expressed in his article “Naïve scientists awakens to the politics underlying climate change”, but it is too late, too easy and self-serving. It is precisely his ‘I don’t want to know attitude’ that the perpetrators of the global warming deception knew would happen and exploited. What he doesn’t know is that the three Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation (SLAPP) I received were not only to silence me but also to have a much wider chilling effect against anyone else who dared to speak out. It was very effective because of the silence of so many who didn’t want to know. There is safety in numbers, but a majority chose to say and do nothing. I know first-hand what Voltaire meant when he said

“It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong.”

Or for my fellow Canadian

Il est dangereux d’avoir raison dans des choses où des hommes accrédités ont tort.

Why didn’t McCarter act when the emails were leaked from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) providing clear evidence that it was more than politics but included the abuse of science by scientists? Here is a list of the activities set out by Mosher and Fuller.

· Actively worked to evade (Steve) Mcintyre’s Freedom of Information requests, deleting emails, documents, and even climate data

· Tried to corrupt the peer-review principles that are the mainstay of modern science, reviewing each other’s’ work, sabotaging efforts of opponents trying to publish their own work, and threatening editors of journals who didn’t bow to their demands

· Changed the shape of their own data in materials shown to politicians charged with changing the shape of our world, ‘hiding the decline’ that showed their data could not be trusted.

Even if only half these charges are true, they are activities that would and should have triggered McCarter to action. It appears they did not, so the question is how much more did he need? How are things any different now that causes McCarter to respond? The apparent answer is that there are no consequences and he will be praised for his enlightenment and forgiven for his failures. Sorry, it is far too late, inadequate, and unworthy of praise. How much damage has occurred because of decisions he made to ignore the problems.

Massive amounts of damage have already occurred. People, economies, and societies have already suffered enormously. He watched as others suffered attacks, lawsuits, and bullying and did nothing. As Edmund Burke said, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” I think that the fact they did nothing eliminates them from being called good men. McCarter apologizes for Naomi Klein as a fellow Canadian, but where was he when she was appointed to Pope Francis’ committee on global warming helping him to draft the Laudate Si Encyclical? As he admits, he knew there were problems but rationalized they were political, and as a scientist, he could ignore them. He made a conscious decision to look the other way; now he wants absolution and even praises after a perfunctory mea culpa.

It is easy now as the tide is turning because Trump had the courage to cancel the Paris Climate Agreement. It is easy to jump on “the deception shouldn’t have happened” bandwagon. I can’t tell you how many people felt they were supporting me by telling me privately they agreed with me. Presumably, this absolved their conscience, but when the opportunity to speak arose at least 95 percent of them were nowhere to be seen. I used to try and understand that people did not want to lose their jobs or their income, but I don’t anymore because it is precisely this weakness that makes them vulnerable to bullies and exploiters. McCarter, by his own admission, hasn’t learned much.So having had doubt about climate change being a political rather than scientific problem I am now a bit wiser.” Only a bit? If he had taken even a limited quiet look at what was going on, he would be a lot wiser. If he spoke out even minimally at the start, he would have experienced the push back and learned how political and nasty the attacks. He chose not to do that, and now he wants absolution for that failure. Sorry, it is too late unless he offers more than hand waving.

No, I cannot accept McCarter’s pathetic apology now it is easy. He admits in this article he knew all along but decided to do nothing. If I hear of him doing more than making an apology on friendly websites like WUWT, I will maybe temper my view. If he tries to get published in the NYT, I will have some sympathy. When I hear that his grandson was made to stand in the hallway outside his Grade six class every day for most of a month because he dared to ask questions about global warming that challenged what his teacher was saying and she knew I was his grandfather.

The only thing I can do here is quote Lutheran Pastor Martin Niemoller.

First, they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Ogden Nash wrote,

There are people who are very resourceful

At being remorseful.

And who apparently feel that the best away to make friends

Is to do something terrible then make amends.

It was a child who pointed out that the emperor had no clothes because the adults were afraid to say anything. McCarter’s story indicates that this continues and will do so until people accept the social responsibility that comes with having the privilege to practice science or do anything in society. He should read about what is happening in his Canada as the government deliberately intimidates people and moves to make alternative climate views a crime. Let him publicly fight that and earn a modicum of credibility, until then his ‘coming out’ is too little too late. For those who think his actions are sufficient as a step in the right direction I will disagree.

Yes, it is a form of penance, the “voluntary self-punishment inflicted as an outward expression of repentance for having done wrong.” However, it is completely out of proportion to the extent of the damage his failure to act created. It indicates that he still doesn’t understand.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Tim Ball is one of the most admirable scientists in this sordid affair. He is absolutely correct. It is shameful what the legion of climate “scientists” have brought the state of that art to.




M Seward

Hear Hear!

The frauds and bullies of climate ‘science’ are the Harvey Weinsteins of their field and the others who quote 97% consensus and ‘experts agree’ etc are just the rest of the industry actors and hangers on who knew exactly what had been going on but there is just too much yummy, yummy gravy to be had and so silence is observed.

John of Cloverdale, WA, Australia

That 97%, although fraudulent, is now stuck in stone and is used all the time to shut down debate, I get it all the time. Makes me so pissed off (excuse the language).


Scientists never registered and voted on the AGW conjecture so there is no 97% consensus. A scientific consensus is an oxymoron. Science is not a democracy. The laws of science are not some form of legislation. Sceintific theories are not validated by a voting process. The 97% consensus is is politics and not science and it does not really exist. In one of the studies that claimed the 97%, the data was reevaluated yielding a consensus of less than 1%. The AGW conjecture is severely flawed and no consensus opinion can change that.

Pat Frank

It’s not the legion of climate scientists who have brought us to this pass.

It is the much larger legions of physical scientists who rolled over, including the top tier of scientists at every single institution of science: the APS, the ACS, the AGU, the AMS, and all the rest, including the National Academy. They are the most blameworthy.

Dave Fair

People documenting CAGW alarmist statements, especially those from scientific societies, will shame the perpetrators.



I concur, in that I don’t see how the “climate change” crew could have pulled this off if not for the silence/acquiescence of a great many “established” scientists in many fields. I mean, I’m a nobody and the moment I heard prominent people speaking of the CAGW hypothesis as “settled science”, and saying things like- “The debate is over”, I went from tentative half-believer to highly suspicious skeptic.

I worry that this particular battle could be won, yet the greater war still be lost, if the “scientific community” does not shed and denounce the “priestly robes” it’s been (it seems to me) flirting with making standard attire for some years now . .


Will go further than you would Tim. For those who have applied for and received funding based on CO2 caused global climate change we need to have some special rewards.
Public denouncements.
Otherwise we will see them appearing in the next scam.


In light of recent awards for people who have done so little of substance (Gore and our former fearful leader), Dr. Ball’s work against massive opposing forces and the evils brought to bear on his (scientific) character merit an honestly appraised Nobel, which might accomplish some revitalization of the Nobel as a valued award.


i have some personal experience along these lines and i understand- the haters gonna hate and that’s how it is, but the cowards who know better and won’t speak up out of fear were the ones i hated back. it’s for them is reserved the lowest rung in hell.

Philip of Taos

Winston Churchill comes to mind for speaking the truth in the face of deliberate lies and others covering their own ass. Thank you Dr. Tim Ball


The sc@mmers will keep up the scare and the sc@m as long as possible. They can survive one Trump term. Two, not so much. Especially if Great Goddess Gaia or Mother Nature continues spanking them.

Arctic sea ice has been growing for five years, unprecedented since 1979. At the end of a second Trump term, it will have been doing so for 12 years and the jib will be well up. And with it the charlatan catastrophists’ lucrative gigs.


The dance jig, not the sail jib.

Nigel S

They’re certainly sailing close to the wind, tacking to and fro and with luck will be ‘in irons’ soon.


My gut tells me that AGW proponents will simply stay the course and claim that everything happening that day -from weather phenomena to sundry social issues- are all proof that CO2 is horrible and needs to be caged. An angry mob needs nothing other than a target (i.e. not science, nor fact, nor tact, nor morality/ethics, etc.) Drs Frankenstein point to the weather, then towards the enemy (“deniers”) while shouting “CHARGE!” And that’s all they need.


there is a need to cut off the pay checks (tides) for many of the legion of protestors, jail soros and steyer


Sadly, I think you’re right…they won’t go easily, they are on Sun Tzu (and Clausewitz) ‘death ground’ with no way out…no offramp for their fraud, they must fight to the bitter end, they have no other choice other than to admit their scam. Maybe the best solution is to give them an off ramp somehow. From the sound of it, Dr. Ball isn’t interested, this is ‘total war’…no quarter asked, none given.

Joe Bastardi

agreed the can not turn back now.
Wrote on this here:

Dave Fair

Joe, I believe you hit the nail on the head: Accountability for a tangible result sharpens the mind. It motivates innovation and advancement in the field. Political interference is quickly observed in sub-optimal results and expensive errors. With academia and government grants in a non-rigorous field, speculation and falsehoods abound.

Leo Smith

No.I thin Tims predictions are probably more likely. In the end people will seize on whatever narrative makes them look the least evil.

The likes of Mann will go to their graves defending it, because a misguided idiot is better than a fraudster.
At the other end of the spectrum people who were told what to say and do will say ‘I was told to say and do it’ ‘It was the price of getting the grant’ and the like.

In the middle people who had been major advocates but not scientists will say ‘if the experts told us wrong, and we believed them, we cannot be blamed’

A few people will be sacrificed on the altar of political expediency, but the rest will be brushed under the carpet. Renewable subsidies will I hope taper off with no new initiatives, and the whole eco-energy thing will become quietly forgotten as other issues are placed in front of the public consciousness to distract it.

But there will be no public spectacle of humiliation, no show trials and recanting, or public confessions.

Everyone will be embarrassed by the whole thing, and it will simply be something people are too ashamed to talk about.

After a generation ‘Climate change’ will be something a standup comedian says that will guarantee to have the audience in stitches.

Very young children will say ‘Grandad, did you Believe In Climate Change?’ and giggle.

Grants will be made available to study the psycho social phenomenon of climate change in order to work out where they went wrong..

History Phds will rewrite history to protect the guilty…

IPCC will mean internal police complaints commssiion


Heartfelt thanks to Dr. Timothy Ball for his brave stand. And, to Joe Bastardi for his.


Perhaps they will “see the light” apologize for their error, and now say actually that CO2 is a heavy “cold” gas that needs to be controlled to keep us all from freezing to death /sarc


I just can’t see academia and their political allies in the UN budging one inch on this…I hope I’m wrong.


The US should pull out of IPCC as we did out of UNESCO.


I agree. I cannot imagine for a second that so many politicians, technocrats and intellectually corrupt scientists are going to say “whoops, so sorry but we were wrong.” They have way too much political capital invested in this scientific fraud. This is not a Piltdown Man scientific fraud but one of mega proportion perpetrated on the entire world. Its supporters in the environmental community are too well funded. Worse still is that the radical left sells this fraud and they are even better funded. If I didn’t under that there are some that pursue power just for fun I would find it quite ironic that more than a handful of billionaires support those seeking to destroy capitalism and the USA as its poster child.


I think what you will see is that some who’ve found out will say so, other will keep insisting, some will add more outrageous claims, while others will try to walk them back. Eventually, some will try to claim that (nonexistent) efforts taken have halted the ‘crisis’. There’s no easy way to unify the message, so some, especially those who’ve invested, will work against the rest to try to keep hope alive.

Mark T

Ben Affleck, Matt Damon. Nuff said.


Read about the great IQ debate in the USA in the 1960’s.That is what they will do.

john harmsworth

reform at the U.N. might make a difference. Long overdue in many, many areas.

Dave Fair

And pigs might fly, John.


Sir! May you stick around long enough to see the ringleaders cringing before those they misled.

4 Eyes

May we see them prosecuted for dishonesty and thrown in jail. Most countries have dishonesty laws. We need a big list.

Nigel S

…see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.”


He who made you bitter made you wise… (Yeats)

If global warming stops scaring people, another boogeyman will take its place.

Good luck in court — the last bastion of smarmy liberals.

You’re articles here are consistently good, so you get the character attacks, and negative attention, from the warmunists, that less visible people do not.

Modern “modern climate science” is 99% politics, and 1% real science, IMO.

The 1% is for the government bureaucrat scientists, who do have science degrees, although they are hired only to play computer games and make scary climate forecasts with high confidence … that have been wrong for 30 years so far, so pretending to be confident is special skill !

In my opinion, after 20 years of climate change reading, adding CO2 to the air was the best thing humans have ever done to improve life (accelerate green plant growth) on our planet.

The current climate is the best it has ever been for humans and animals on our planet.

More CO2 in the air would be even better — green plants would prefer 800 to 1,200 ppm.

If there was any warming from CO2 in the second half of the 20th century, it is invisible in the data — the second half of the century had almost the same amount of warming as the first half of the century, before the “age of man made CO2”.

If nothing unusual happened in the 20th century, there is no justification for claims that 4.5 billion years of natural climate change suddenly ended in 1940, and CO2 took over as the climate controller.

Only stupid people could believe that, and liberals — I repeat myself sometimes.

My climate blog for non-scientists:


The new bogeyman is already here and making its ‘fears’ known – after all, you can’t ignore 500,000 deaths annually from PM2.5. There just HAS to be a way to extract taxation to ‘cure’ this problem.

Joe - the non climate scientist

The Problem with the pm2.5 studies is that they are extremely bogus.

The methodology used is the same as the studies of the premature mortality due to increases in ground level ozone.

Those studies and the pm2.5 suffer from several basic defects
1) lack of a control population
2) recording bias,
3) ignoring other correlations,

Joe - the non climate scientist

Your study is from GreenBiz – not exactly an unbiased advocacy group.


Premature death at the age of 85. The air in Europe has never been so clear and people never had such a life expectancy. Of course there will be more cancer in an aging population.


comment image

When in Europe state pensions were introduced after WW2 most people did not life to enjoy them. Today that most live to at least the age of 80 all those countries can no longer afford theme.


“.. adding CO2 to the air was the best thing humans have ever done to improve life (accelerate green plant growth) on our planet.”

How TRUE that is.

Human release of accidentally sequestered carbon, back into the carbon cycle WHERE IT BELONGS, has been of MASSIVE BENEFIT to all life on this CARBON-BASED planet of ours.


AndyG55, 1:29 pm. Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, agrees with you. His speech in London on 10/14/2015 at the GWPF Annual meeting pointed out that carbonaceous rocks have sequestered 99.9% of all the carbon that ever existed in the atmosphere. Coal, peat, oil, and gas sequestered a great deal, too. Our use of fossil fuels has been releasing it to join the carbon cycle again and be of benefit to life.

Joe - the non climate scientist

Richard –
“If nothing unusual happened in the 20th century, there is no justification for claims that 4.5 billion years of natural climate change suddenly ended in 1940, and CO2 took over as the climate controller.”

Actually it is a good thing that mankind was able to take over for mother nature when mother nature could no longer handle her duties. (sarc)

The left requires a simple factor, like CO2, to be the climate control knob in order to force regulation on society on a global scale. The true climate science, if revealed and accepted, will stop their plan in its’ tracks. We must never give up as it would mean the complete loss of freedom if the left is allowed to prevail.


It not a coincidence that if you control co2 you control 90% of human activity. Stalin could only dream of such control.


Summary – he’s a coward.


Many in academe and government knew that CACA is a ho@x, but had to keep silent out of fear of ostracism, not getting tenure or losing their jobs.


Same as the chicks Weinstein was banging.



Yup. I had the same thought.

CACA rests on a climate of fear and intimidation, like f@scism and communism.


Courage and integrity are fine things. Unfortunately, you can’t eat them. 😐

Tom Halla

Sometimes politics comes down to the chorus of the old Mother Jones mineworkers song “which side are you on, boys, which side are you on?”

Tim. We are on your side and we pray for you.

CC Reader

McCarter is very much like the Hollywood crowd who knew about Harvey but were afraid to say anything about it. He must have just retired.

How does anyone go to bed at night and sleep in the full knowledge that they are disgusting craven creatures who would sell their own grandmothers into slavery to protect their cosseted lives?


Easy when your morals are relative and you are getting paid more than you ever imagined. Organized crime functions the same way.

Javert Chip

Yup. What Edwin said.

The question is how many of these people are there? (Apparently A WHOLE LOT!)


The choice between an empty stomach or an empty soul is rarely simple, often agonizing. Have empathy for any (wo)man who must make it.


“….. the government deliberately intimidates people and moves to make alternative climate views a crime.”

When science of fact based on application of reason is obscured by transformation of knowledge to a bogus belief in righteousness, darkness descends on liberty of thought.


Tim: Please celebrate your role as a Champion of Science, who will not need apologies for your own walk on the high road that is paved with integrity!

The Reverend Badger

Thanks Dr.Tim, seen a few of your presentations (YouTube), you have an interesting perspective on this.

There are going to be some great possibilities for lawsuits the other way round when the SHTF full time. I would encourage all those involved, particularly students and undergraduates who are now being taught false science to keep detailed records and notes. You may be getting VERY large payouts for years of your life being “wasted” by deliberate false teachings. It is possible some Universities and other establishments will be near bankrupt when it all unwinds. Each and every one of us who has suffered any loss has a potential claim.

Keep notes, keep emails, record conversations with your teacher/lecturer, back it all up. Be particularly vigilant for any indication of known deceit. From time to time ask those awkward questions and record the result in detail, probably best kept to 2 or 3 questions a year to avoid arousing too much suspicion or being outed as a “d3nyr”. As in any profession there will be those poor at their job, including poor liars. With luck you can get a few hook, line and sinker when it comes to court. Some may be going to jail.

Of course the lawyers have a great opportunity here too. Maybe one or 2 firms are already quietly working in the background to secure a competitive advantage near the forefront of future litigation. The amount of money potentially available could be astronomical.

And I await with interest to see who is going to get the Nobel Prize for the RIGHT paper when it all “flips”.
Tastefully ironic if it was the two who flipped their names, eh?

Good on you Dr. Ball. We all owe you big time.

Lutheran Pastor Niemoller’s legacy grows with each passing year.

Niemoller wrote in the tradition of the Protestant Reformation which Quincentennial Jubilee celebration begins All Hallows’ Eve, 31 October 2017

Rodzki of Oz

The number of people who say “I knew catastrophic anthropogenic global warming was wrong all along” will eventually explode, just like the number of people all of a sudden condemning Harvey Weinstein, having known for decades what he was up to. They tend to be cowardly people with no principles.


Great post, Tim…
As you know, I’ve been a staunch believer that CO2 cannot affect climate since about 2000 when I first became aware that it was even a debate. Of course, I was a laser designer, an instrument designer and a weather instrument designer so I know something about gases and temperatures. I have found it preposterous that ANYONE could believe that a trace gas could actually affect, let alone CONTROL the earth’s climate, particularly since it has been dozens of time higher in the past before humans even existed.
A real head scratcher….and trillions of lost dollars.


Best wishes from the UK, give the bar-stewards some stick from us.


Dr. Ball you should consider moving to the USA where free speech is protected by the Constitution; at least until the Canadian government regains its common sense. I respect your efforts to maintain scientific integrity in climate science, but it has become a cult and is no longer a scientific discipline. Best wishes in litigating your lawsuits.




But no free speech in US academe.


Have you heard about Mark Steyn’s court case? I would not recommend American courts, they are political and circuit dependent. Apparently the oath of office means little.

John Spencer

2 Year Sea Level Pause 2015 – 2017.


“When I hear that his grandson was made to stand in the hallway outside his Grade six class every day for most of a month because he dared to ask questions about global warming that challenged what his teacher was saying and she knew I was his grandfather.”

That really makes me angry! Not only is this an example of child abuse, but in so many ways the whole AGW movement abuses children and children yet unborn. They brainwash and use children to advance their political agendas, and also the policies they espouse will reduce the opportunities and standard of living for generations to come, if they don’t collapse entire economies beforehand.

My grandkids are being told the big-lie in school. As an Engineer, it makes me sad to see it, but when the dam breaks and the truth blows away the lie, the kids will know they have been taken for a ride, and the demands for retribution will echo wide and far. It will foster in a huge push for the return of the “scientific method” as taught by the master, Dr. Richard Feynman.

John F. Hultquist

… the kids will know they have been taken for a ride, and the demands for retribution …

I doubt this. Our teachers spouted lots of lies. We passed through that and moved on. Consider the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, and Santa Claus — have there been any organized demands for retribution? I can’t comment on others societies or cultures. If you think Al Gore is going to be fined or jailed for spouting lies, you are not paying attention.

The Reverend Badger

Keep records. Parents will be able to sue the school and the relevant teacher later. You may be able to get some free initial legal advice on it, worth starting the process from your own side so you can prepare the ground and do the right things to maximise a court win. Teaching children lies is something that need to be exposed in court.

Dave Fair

Get real, Rev. One cannot successfully sue government employees for regurgitating government dogma.

Truth is what our masters say it is; until it is a different truth.

john harmsworth

I was in Grade 3 when I realized my teacher was telling me something that wasn’t true and that I knew more about it than her. Somehow, believing people in authority was never easy for me after that. A healthy dose of scepticism and a core belief in one’s own ability to discover the truth is the best thing we can arm our children with. It’s a crazy world, full of self interest and ignorance.


Well, you just shot us all in the foot. How many scientists do you think will now be inpired to come forward after your bitter triade Dr. Ball?

PS: I have enjoyed reading all your previous articles.

Chill out. They’ll only “come forward” when the stone they customarily hide under gets lifted be circumstances. Don’t even begin to think that these pond life will do it from ethical considerations.


Sorry mate, but gutless is gutless….no other way to say it.
I can understand their decision, but gutless is the word necessary to be used.
Sorry too to be blunt, when I read about Mr Balls grandchild having to suffer due to the …….sorry taking a breath…..teachers, then your comment fell short, and was exactly the point Mr Ball was making.
Bloody hell, thats annoying.
Sorry people, (and mod) but where is the line of civility now a days?

Russ Wood

As to your missing description of teachers,you may like to use Sir Terry Pratchett’s (in “The Truth”) expletive of –ing! (and one other character wondered why he was saying “ing” all of the time!).

Javert Chip


Just in case you didn’t understand what D B H said, he’s included you as gutless coward, and invited you to crawl back under your rock as Dr Balls 6th grad grandson gets abused for the beliefs of his grandfather.

I second the emotion.


Its now the following day, and I rather regret the severity of my comment…but hold with the sentiment.
Javert, I do find it irksome that Niels may have elicited the response, and not knowing the person at all, they may have been simply responding to Mr Balls comments, in their view, as a ‘real world’ comment to how other ‘scientists’ will react.
They may feel even greater need now, to protect themselves from the very attention such as Mr Ball has had to suffer.
But I can’t help feel that the very point of the letter he (Mr Ball) wrote, needed to be penned…and read…and felt.
Hang on, I’m starting to get wound up again…….taking a breath……
So…like we ALL should do, an olive leaf to Niels, who I would prefer, not to alienate….who knows, we might become acquainted one day….and friends.
Maybe not able to totally see eye to eye, but who has friends that we can say that about?


I just don’t see the tide of global warming turning. I don’t see any prominent AGW supporter changing his view. I don’t see the media reporting against AGW.


When funding for the sc@m dries up under the Trump administration, when subsidies for “renewables” are wiped out, then the floodgates of mind-changing will burst open.

It will be hard for former prominent CACA advocates to switch, but it won’t matter if governments quit supporting the ho@x.


Wishful US-centric thinking. This is a global phenomenon. And placing your hopes on Trump might not be such a good idea. He has changed views on issues several times already.

I’m a skeptic. I’ll believe the tide of AGW is turning when I see it happening.


It’s a global sc@m now, but it started in the US and will end when our government stops rewarding its charlatan ho@xers and Green grant-grabbers.

Whether present CACA advocates ever publicly change their minds is irrelevant. None of them is a real scientist and all are third and fourth raters. What matters is funding and who runs government agencies.

Both Australia and Canada have also had skeptical PMs. They could again. Add them and Japan to the USA and the international organized criminal conspiracy is as good as dead. Europe doesn’t matter. Its enslaved subjects freezing in the dark however might even yet liberate themselves from EU tyranny. Russia, China and India were never seriously on board.


The EU’s share of the global economy is already under 1/6, and currently dropping at a rate of about 3% points per decade. Back Britain out of that, and it’ll be under 10% by 2030.

Western Europe is committing cultural suicide because it needs immigrants, given its falling indigenous population. But too many of the immigrants cost the locals in health, education and welfare, rather than working to increase production. Working too few hours, not having enough babies and adopting insane energy policies will continue dragging Europe down into ever greater irrelevancy on the world stage until the few surviving indigenees fight back against their faceless bureaucratic globalist and socialist masters.

Javert Chip


Is the country you live in in or out of the Paris Accords?

I’m an American (so is Trump), and America is OUT!.



My impression is that Javier is Spanish.

The EU is all in for Paris.

The best weapon we have is the massive failure of AGW predictions, plus the draw-down of Federal funding and terrible regulations. Trump is doing a great job in this regard – lets hope he keeps it up.


Not to sound pessimistic, but AGW predictions have been failing spectacularly for decades, and it has had no effect on the hypothesis acceptance. I just don’t see people deserting it now in mass because more predictions fail.


Happily, the false opinions of rent-seeking so-called “climate scientists” only matter if policy makers pay attention to them. When the professional liars are no longer heeded, then we’ll quit wasting trillions on Green schemes.

US voters chose a CACA-skeptical party to control both Houses of Congress, the White House and a majority of state legistlatures and governorships. If other countries had our system of choosing officials, the sc@m would be dead already. Unfortunately in too many other alleged democracies, party bosses chose the candidates to be presented to virtually powerless voters.

Thank God for referenda like Brexit and Catalonian independence. Also Scottish, however it ends up, although I’d hate to see Scotland become the Venezuela of the North. Catalonia would probably also be even more socialist than the dysfunctional Spanish central regime, but breaking up present nation states into smaller provinces would be a good thing, if it also ends unaccountable supranational bureaucracies like the EU and UN.

And yes, the USA would benefit from splitting up. Sovereign nations become dysfunctional at well below 100 million in population. Ten million is about right for a maximum. The more widely power is shared, the better.

Peter Morgenroth

Google news (at least here in Australia) carries articles from WUWT and I’ve seen a few anti global warming articles recently in other sources.


The pro Climate Change press won’t “report against” it. They’ll just move on to other subjects or crisis’s. That’s what they do. Expecting them to change 180 deg. is unrealistic. Tell me, what talking head on a major US news Network has admitted they were dead wrong for supporting the claim that Benghazi was about some little known video and then tried to set the record straight?

The scientific “consensus” tide won’t turn until the AGW paradigm totally collapses. This won’t happen soon or quickly.

The political tide has turned, for now, in the US and a few other nations.

The best we, in the US, can hope for, is that PresidentTrump gets to replace SCOTUS justices Kennedy, Ginsberg and maybe Breyer and finds a path to overturning Massachusetts v EPA.


“I just don’t see the tide of global warming turning.”

I find myself agreeing with Javier 100%. People who think warmists are heading for the exits are delusional. Obviously many people here disagree. I’m hopeful that some of them will supply some evidence that skepticism is gaining.

In the real world, that I think I live in, it is rare to find anyone who’s even remotely educated on the subject of climate change. Most people who have an opinion on the subject merely default to their world view. To me, the propaganda campaign to sell the global warming meme has been wildly successful and there is little sign sign of inroads being made. The fact that this country has not been overrun by climate alarmism is due to the existence of the kneejerk response of conservatives and Trumpites. It has little to do with the real scientific or logical inroads that have been made.

My brother is a highly educated retired college professor whose views are a little left of center. He accepts the climate change propaganda without having really examined the science at all. He naturally accepts academia’s embrace of global warming. This is the truth, in his view. When I challenge this view he politely listens but I know he’s not impressed. In my experience, even people with conservative instincts have been snowed by the relentless propaganda campaign. People, like myself, who’ve tried to educate themselves and who argue against the consensus are usually regarded as cranks or contrarians.

Dr. Ball’s outburst is impassioned but too personal to be effective. And he doesn’t even try to identify the people he excoriates other than mentioning their last name. I don’t doubt that he’s suffered greatly for being so public in his contrarianism. This has encouraged the denialists among us, which is ironic since Ball is not a denialist at all.

Ball’s article does skepticism no favors. I find no comfort in material that drags denialists out of the woodwork and offers them encouragement.

john harmsworth

I understand your doubts, Javier. We are far behind in this battle. But!
We are no longer losing ground!
The Earth is no longer warming!
The U.S. is stepping slowly and cautiously forward in rejection of the problem’s existence!
The same grassroot opposition that became the Trump admin’s climate policy exists elsewhere, I am a Canadian, as is Dr. Ball and Mick and Mack-crucifiers of Mikey Mann, Susan Crockford and others who are more interested in the truth than getting bogus grants.
There is a strong push for reform at the U.N.
The political/scientific climate is now such that more and more scientists are prepared to speak the truth.

We need one thing desperately- A solid and convincing scientific ( soft science) treatise on why Socialism/Communism is unworkable. This evil economic philosophy has plagued mankind for more than a hundred years now. Human nature dictates that it cannot work. Someone needs to describe why so we can get on with better ideas.


The world will be warming, if those gate keepers keep “adjusting” the temperature data.

It will continue until the cognitive dissonance is so large that shivering people doubt the BS they are told.
And the relentless scare of extreme weather, storms, rain, sea level rise (also ripe for data adjustments) will keep the average citizen in the cross hairs of their manipulation.


You know what this entire piece is missing? Links to good (NOT cherry-picked) evidence.

You know why so many people apparently believe this scam you speak of? Good, peer-reviewed evidence. And a lot of it. Which you are ignoring with your scaremongering FUD tactics.

What separates these two? Evidence. Not bullshit assertions.

[???? .mod]

Dave Fair

How are climate models peer reviewed? Has anyone read of any validation exercises? IPCC AR5 begging the question comparisons of with to without CO2 are beyond parody.

Good, peer-reviewed evidence. And a lot of it. Which you are ignoring with your scaremongering FUD tactics.

I’m sorry, but when you are trying to prove that something is an impending disaster requiring that we impoverish billions to avert, the onus is upon YOU to provide evidence to substantiate your claim. As for peer reviewed evidence to support the alarmist position, there is remarkably little of it. Once you get past the alarmist headlines down to the actual papers they purport to be reporting, there’s just not much there. In fact, may I quote from that most august of bodies, who build their reports on the most current peer reviewed science that there is, the United Nations Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change, and their most recent report, AR5:

Changes in population, age, income, technology, relative prices, lifestyle, regulation, governance, and many other aspects of socioeconomic development will have an impact on the supply and demand of economic goods and services that is large relative to the impact of climate change.

You see pmarreck, when I delve into the science espoused by your side, what I find is weasel words to obscure the truth. A lot of things will affect our society in the future. Climate change is minor in comparison. Don’t argue with me, argue with the peer reviewed climate science.

Reed Coray

pmarreck, You wrote: “You know why so many people apparently believe this scam you speak of?” There are many reasons, but I’ll focus on one. The AGW community, including many physicists, claim CO2 is a heat-trapping gas. Labeling CO2 gas as a heat-trapping gas makes it easy for lay people to believe atmospheric CO2 via the trapping of heat will increase the earth’s surface temperature. The problem is CO2 IS NOT a heat-trapping gas because heat cannot be trapped. The physics I studied uses an adiabatic wall (a wall that allows neither heat nor matter to pass across) as a useful theoretical concept but states that such a wall does not exist in the real world. As such, no known material can trap heat–this includes CO2 gas. In some situations CO2 gas surrounding an object with an internal source of thermal energy may result in an increased object temperature; but not always. In fact there are everyday simple examples where CO2 acts as a heat-releasing gas–in particular filling the vacuum space of a vacuum thermos bottle with CO2 gas expedites, not inhibits, cooling of heated material placed in the thermos bottle. If every AGW discussion that mentioned CO2 gas touted CO2 to be a heat-releasing gas, how many people would then wonder why atmospheric CO2 heats the earth’s surface?

Dave Fair

Satellites, radiosondes and reanalysis models all belie the “physics” as reflected in IPCC-used climate models: The atmosphere is not heating faster than the global surface temperatures.

The absence of a tropical tropospheric “hot spot” is THE smoking gun. And none of the alarmists will debate the topic. All of the arm waiving did not make it go away.

Leo Smith

let’s rephrase that. in the absence of evidence appeal to authority trumps reason.


Please provide links to this evidence that you are so convinced exists.
Until then you are merely accusing the doctor of the same sin you just committed.
Hypocrites all of you.

Doc Tim probably has way better insights on this stuff than I do – but I’m not so sure that tides are turning. Glarbal worming is a fundamental axiom of the psychotic liberal cult and they will defend it to the death – regardless of any and all evidence. Also the fact that virtually the entirety of the political, media and academic establishment has thrown its full weight behind this trivially stupid faux hypothesis for decades means it’s pretty much impossible to reverse as far as I can see.

So obviously idiotic is it that everyone involved would be completely transparently culpable of gross crimes against humanity without a shred of defense.

If we ever get around to trialling these people it would surely have to be done at Nuremberg.


I’m certain the tide is turning.

After 40 years of hysterical, Chicken Liken predictions, nothing on the planet has changed. Our politicians are not blind to this.

It served a political purpose to promote the climate change meme because people were genuinely scared of media scares of sea level rise, reduced crops, increased hurricanes etc. etc. etc.

But people who live by the coast haven’t seen any meaningful sea level rise. Farmers are seeing bumper crops and the entire population of the East Coast of America knows there hasn’t been a major landfall hurricane in the 12 years prior to 2017. So attitudes are shifting, perhaps slowly, but they are shifting.

Politicians sense these shifts, almost before they actually manifest themselves. And every politician want’s to be in the vanguard of a new initiative. Look at Al Gore, he almost single handedly created the AGW bandwagon.

And now prominent politicians like Trump and Australia’s Tony Abbot are publicly condemning AGW because the money involved is far too big a burden on the taxpayer. Mention saving taxpayer money to a politician and that’s a bandwagon they can all happily climb aboard.

The goose that laid the golden climate change egg is the rock on which it will perish. Forgive the mixed metaphors, but there’s now too much taxpayers money involved for politicians to continue to turn a blind eye.

Public opinion and taxpayers money are the mechanisms by which the climate change scam is buried, not science. And the more taxpayer money poured into it, the more politicians will be attracted to it, like bee’s to a honey-pot.

It feels like the tide is just starting to turn in Australia, thanks to some government MPs and to the growing number of members of the public pressuring them (and to rocketing power prices). The Prime Minister is still in the way, but it does seem that momentum is building. Even the ABC (public broadcaster) has started reporting some alternative views – completely unthinkable just a short while ago.

Mike Jonas

In my opinion, Aus. is a bellwether. If renewables can’t be made to work there, with the huge coastline, the amount of sunshine in many areas and the huge land mass, frankly, it can’t be expected to work anywhere.

When I said the tide is turning “thanks to some government MPs”, I should have given credit to Pauline Hanson too. The government MPs provide the clout, but Pauline Hanson spoke out first.

Gary Pearse

Cephus, the liberals are dying too! Hillary is still all they got. A party who takes a shellacking like the Dems who thought they were going to win with the billions from elites, the signing up illegals and voting multiple times, who haven’t long ago begun a retrospective soul search is dying. Hillary’s book shows she is the only one who doesn’t know “What Happened” and all her supporters ate going with that.

When they revoted Pelosi as the Senate minority leader instead of going with the younger, new challenger they signaled their moribundness. Trump will win the next election too. Climate disaster is dead if US says so! That’s the simple truth. No one is going to step in and fund this drek.

Tim is right that it has already collapsed. Papers are coming out saying warming was exaggerated. The team isn’t publishing anymore. They’ve begun to retire. Where is Trenberth? Mann isn’t striking with science. He’s twittering nasty insults. He wrote one paper and has been defending the indefensible ever since. The liars have been reversing themselves on the Pause. There is definitely a hysteria building as they lose their way. I haven’t heard a peep from the UEA for about 4yrs. Ozzies are coming out with crazier stuff and they have the most climate clones per capita, soon to be defunding. Subsidies are drying up. Oh yeah baby it’s over! But when you cut the head off a chicken it goes into a crescendo of athletic leaps and dives and then is still.


From her recent appearances it appears that Pelosi is suffering from some form of dementia. She was clearly suffering from something for the last couple of years, but the political machine she and the Democrats have built is so powerful that they could elect dead people if they wanted.

The Reverend Badger

There WILL be some kind of trials when this all gets “flipped”. This is why I keep telling people to keep records and gather evidence. I am even in contact with 3 undergraduates at 3 Russell Group Universities in the UK who are doing EXACTLY this (carefully and quietly) during their climate related courses. And I have first hand evidence of one lecturer who absolutely knows that the physics he is teaching is scientific BS. Whether this all comes to light in 3 years or 5 years or 10 years we have no way of knowing but it WILL be exposed eventually PROVIDED we keep the evidence. The more of us that do this the better.

Tom Gelsthorpe

“Climate rats desert sinking doomsday ship as data fail and fashions shift.” Beautiful!

Nigel S

Then they’ll raise their hands
Sayin’ we’ll meet all your demands
But we’ll shout from the bow your days are numbered
And like Pharoah’s tribe
They’ll be drownded in the tide
And like Goliath, they’ll be conquered


The entire ‘scientific’ premise of ‘global warming’ is based on the erroneous concept of ‘greenhouse gases’.
If CO2 in the atmosphere absorbs infrared energy from the sun and heats the atmosphere, what would happen to an atmosphere without CO2? The infrared energy would pass through the atmosphere and strike the surface, where it would be absorbed and converted into heat.
Where would this heat go? It would heat the air that is in contact with the warmed surface.
Either way, the infrared energy ends up heating the atmosphere. The presence or absence of a gas that absorbs infrared energy does not affect the total amount of energy transferred to the atmosphere. The source of all that infrared energy is the sun. The gas may, at best, provide a secondary path for some of the energy to get absorbed by the atmosphere.
If you leave your car windows rolled up while the car sits in the sun, the greenhouse effect will quickly heat the interior to lethal temperatures. If you roll your windows down, leave your sun roof open, or lower the convertible top, the heating doesn’t happen, because the warmed air rises. Obviously, this is not a problem for motorcycles. The “Greenhouse effect” needs a roof.
The atmosphere of Venus is often stood up as the paradigm of a ‘runaway greenhouse effect.’ The problem with that is the atmosphere of Venus shows no greenhouse effect at all. The elevated temperatures are due to the adiabatic lapse rate.
Anybody who has ever worked with gases or air compressors knows that when you compress a gas it heat up, and that when you allow a gas to expand it cools down, all without the gain or loss of internal heat energy. Thermodynamics calls this an adiabatic process. This is why higher altitudes are cooler and lower altitudes are warmer. The surface of Venus is so remarkably hot not because of any imaginary ‘greenhouse effect’, but because at the surface the atmosphere has been compressed under 92.1 atmospheres (over 1350 pounds per square inch). If one looks at the temperature of the atmosphere of Venus *at an altitude where the pressure is equivalent to that of Earth’s atmosphere*(!) the temperature is a comparatively mild 65° C. Given the proximity of Venus to the sun, this is about what we might expect.


All true, but there is one thing that everyone seems to ignore. Everything radiates energy at the 4th power of its temperature. We all know that. So, just suppose the earth WAS warmed by some unproven source? What would happen? The earth’s RATE of radiation would increase, thus cooling the earth. It is an automatic thermostat that is proven The radiation rate goes up during the day, and slows down at night. If it can happen on a daily basis, it can happen on any time scale.

The Reverend Badger

Just to be a bit clearer – everything has the potential to radiate up to a maximum figure related to the 4th power of temperature. (there is an emissivity term). Whether any heat energy is transferred FROM a radiating object (cooling) or whether any heat energy is transferred TO a radiating object (heating) depends on the temperature(s) of the other object(s). In short radiation cannot be a mechanism for heat energy to be transferred FROM a cold source TO a warmer sink. That is a physical impossibility which has never occured let alone been observed anywhere in the entire universe ever.

Someone ought to write all this up as some kind of LAW of HEAT!


That is right. The AGW conjecture is based upon the existance of a radiant greenhouse effect caused by trace gases in the atmosphere with LWIR absorption bands. As we all should know, good absorbers are also good radiatiors so what these gases absorb they both share with their neighbors or radiate away. Heat energy transfer in the troposphere is dominated by conduction, convection, and phase change and not LWIR absorpton band radiation. Because the non-greenhouse gases are such poor radiatiors to space it is the non-greenhouse gases that are more apt too hold onto heat energy than the so called greenhouse gases. The radiant greenhouse effect has not been observed anywhere in the solar system including the Earth. The radiant greenhouse effect is sceince fiction. Hence the AGW conjecture is science fiction.

Leo Smith

do no confuse a negative sign in an equation with a physical process.

your body is at 38 c – it will be warmer standing net to a radiator at 20c than a block of ice at 0c,

even though neither is capable of transferring heat to it.

Dan Sage

According to the black body radiation profile of the Sun, not much infrared energy is radiated to the earth. Most of the LWIR is created when the Sun’s visible energy is converted into infrared energy, when it is absorbed by the earth and radiated back into the sky as LWIR. That is where the conversion into “heat” takes place. comment image

Dan Sage

Actually according to the picture, there is down going near infrared from the Sun, so my statement was wrong!



Glad you saw that. I was about to observe that much of the Sun’s energy arrives on Earth as infrared radiation.

Sunlight in space at the top of Earth’s atmosphere at a power of 1366 watts/m^2 is composed (by total energy) of about 50% infrared light, 40% visible light and 10% ultraviolet light (although the UV portion varies greatly). At the surface, this decreases to about 1120-1000 watts/m&2, and consists of 44% visible light, 3% ultraviolet (with the Sun at the zenith, ie directly overhead, but less at other angles) and the remainder infrared. Most of the UV (its most energetic portions) is absorbed in the atmosphere.

Thus, sunlight’s composition at sea level, per square meter, with the Sun at the zenith, is about 527 watts of infrared radiation, 445 watts of visible light and 32 watts of ultraviolet radiation. Hence, incoming solar radiation is mostly IR. The balance between absorbed and emitted infrared radiation of course has a critical effect on Earth’s climate.

Reed Coray

I think most people would be surprised at the percentage of the radiated solar power that exists in the IR band. Various definitions of the IR band exist, I’ll use Wikipedia’s definition–see “Regions within the infrared” at

Assuming for the purposes of computing solar radiated power the sun is treated as a black body radiator at a temperature of 5780 K, the following table gives the percentage of the total solar radiated power over a number of frequency intervals*:

0.022%–Far IR (300 GHz to 20 THz)
0.115%–Long Wavelength IR (20 GHz to 37.5 GHz)
1.982%–Mid Wavelength IR (37.5 GHz to 100 GHz)
11.892%–Short Wavelength IR (100 GHz to 214 GHz)
32.148%–Near IR (214 GHz to 400 GHz)
46.160%–Total IR (300 GHz to 20 THz)

That is, approximately 46% of the radiated solar power exists in the IR band (300 GHz to 400 THz). Although the peak solar radiated power is in the visible band, the radiated solar power in the IR band is larger than the 39% of the radiated solar power that exists in the visible band (428 THz to 789 THz).

Quoting from the referenced URL: “Above infrared in frequency comes visible light. The Sun emits its peak power in the visible region, although integrating the entire emission power spectrum through all wavelengths shows that the Sun emits slightly more infrared than visible light.


The vast majority of the energy from the sun isn’t in the infrared region.
Your whole argument is based on a misconception.
The infrared being captured by CO2 is coming from the earth.

My thoughts are with you and your family Dr. Ball.

My daughter suffered persecution from the head teacher at a prominent British grammar school because I encouraged her to question everything she was told. It went on for about a year. The head teacher and a complicit member of her staff no longer work there.

Thankfully, despite that and a serious undiagnosed medical condition, she achieved a 2:1 in Zoology and is currently embarking on a Masters degree in the subject.

I trust, as she did, your grandson has learned of the tyranny of petty minded, bureaucratic establishments.


Wish more parents encouraged their kids to question everything,
I hope your daughter does well.


Thanks mate. The trouble is, she questions me as well…….!!!! 🙂

Another excellent article by Tim Ball. Thank you Tim.

Tim wrote:
“The level of inventiveness will astonish as rats desert the sinking ship.”

I had similar thoughts, and wrote this in 2012:

I was searching for some famous quotations about rats, but only found one, which coincidentally was about rats finding a way out:
When the water reaches the upper level, follow the rats.
– Claude Swanson (1862 – 1939)

I found many more about aristocrats, bureaucrats and democrats. Oh well, close enough:

You get fifteen democrats in a room, and you get twenty opinions.
– Senator Patrick Leahy (1940 – ), May 1990

Bureaucrats write memoranda both because they appear to be busy when they are writing and because the memos, once written, immediately become proof that they were busy.
– Charles Peters

The only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is that the Democrats allow the poor to be corrupt, too.
– Oscar Levant (1906 – 1972)

Art forms of the past were really considered elitist. Bach did not compose for the masses, neither did Beethoven. It was always for patrons, aristocrats, and royalty. Now we have a sort of democratic version of that, which is to say that the audience is so splintered in its interests.
– David Cronenberg, Rocketboom, 07-19-06

I am from a state that raises corn and cotton and cockleburs and Democrats, and frothy eloquence neither convinces nor satisfies me. I am from Missouri. You have got to show me.
– William Duncan Vandiver, US Congressman, speech at 1899 naval banquet

The legacy of Democrats and Republicans approaches: Libertarianism by bankruptcy.
– Nick Nuessle, 1992

Most managers were trained to be the thing they most despise — bureaucrats.
– Alvin Toffler

Lil Fella from OZ

This is exactly how wicked endeavours can flourish. Martin Luther King had another quote, We shall have to repent in this generation, not so much for the evil deeds of the wicked people but for the appalling silence of the righteous people.

The Reverend Badger

+10 . I did a rewrite of the “I have a dream” speech about 3 years ago about AGW on a blog somewhere, can’t find it right now but maybe someone here saw it?


Don’t get lax because it looks like truth has won. The philosophy behind “global warming” is the same as that of communism and other we-know-better, anti-liberty, anti-truth totalitarian elitism. The philosophy will never die; it will only change its spots.

So, those of you who have copies of original data sets, please make more copies and store them in safe, separate places.


CACA has never been about science, but political control.


Dr. Ball is obviously very bitter – he has a right to be! Hopefully more people like him will finally have the courage (Gonads) to stand up and let the truth be heard. From a fellow Canadian.

The Reverend Badger

YESSSS !! time to grow a (big) pair. We need some serious numbers in academia to not just pop their heads over the parapet but stand on the top, wave the flag and shout flippin’ loudly.


Dr. Ball, good luck in your upcoming legal fight. A donation to your defense fund is on the way.


There is an interesting article in the current “British Archaeology” magazine by Chris Stringer of the Natural History, acknowledged now to be one of the leading researchers in human evolution .
But it was not always so .
As a PhD student he spent months going around Europe measuring Neanderthal skulls , in the pre – PC era, and came up with the conclusion that Neanderthals were not ancestors of Homo Sapiens , but cousins (although a little “incest” has left a legacy of about 4% Neanderthal DNA in most of us who are “Out of Africa”) . This was so contrary to accepted dogma of the time that , as he says , for 10 years it was difficult to publish . Papers were “booted out” at peer review and it was a struggle to get these alternative views acknowledged . Nevertheless he persevered and eventually won the argument .
There was of course only academic self esteem involved , not the murderous financial complication introduced by the renewable energy megaliths , but it takes perseverance and courage to stand up for what you believe in in many academic fields and Dr Ball is to be admired.

Dr. Ball, one of my regrets in this life as I come towards the end is that I never had the opportunity to meet you in person and shake your hand. (and have a beer with you perhaps)


To control a population you have to create a problem. Those in power don’t like (hate) Freedom. That’s why they create central banks and direct taxation.

Shame on you Dr. Ball. Your bitter pill is misdirected. Mr. McCarter’s mea culpa clearly said he is a convert, wasn’t attempting to hide anything in the past, and should be applauded.

I totally agree. It’s a very bad strategy to beat up on people who are moving in the right direction. It’s not going to encourage others to “come out” either. Why should they get bashed both by the people on the side they’re they are leaving and by people on this side too?

If we’re going to act like this, we’re no better than the progressives with their zeal for the “purity” of their ideological commitments. And as bad as many of the trolls that infest the Internet.

Oops. This was supposed to be after the markl October 15, 2017 at 3:13 pm post below.


Shame on you Dr. Ball. Your bitter pill is misdirected. Mr. McCarter’s mea culpa clearly said he is a convert, wasn’t attempting to hide anything in the past, and should be applauded. It’s what we need. How many people have admitted to being converted from a skeptic to an alarmist? I know this is personal for you but please don’t let it sully your outstanding work.

Javert Chip


Gosh, that’s very nice of you to say all that about Dr Ball & Mr McCarter.

Then again, your 6th grad grandchild wasn’t attacked for what you thought.


Feel better now?


I’m reminded of the prodigal son’s brother in the parable, who resentfully asked why they were throwing a welcome-home party for the deadbeat black sheep of the family.

Those who must choose between an empty stomach or an empty soul deserve empathy, not disdain when they choose the option we consider “wrong”.


I agree with you, markl. If you’re going to attack someone, attack those who continue to support lies and propaganda, not those who have finally seen the light and have now come over to your side. What purpose does such vengeance serve, other than to drive them away?


Off Topic:
Question for Tim Ball or others:
This link on Dr. Ball’s website:
seems to be hacked, leading to


You should probably run a malware checker on your computer.


Thanks! I doubted your advice, but after checking, I discovered that the link works on Safari and Firefox on my Mac, and on Chrome on my wife’s Mac, but NOT on Chrome on my own Mac. Thanks. I continue to investigate.

the old man

Tim, is one of the cases to be heard in BC involve ‘the Weaver’ that I posted on my site a while ago?
Regardless, anll the bset and “go git ’em”.

Yes, that’s the guy. He was an IPCC author on four of their Reports, 1995, 2001, 2007,and 2013.he is now the leader of the Grenn Party in British Columbia and a member of the Provincial Legislature. He was also very influential in policy before that as a member of the Provincial Climate Action Committee and helped write the Policy document known as the Climate Action Plan that introduces Agenda 21 at the municipal level.

This was a great article by Dr. Tim. While I agree with everything he said, I have a slightly different option on the “political” motive behind the Climate Doomers actions. In my opinion they are after massive amounts of money that is there for them. Similarly to their leader Al Gore, it’s the billions of dollars that makes them behave in this ugly manner.


“Just for the money” doesn’t explain why the UN/IPCC started the whole AGW scare unless you mean their intent is to bankrupt Capitalism so Socialism can take over. Individuals may be in it for the money but the prime driver is the downfall of Capitalism. The UN has stated as such and why more people don’t believe it is a mystery.


True, but the mainly Third World membership of the UN was in it for reparations dough, and of course the sc@msters themselves, like Hansen, have personally and professionally made out like bandits off the ho@x. Ditto the greedy Green Machine money-grubbing parasites.

Steve Case

   markl October 15, 2017 at 3:35 pm
“Just for the money” doesn’t explain why the UN/IPCC started the whole AGW scare

“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized
civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring
that about?”
                                                            Maurice Strong

It is not just money. It is all about the the implementation of the New World Order. Al Gore would see himself as one of the Elite who will be running the world. Mann would see himself as one who is favoured by the Elite and be given an important position.




Dear Dr. Ball,
It is very unwise to harshly criticize people beginning to step forward. They were afraid for their families. Welcome them. They will add to a rising chorus of truth which, once it reaches critical mass, will overwhelm the lies of the truly evil men who are behind this fraud. The damn is starting leak.
The best case scenario is that in 5 to 7 years most people will have forgotten they ever believed in global warming due to the burning of fossil fuels. Very likely there be a new manufactured crisis which they will believe in.

Dave Fair

Crises are needed to control the masses, Joel. There is no end.

Javert Chip


How comforting your words must be to Dr Ball.

Probably would mean a little more comping from someone who stood up for him when the Canadian state was banging on his door, or his grandchild was made to stand in the hall.


If they are not made to suffer for their sins, they will just go back to cowering when the next sc@m rolls through.


“…worst of all those who say they knew the science was wrong all along but did not consider it important to speak out;”
For my part, the grubbiest will be those who claim that they relied on scientists for their beliefs. You would lose count of politicians with that response already prepared. Of course the challenge then is for them to explain why their choice of “scientists” was so selective.

Neil Jordan

“For my part, the grubbiest will be those who claim that they relied on scientists for their beliefs.”
True, and the grubbiest might be able to sidestep culpability by pointing to the Climate Scientists(tm). But the people who should be really worried as the house of cards collapses are the Climate Scientists. This is the consequence of holding yourself as a qualified expert and being held in responsible charge, a term that engineers are familiar with. Climate Scientists will have no one to blame but themselves. There is nowhere they can point their shaking fingers except their own mirrors.


I think Dr. Ball is being way too optimistic. There was a point at which I thought I could detect the tide turning but I was wrong. Over the years there has been a continuous stream of papers nibbling at the edges of CAGW but I don’t think we’re seeing the beginning of a deluge.

There’s evidence that ‘science advances one funeral at a time’. link

Certainly Ancel Keys had everyone convinced that fat is evil. link Until he died, research saying that sugar might be the culprit was hard to get published. Climate science is remarkably similar.

At this point I think it is an act of courage for any scientist to come out against CAGW.

Mark T

Unfortunately, most of the people dying are skeptics.

Nah. Retired come out of the closet.

I am nobody from nowhere land and I knew this was a scam from the early 90’s. I am not a climate scientist or any sort of scientist. I can remember when Larson A ice shelf broke off about 1993 and my colleagues thought we would all die in a few days and I just laughed at them. My biggest joke was telling them I could go to Lapstone Beach if sea levels rose. I lived in the Blue Mountains at the time.

This is the point when you are not in the field nobody listens to your skepticism. “Evil abounds when good people do nothing” is not 100% true for this reason. I found WUWT after the Email scandal but before that I would regularly go to CO2Science. When you are Nobody from Nowhere Land no one listens and that is even true here on WUWT.

G. Karst

I listened


Hocus Locus


Science represents mankind’s deepest aspirations—aspirations to power, to wealth, to the satisfaction of sheer animal lust. The cornerstone of modern science is the scientific method. Scientists first formulate hypotheses, or predictions, about nature. Then they perform experiments to test their hypotheses. There are two forms of scientific method, the inductive method and the deductive method:

formulate hypothesis
apply for grant
perform experiments or gather data to test hypothesis
alter data to fit hypothesis

formulate hypothesis
apply for grant
perform experiments or gather data to test hypothesis
revise hypothesis to fit data
backdate revised hypothesis

~from the book “Science Made Stupid” by Tom Weller [1985]


This should be called the Harvey Weinstein effect, where people either suddenly regain their memory and point out their opposition all along to an evil, even if their opposition was invisible to the naked eye or else rely on the Sargent Schulz defence, where they claim “I know nothing”.

The Reverend Badger

I always referred to the “I know nothing” defence as the Barcelona technique.

Particularly in light of our esteemed leaders name.

C K ??

The Harvey Weinstein effect – a good analogy. Only now is it safe for people to speak out against the odious Weinstein, but it is not yet safe to speak out against global warming alarmism.

There is ample evidence that the sensitivity of climate to increasing atmospheric CO2 is very low – and thus catastrophic manmade global warming (CAGW) is a false crisis. Global warming alarmism is a fictional fabrication and it is the greatest embezzlement, in dollar terms, in human history. I suggest that most academics who possess even average intellect know this my now, just as most screen actors knew about Weinstein and his casting couch.

The majority of academics have not spoken out against global warming alarmism for obvious reasons:

1. They know they can get grants if they support CAGW, and NO grants if they oppose it.

2. They know that if they openly oppose CAGW, they will be ostracized by their peers and may be fired by their institutions.

3. Many academics lean to the political left, because it is socially fashionable and because they are insulated from the economic destructiveness of leftist politics.

4. Global warming alarmism is the new “front” for economic Marxists, who were discredited after the fall of the Soviet Union circa 1990
Ref. Dr. Patrick Moore, “Hard Choices for the Environmental Movement”, 1994, “The Rise of Eco-Extremism”

5. Academics as a group are not particularly courageous or principled – it is safer for them to do and say nothing that would threaten their comfortable existence.

Regards, Allan

Austrian Election Results for Green Party:

2013: 582,657 votes, 12.4% of the vote – 24 seats won
2017: 141,959 votes, 3.3% of the vote – 0 seats won* (4% threshold to get seats)

*preliminary results.


Nice. 🙂

Austrians are waking up……… I wish Australians would. !


The comments supporting Tim are all good and likely somewhat of a boost to his confidence in succeeding in this case against what are likely the world’s worst scoundrels. However, I believe that if we really want to support Tim, we should “speak with our pocket books.” I believe that at least one commenter has already stated that he/she is going to do this.
Once I determine how (are you listening Tim), I too will throw a few quid into the hat. Anyone else going to join me?

The side bar under Skeptics lists ‘Dr Tim Ball” go to
Just put in my $200. Have had the pleasure of hearing Tim speak many years ago. Was fascinated them, still am now.

While at his website, take a look around, consider buying a few of his books and distributing them as Christmas presents.


Thank you. I’m on my way over.
Anyone else?

What a difference a thread makes. Why only the other day I was being lectured here by Larry Kummer about how I should give due respect to the serious scientists Gavin Schmidt and Zeke Hausfather.
You respect ’em Larry – not me.


Comic irony. Neither renewable nor sustainable and less “green” every day.


Could someone tell me who “Mr. McCarter” is? I keep coming up with an architect.


Thank you. But that didn’t answer my question.


I don’t think that anyone here has ever stated his CV. His name and that he presumably lives in or near Vancouver, BC, is all that most of us know of him. Our host IDs him as a “scientist”.


Well, if Robert McCarter is his real name, it is surprising that his name doesn’t come up on top of a Google hit list.


Appeal to authority measured by google hits excluding SkS?

You may try this:

Peter Morris

I’m glad you wrote this. I got pretty worked up reading McCarter’s apology but you articulated what I was feeling so much better.

The evidence of the deception has been there for a while. Admitting ignorance and shifting the blame to a dislike of politics is not an excuse. It just demonstrates how right Kuhn was and how modern scientists ignore his advice at the peril of the entire endeavor.

Or endeavour, if you like. There, I extended an olive branch.