Guest Editorial: Dr. Tim Ball
I thought about making this my last article on climate for this or any other website except my own. I planned the action some time ago, but it was the recent headline in the Telegraph that triggered this penultimate move. It said, “Climate change is a risk investors can’t ignore: Black Rock latest to sound the alarm on environment.”
Climate change is not a risk factor. Current climate and climate changes are normal and well within the pattern of change over history, certainly the last 10,000 years. The world believes otherwise, despite efforts by me and others to make the correct information available.
This means that after 50 years (1968-2019) of trying to educate the public about the weather, global warming, and climate change I achieved little or no change in understanding, attitude, or most importantly, policy on the world stage. My attempts to counter the massive deception that began as human-caused global warming (AGW) and later shifted to human-caused climate change, fell short. The deception is now what people accept, although they don’t necessarily believe. Because of that it is now the underlying reason for all policy on energy and environment that are the mainstay of these business-world views, indeed all views.
The only risk is not climate, but the one that governments created by the pseudoscience of climate science. All elements of society from energy to the environment and from industry to business and daily living are based on completely unnecessary and expensive limitations. The sad irony is that the climate change risk the investors face is a shift to colder weather when all governments are warning them to prepare for warmer conditions. This false basis for society thinking and planning is so pervasive that it is unlikely to change.
I am frustrated by the success of the deception, but I am angry about the waste of time, money, and opportunities lost. I think about the trillions wasted on a non-existent problem while real problems go wanting. For example, it is likely that enough money was wasted to provide clean water and adequate sewage for the entire world.
Apart from my overall failure, there was one failure restricted to the skeptics that might create different results. Skeptics are people who recognized the false science used to create the threat of human-caused global warming. It’s a group that slowly grew in numbers over the years but achieved little impact in the wider community. A major reason is the division of that community into approximately 15% who are competent and comfortable in science and 85% who are not. While I achieved some recognition in this group of skeptics, I failed to convince them that the wider public would never understand climatology. Worse, I failed to convince them that even if they could identify all the bad science, manipulation of data, creation of false and misleading reports, and deliberate exaggeration of stories to amplify fear that they wanted, it would do little to spread the truth and correct the story. I failed to convince the skeptics that without explanation of the MOTIVE, people would not listen to their critiques and warnings.
Recently, I received the charge through my web site that I was just “another conspiracy theorist.” Other attempts to marginalize included the term global warming skeptic or climate change denier. These were effectively what I call collective ad hominems, but the fall back dismissal was usually that you are a ‘conspiracy theorist.’
It is encouraging that a recent article appeared on the WUWT website that proposes a motive for the misuse of climate.
But the Left seeks far more. In fact, its goal is nothing less than total control of every aspect of human life, which we call “totalitarianism”, justified by fear of climate change.
The types of commentary that article will engender are predictable. They will indicate why people have not considered motive in the discussion to date. It is a classic Catch 22 you must provide a motive and marginalized or don’t provide one and get no traction with the wider public. It is critical to remember that you are asking people to believe that a small group of people managed to deceive the world into believing that a trace gas (0.04% of the total atmosphere) was changing the entire climate because of humans. In addition, that group convinced many others to participate in the deception. The public view is that deceiving so many is just not possible. The trouble is it was possible. To paraphrase Lincoln, they effectively fooled most of the people and marginalized the few not fooled.
After 50 years of combating hysteria over climate change, it is time to take a new direction. I say a new direction because the last 50 years attempted to educate the people to the lie that is human-caused global warming and effectively changed nothing. It especially did not change the unnecessary, ineffective, and massively expensive energy and environment policies that control everything in the world. When I see a car advertisement identifying its low CO2 output as a major selling feature, I know how badly I lost. Millions of more people now believe in AGW than when I began. Now, most governments believe and act on the AGW belief compared to the few when I started.
The first 10 years of the 50 involved dealing with the threats about the end of the world due to global cooling. The last 40 years dealt with the same threats about warming. In recent years, I used the quote from Lowell Ponte’s 1976 book The Cooling to illustrate how similar they were.
It is cold fact: the global cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with for ten thousand years. Your stake in the decisions we make concerning it is of ultimate importance; the survival of ourselves, our children, our species.
Change the seventh-word “cooling” to warming, and it applies to the entire 50 years. What happens going forward? What are governments preparing for? Is it appropriate? Are we victims of the adage that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing? Will governments prove once again that they always make a situation worse?
In the 1970s I knew that the cooling trend would end because it fit the overall pattern. This included the longer-term emergence from the nadir of the Little Ice Age circa 1680 and shorter cycles since. The world warmed from 1900 to 1940, cooled from 1940 to 1980, warmed from 1980 to 1998 and has cooled slightly from 1998 to the present.
Fortunately, the idiots we call leaders did nothing about the climate when cooling was the trend in the 1970s. Unfortunately, after the 1980s they began to succumb to the lies, misrepresentations, and pressure of the eco-bullies; those who used the environment and later climate for a political agenda. We needed the paradigm shift to environmentalism because it doesn’t make sense to soil our own nest. However, as with all such shifts, a few seized it for the power and financial rewards it provided. They were able to obtain power up to the UN General Assembly. They introduced the full environment and climate change plans at the Earth Summit conference in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 as Agenda 21.
The movement appeared to falter at the international level when even Greenpeace announced that Rio +20 was a failure. This was not a falter but exactly as Maurice Strong and the proponents of Agenda 21 planned. The entire objective of Agenda 21 is firmly ensconced in all societies through the municipal level of government.
The climate plan that isolated and demonized CO2 through the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was designed and implemented at the national level through every weather office in nations throughout the world. This puts the idea and control of those countries almost completely in the hands of the deep state and beyond the control of international and national politicians. They then promote the concepts of the environmental and climate plans through the Climate Action Plan imposed at the Municipal level. This puts the original plan of thinking globally and acting locally into practice at the lowest political level. A conference in San Francisco in July 2018 explains the objective.
California Governor Jerry Brown has announced that a Global Climate Action summit will be held in San Francisco in September 2018, in a challenge to President Donald Trump’s plan to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate accord.
Nearly 200 nations have signed the 2015 agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which are widely thought to be responsible for rising temperatures, and Brown is one of a number of local and regional leaders working to build coalitions without Trump.
Here is what one mayor wrote about what occurred in San Francisco.
The Global Climate Action summit in San Francisco began on Wednesday. This year’s goal: “Take Ambition to the Next Level.”
What is that next level? As part of the We Are Still In, Mayors Climate Alliance, and other city climate-action efforts, many U.S cities are creating their first ever climate-action plans; others are rewriting theirs to meet more ambitious goals. The next level is ensuring that these multi-year plans integrate equity considerations or risk perpetuating an unjust life for millions of already marginalized Americans.
The original intention of the CO2 pseudoscience deception was purely political as this quote confirms. Note the word “equity.” It confirms quotes that were around before the deception reached the world stage. Former US Senator Timothy Wirth who went on to head the UN Climate Foundation said,
“We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing, in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”
Former Canadian Environment Minister Christine Stewart said,
“No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits…. climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
What those quotes really mean is that we must use the climate for total political and economic control. If people continue to buy the false science story so much the better. For example, on April 13, 2019, US Presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren promised,
Besides an executive order barring new fossil fuel leases on public lands on shore and offshore, Warren said Monday that she would work toward boosting U.S. electricity generation from renewable sources offshore or on public lands.
This is planned despite the failure of such actions everywhere they are applied.
The climate deception and the climate debate are complete and, though they will continue, they are irrelevant. The Paris Climate Agreement is almost dead. At the 2018 meeting of the Green Climate Fund, the Director resigned.
Howard Bamsey, an Australian diplomat who served as the GCF’s executive director since January 2017, resigned after a “difficult” meeting in which no new projects were approved, according to a statement released after the gathering in Songdo, South Korea.
There are many charges and warnings of corruption and misuse of funds against GCF. The institutions associated with climate change at the international and national level are collapsing. It creates an illusion that the skeptics are winning. It distracts from the fact that the entire focus quietly shifted to the municipal level and is infiltrating through the world. Much of the funding for the San Francisco meeting came from the World Bank.
I agree with the author who claims the misuse of climate was originally a left-wing agenda for control. However, I think the idea is so attractive because it is under the cloak of ‘saving the planet’ that it fits the platform of all politicians. They all want control. The only difference is in the degree and method. Of course, the ultimate irony is that the massive cost of this anti-CO2 system is only possible because of the one thing it demonizes, fossil fuels.
As a result of this train of events, I decided to stop trying to educate people about the global deception that is AGW. It is a firmly established false fact. Most skeptics know this because many are stunned by the strong hostile reaction they get when they state their position publicly. In many cases, they become ostracized in their family. The challenge now is to help people understand the differences between deceptively derived policies, and what is the best, most adaptive, most profitable, and most rewarding strategy for survival of the individual, business, or industry. In this age of the big lie, survival and success strategy is more important and challenging than ever. I want to help people bridge the gap between the false world of government and the real world. I will not achieve that through explaining the corrupted science but providing a credible motive.
What has been missing in this effort to educate the public was highlighted in a previous WUWT article “Why we may never be able to change minds on the climate issue” (April 12, 2019). People are naturally tribal; historically for protection from neighboring tribes and wild beasts, in modern times for the safety of social acceptance and business relationships. Skeptical scientists and technical people tend to argue facts, figures, and data. They/we can win the debate, but that is insufficient to overcome tribal loyalties. Why would someone want to risk being socially cast out by their peers and friends by voicing a differing opinion on climate? What do they have to gain from that, what do the have to lose? Skeptics need to build attractive social groups with cheerful, persuasive leadership and an interesting social culture. The broader public will be attracted to that first and foremost, and then perhaps be willing to hear “facts, figures and data.” Plus its more fun.
The mistake made by skeptics was to assume that all people are inherently unbiased and intelligent and that conveying facts with supportive data will influence their thinking.
Unfortunately, left-wing ideology is not based on logic, but on a belief system. In a debate with an alarmist, all logic and facts are dismissed simply because they are not considered important. What is important to these poeple is supporting the belief in their moral cause, which is about taking money from wealthy people and redistributing to their victims, which are generally poor people and minority groups, plus themselves. Importantly, left wing ideology is based on having victims and a perpetrator (ie: enemy), which is why society is becoming more and more divided. This is a deliberate tactic to first divide and then conquer. Here we see deliberate divisions being orchestrated between sexes, races, religions, etc, all designed to destaibilise society. Climate change is seen by the alarmists as an important tool in which to facilitate their outcome as it provides a moral cause of salvation, and a perpetrator, which are the systems of capitalism and democracy, which they seek to overthow to establish hard left totalitarianism.
In terms of being able to counter the narrative, this is not easy. Left wing ideology has slowly taken hold of all learning institutions in western countries and most governement funded institutions. This has been a deliberate move by the left. Once you control the learning corriculum and government regulatory bodies, then you can control what people do and think and you can condition people from a young age into your system of beliefs, just as we see in extreme religious ideology. Trying to convince a climate alarmist that the theory is wrong is just as dificult as trying to convince an Islamic extremist that there is no Allah. It’s basically impossible as there is no room for logic in a belief system.
So where do we go from here ?
Possibly the only way to fix society is to take back control of the education system. This won’t be easy as it’s completely overerrun by extreme left wing zealots. Even if you can kick the zealots out today, it would take decades to restore the ideological balance within society back to a normal situation (aka 1970s).
Most likely we will need to let this entire scenario play out. This is a bad outcome experience, but one that every skeptic can clearly envisage. Once the final chapters of the left wing playbook are put in place, ie: GND or similar, then we all know that total economic collapse will follow and mass poverty and starvation will ocurr across western countries. Once people have become poor and impoverished then they tend to focus on getting their own food and shelter as a priority. This is probbaly the time when poeple will have the hard wake up call and realise they were duped and the time when people can be reeducated back to the where we were 50-100 years ago.
Tim
You don’t quit when you are winning.,the damage being done to the economies who adopt this creed is becoming increasingly obvious hence the more strident and vicious reactions.Sceptics are on the ascendancy. Do not give up.
Don’t worry: Reality, sooner or later, will catch with the Alarmists…
“Recently, I received the charge through my web site that I was just “another conspiracy theorist.” Other attempts to marginalize included the term global warming skeptic or climate change denier.”
________________________________________________
be assured not to be alone with that label: conspiracy theorist.
Every responsible state has papers and documents which can not be made accessible to the general public – especially the MSM.
Usually after 30 years all documents are released.
During this time, the underlying problem should be recognized and banned.
________________________________________________
Who in the meantime thinks “there is something missing” but has no access to facts must stand to be suspected as a conspiracy theorist.
C’est la vie.
A very good and interesting article.
I as a Atheist find exactly the same thing if I ever discuss faiths with a person
who is a believer.
It is not enough to simply say that its just a myth, with no solid evidence
to back it up, but if you take it one step at a time such as how did a
simple tale of a young preacher man, Jesus, who upset the strong group
of High Priests who ran the Temple ceremonies, and who then framed
him for the crime of his followers carrying arms, resulting in his Jesus
execution, evolve into today’s widespread belief system.
You then point out the odd situation of the enforcer Saul of Tarsus, who
while on the road to Damascus probably suffered a stroke, and this event
completely changed his thinking about what had become the Jesus cult.
He Saul somehow now thought that contrary to his belief hat the Jesus
cult must be destroyed, had changed to a belief now that Jesus was in
fact the Son of God, and that he had been placed on Earth to save the
Jewish people from their sinful ways, but that as the Jews had in effect
aided the Romans in his execution, then they were to blame for killing him.
This way of thinking was essential if he Saul was to ever sell this story to
the Romans, it was the Jews and certainly not Governor Pilot who did it.
Thus this myth was born that the Jews were bad people and that lead
to the anti- Semitism in Germany and the death camps.
Fast forward to the time of Emperor Constantine and we see a clear
parallel with today’ politicians. Constantine for political reasons to unite
his vast Empire, offered a deal that they, the early Christians could not
refuse.
He cherry picked his version of the Jesus story and said if they
accepted it as the official story that he would make them Princes of the
Church, plus lots of money to build Churches and spread the word.
As we say that is now history, and its a perfect example of how a simple
story of a idealistic young man in Roman Palestine can become a still
very powerful organization.
To me the resemblance between this story about Jesus and Climate change
are very similar.
So my suggestion regarding the widespread belief in Global warming come
climate change is to nibble at it a bit at a time, starting with the key card
in this whole House of Cards, the molecule CO2.
I hope that this article does not upset to many people who just as with
Climate Change , they truly believe.
MJE VK5ELL
I’m reading a good book about the Apostle Paul and the early Christian church.
The Title is: Jesus is Risen, Paul and the Early Church by David Limbaugh.
It’s been enlightening for me. And it has a good description of Paul on the Road to Damascus. It doesn’t sound like he had a stroke to me.
Thanks for all your work Dr Tim Ball!
I certainly understand your frustration.
Its like watching the lemmings walk over the precipice.
But, in reading your article, I was reminded of a particular verse in the Bible,
2 Thessalonians 2:11 New International Version (NIV)
11 For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie.
Seems apt.
Dr. Ball: I respect your decision but am saddened by it. I would ask you that you look at the glass and realize that it wouldn’t be merely empty but for efforts, it would lay shattered. The hysteria would be universal and it would dominate government action and result in totalitarianism beyond our comprehension.
Reconsider and weigh the thought that without men & women of intellectual rigor willing to challenge those misusing science what hope do those without the education, talent & experience have when their instinct tells them “this is wrong”?
Thank you regardless of your decision.
I say a new direction because the last 50 years attempted to educate the people to the lie that is human-caused global warming and effectively changed nothing.
How could you possibly know what effect you’ve had? And even if none, should you be the one man who changes the world? If so, why? And if not, do you do well to be angry? Does not the Potter have the right to form the clay? Finally, how can you possibly think to achieve anything if you hide your light under a bushel?
For one such as I who has greatly appreciated your past efforts, and for which I thank you, it’s extremely disappointing to learn that you yourself have decided to snuff out your own light by an irrational, if not pretentious, standard.
Are you not one of many appointed watchman as per Ezekiel 33:7ff?
“How could you possibly know what effect you’ve had?”
Yeah, you never know who might be reading your material. President Trump might be a fan. Don’t deprive Donald of your insights. 🙂
Skeptics are going up against a very powerful CAGW machine and it can be discouraging at times but I think the skeptics are winning. The only thing the other side has is a Big Lie and no evidence for it being real. Meanwhile, the temperatures have been cooling for the last three years which can’t help the alarmist case.
Skeptics are going up against a very powerful CAGW machine and it can be discouraging at times but I think the skeptics are winning.
And even if we aren’t, what shall we do, run away moaning and bewailing our failure to convince the world that our position is the correct one? Or is it better to stay in the fight until the very end?
I would argue the latter.
You ever play Go, Dr. Ball?
The right move can flip nearly the entire board from one color to the other.
Such will be the case with this.
I don’t think so. People don’t like to admit they’ve been duped. They’ll double-down instead.
Ala the Democrat response to Mueller report.
Thanks Dr Ball.
I always marveled at people like Dr Ball who stood in the precipice and tried to make a difference. They try to “Hold Back The Night” and they do their damndest as long as they can.
So, it’s time to pass the torch to the next standard bearer, whomever that might be. But be assured, Dr Ball, that you have been appreciated by thousands and that is a pretty good legacy.
Generation IV Nuclear. The new generation alternatives cannot meltdown. They use nuclear waste from current nuclear generation facilities.
Strangely, this technology should be approved by the true believers in the religion of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming, those atheists who see no problem, and those true believers in the other religion who advocate Catastrophic Natural Global Cooling.
No danger. Eats nuclear waste. Produces no CO2. Can provide sufficient energy to survive the warming, if any. Can provide sufficient energy to survive the cooling, if any.
Side benefit: We can stop being “friends” with the Saudis. Our “allies” enforce Sharia.
“There should be a test for accountants, prognosticators, forecasters, futurist, meteorologists, climatologist, scientists, predictors, and visionaries: They should have to disclose their past record for predicting the future.”
P.S. Wall Street already does it.
Anonymous Heins
“Futurebabble” by Dan Gardner is a good read. He discussed the work of Philip Tetlock (an American psychologist), who ran a 20 year project on predictions. He rounded up about 300 people, experts in many fields plus some lay people. They were asked to make some 30,000 predictions about various issues over the 20 years. Experts were very good at explaining the current situation (which I guess is why they were recognised as experts), but when it came to predicting the future, you might as well rely on a dart-throwing chimp.
I have said this too many times, I am sure regular readers are sick of it by now, but it has to be said again. Stop trying to win with facts and logic, you can only win by appealing to emotion and benefits. Sales 101. The left have been doing that for decades. Look what car companies have done. Instead of fighting electric cars with facts, they embrace the dangerous warming narrative and sell the benefits of those cars. It is long past the time when we should have embraced the warming predictions as a good thing and sold the benefits of it. Instead we continue to fight with facts that alienate the uninformed. They simply don’t want to hear what they don’t understand. They want to feel like they serve some useful purpose so they jump on the band wagon of the side they see as winning. To those people the winning side is the right side. Believe me, they will change sides faster than a chameleon when they need to.
Tom in Florida
100%!
I find that accusing warmists of racism and poor-hating, is an effective way of getting their attention and even occasionally getting them to think. Thanks to Paul Driessen and others i have plenty of ammunition on my side.
I think the better course is for Dr. Ball to continue doing what he’s been doing. He needs to continue showing the public in understandable ways how the current science is flawed. That information has to be out there.
If you shift to motive, you will be scoffed at. For one thing, a large number of people have become convinced that socialism is a good thing. Telling them that Climate Change is just a face for the advancement of socialism will be seen as a *good* thing, not a bad. Many of the rest will see your claim as doubling down on conspiracy theories. They won’t believe you. They will see that as absurd.
Your best bet to fight this scam is to do something positive. That is advocating hard for Generation 4 nuclear power. Oil, gas and coal will not last forever. We will need to find a replacement for them someday. That may be a hundred years or more, but that is the cushion that we need to develop new technologies. We know that windmills and solar panels aren’t the solution. Gen4 nuclear is close at hand. The best aspect of Gen4 is that when it is fully developed, it will be nearly a carbon-free method of power.
It will be an uphill battle. There is a lot of money behind windmills and solar panels. That’s probably why Blackrock is pushing Climate Change now; they are probably heavily invested in those fields. But the logic behind Gen4 is strong: a long-term solution that isn’t beholden to foreign powers and is a clean source of energy. This is the shift in focus that Dr. Ball needs. Instead of being a negative voice (Climate Alarmism is false!), he becomes a positive voice (Let’s go with a new clean source of energy that solves the intermittency problem of solar and wind!). He can still state that he doesn’t believe in the alarm, but come across not as an opponent who cares nothing for our future children, but as someone who is willing to work toward the same goal of cheap, clean power.
90+% of humanity are not scientists and trying to convince them AGW was wrong with science was never going to work.
Everyone on the planet has one common denominator. We all have a political belief and, we are all experts in politics.
How can one educate people in science when they don’t understand the subject matter in the first place?
It’s about time sceptics began to understand the game is won by political means, which is where the alarmists hit pay dirt. They spoke the language of politics and, of course, everyone is a political expert.
How can one educate people in science when they don’t understand the subject matter in the first place?
Like so:
“In sum, a strategy must recognise what is possible. In climate research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible. The most we can expect to achieve is the prediction of the probability distribution of the system’s future possible states by the generation of ensembles of model solutions. This reduces climate change to the discernment of significant differences in the statistics of such ensembles. The generation of such model ensembles will require the dedication of greatly increased computer resources and the application of new methods of model diagnosis. Addressing adequately the statistical nature of climateis computationally intensive, but such statistical information is essential.”
http://www.thestupidithurts.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/TAR-14.pdf
Try telling that to an Arts graduate (ostensibly educated) or an 18 year old working in a coffee shop, a supermarket or in an office. Try telling it to a stay at home Mum, a bus driver, or most of his passengers.
They simply won’t get past the second sentence before switching off.
“The most we can expect to achieve is the prediction of the probability distribution of the system’s future possible states by the generation of ensembles of model solutions.”
Classic, unintelligible, scientific pomposity.
As a layman I can, with considerable authority, tell you that had I not been reading this blog and many others for several years now, I wouldn’t have a clue what you just said.
Was it Einstein who said something like ‘If you can’t explain science to a six year old you don’t understand it yourself’?
The alarmists have stolen a march because they discuss the subject emotionally and politically, subjects we are all experts in.
As a layman I can, with considerable authority, tell you that had I not been reading this blog and many others for several years now, I wouldn’t have a clue what you just said.
Interesting . . . this is the very text I use to talk to laymen in order to avoid science altogether. Seems to me it says it all in plain English.
Dr. Tim Ball
“It is a classic Catch 22 you must provide a motive and (be)? marginalized or don’t provide one and get no traction with the wider public.
P.S. Great job, as always….
Tim I have been following all this climate nonsense with great interest in the last several years and I can assure you that your articles and lectures on the internet are most valuable entertaining and useful and most important educational. Thousands of people have enjoyed reading your prose and listening to you. You do it very well you are the best. Students must have loved your classes that you taught at university. Please carry on even if you do it not as often. We all look forward to your next post. And more people really understand things as they really are from what you have told them.
You don’t think we are making enough progress? The analogy is like this think of an unbelievably messy dirty room and you start to clean it up. It really doesn’t look a lot better until you have done 90% of the work. I think we are at the 90% point. And we need you to help finish off the last 10%. Keep at it and you can help get it done. Your work has been very significant. The world needs you.
“Just another conspiracy theorist….”
Well, if that’s all that someone has to say about you, he has nothing. That isn’t even a good insult. The proper come back is “Well, at least I”m consistent!”
There are people whose opinions seem to be cast in stone (they aren’t) who simply won’t accept another view or an opposing idea, and all they have left as a response is insults, and amateurish stuff at that. Take some time off, put your feet up, read a good novel or two, and move on. These people are stupid and blind to other possibilities because they want to be that way. Arguing with a convert to a cult to try to get him to see a different viewpoint is not wasted energy. Bring up that word: CULT – and ask him how it feels to be unable to think for himself.
This field of science needs it’s own Sarbanes Oxley. Never understood as a CPA why the same stringent laws aren’t applied for climate studies. The end users are governments who spend billions on this. If your numbers have material errors, I want some of those claw back laws applied. I want scientists called in on the carpet. I want Congressional hearings. I want jail time. You sign your name as having peer-reviewed it, you own it. Why should it be any different?
Great idea! Especially since the damage which would result from taking the advice of so-called “climate scientists” is so much worse than that which could ever result from following the advice of accountants!
I’m with Garland Lowe: “…alarmism sells.”
The media are a HUGE part of the problem. They have been bought and sold by the most incorrigible control freaks ever to walk the face of the Earth. Also, since CGI and VR/AR have made such great strides at imitating reality, we must remember that what we’re viewing might very well be fake or heavily doctored-up.
I personally take in their message in extremely small doses.
When i’m not at work, I spend my time consuming, making, and teaching others to make uplifting music–or reading thoughtful blogs like WUWT.
A couple of skeptics have made their mark , made their mark by doing better science.
Steve McIntryre
Anthony watts
Nic Lewis.
The skeptics who just shout no, who fantasize about global conspiracies, they never leave a mark.
They do no science; they don’t even try. They have no students, they just have cheerleaders, and
folks who link to their nuttery. Nobody carries on their work or builds on the their work
because they didn’t do anything.
In the end they lose the science fight because they never did better science, they just threw tomatoes.
And when they lose the science fight, embittered and old, they quit and try a new fight that they
are totally untrained for.
“a new fight that they are totally untrained for.”
Freudian slip about yourself perhaps Mosh?
So remind us about your science degree again, last I looked English lit wasn’t a science 🙂
LdB
Ah! But his latest employers have given Stephen the title of ‘Scientist’ so of course he’s now scientifically educated.
Ah yes I forgot employers can just issue honorary science degrees.
Agreed. And Mosher displays his low-brow hostility by throwing tomatoes at one with a PhD in Climatology.
Steve,
you are badly mistaken since most people learn on their own about climate stuff. They visit websites that help them see what the nonsense is about. I have converted quite a few over the years, some have referred me to join my forum in past years. Others have gone to the warmist drone level, meaning they have lost but never will admit it.
I joined quite a few forums over the years, 20 years ago, when I first started, there were a lot of people who were convinced that global warming was a big concern, but over time, people began to see behind the curtains. See that Al Gore always full of hot air who always duck debate challenges, see that the Hockey Stick paper was garbage, even though a small group of people defend the garbage with a passion that borders on insanity, most people now a days don’t give a dam. See that the 2009 e-mails opened a lot of eyes to the corruption. The Wegman and North reports took the hot air out of Dr. Mann’s playstation paper, exposing it as statistical gibberish.
Then we see that the U.S. Senate in 1997 told President Clinton in a resolution, that they think the Kyoto treaty sucks with a 95-0 vote. Then a number of published science papers came along showing that CO2 LAGS Temperature changes.
Whoops!
Then recent polls such as the open ended question one that people can list their concerns had zero climate concerns in it, ZERO!
“New Gallup Poll: Americans do not even mention global warming as a problem – 36 ‘problems’ cited, but not climate
https://www.climatedepot.com/2018/07/21/new-gallup-poll-americans-do-not-even-mention-global-warming-as-a-problem-36-problems-cited-but-not-climate/
Whoops!
Lets face it more and more people are tuning out because they have been hearing the same dooms day pap for 30 years now, why take it seriously anymore they often say. The remaining diehards to the AGW cause have gotten crazier and crazier, with the latest baloney called the Green Plan, since according to the bartender boob, we have only 12 years to live, since the invisible CO2 bogeyman is out to get yooooooo! Unless you trash Capitalism, usher in total Authoritarian Socialism, then we live with a boot on our necks, but we will live far beyond 2030, when I feel better know we have schizophrenic planetary saviors always around to watch over us (literally), while we enjoy watery soup and a one room shack.
Utopia is right around the corner! Yahoooooo……
I don’t agree with Dr. Ball since warmists have LOST the debate, they are so busy changing the data and lying like hell, that they seem unaware that skeptics are pointing them out to people, I sure have a lot in this forum, where I fight the low thinking warmists, who act if they are drones for the AGW cause. They can barely articulate anything scientifically in a coherent manner, but golly they think they are smart…., often completely unaware that they show a reduced motor thinking skill, which is why they make fools of themselves and be unaware of it.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/environment.84/
As far as I know this is one of the largest Environment forum on the internet chock full of climate related debates, where skeptics routinely make fools of the warmists who ignore the inconvenient evidence and lie a lot. When I first came on there were a lot of confident warmists participating all the time, but today with just 3 people doing most of the heavy lifting (Sunsettommy, SSDD, billy_bob) have driven most of them into the corner, exposing their ignorance and their obvious lemming cult behavior.
A recent post I started there was to defend Dr. Moore’s being a founding member, a couple warmists would NOT accept the actual original Greenpeace webpages that clearly showing him as a founder, it was hilarious as they tried so hard to defeat the evidence.
GreenPeace lies about Dr. Moore…. again
http://www.usmessageboard.com/threads/greenpeace-lies-about-dr-moore-again.745984/
Warmists make fools of themselves so easily here.
Whoop!
There have been new skeptics showing up from other areas of the forum or from outside who joins to add to the beating warmists get. They know they are losing the debate. Only one new member who is a warmist showed up in the last year.
I haven’t even brought up another Environment forum, where a few skeptics there are actual scientists, run in circles around warmists who are unaware of the exposure to their delusions to the world. I often visit just to watch the beatings there and learn some more too.
Never give up and don’t denigrate the smart people who don’t need websites to know that the AGW is at best only 50% correct, the rest is impossible since it never happened in the last Billion years.
The world needs more than just scientists doing science Steven. Most of the world will never read a single scientific paper. They need honest people who can distill the essence of hundreds of scientific papers into an easily understandable format. They need people who can read scientific papers that most people can’t understand, and point out whether or not the conclusions in the studies are valid, vapid, or somewhere in between. Science can’t stand on it’s own. It needs editors. It needs compilers. It needs people like Dr. Ball. He has already left a mark on me, and I think more people than he will ever know. Now put away your tomatoes please.
Steve,
The reason the unambiguous science from so many that overturns everything that the IPCC claims is ignored is because the conspiracy you deny is very real, although to me it seems to be more of a conflict of interest, where the IPCC’s very existence requires what the laws of physics can’t provide. Other than complete incompetence, there can be no other explanation for how climate science per the IPCC got to be so incredibly wrong. By this I mean an ECS that violates every known law of physics as it defies the data. The fact that the science is so incredibly wrong contributes to why so many have a hard time accepting how wrong it is. After all, how can ostensibly intelligent scientists be so incredibly wrong about something so important to the future of mankind.
If you don’t think the science is horribly broken, then answer the question I’ve posed many times and that nobody who accepts the IPCC’s fake science has been able to answer, including well known alarmist ‘scientists’:
How can the planet tell one Joule from another such that the next W/m^2 of solar input (forcing) will increase surface emissions by 4.4 W/m^2 (0.8C) while all the other W/m^2 arriving from the Sun only contribute 1.62 W/m^2 to the surface emissions?
Steve,
The reason the unambiguous science from so many that overturns everything that the IPCC claims is ignored is because the conspiracy you deny is very real, although to me it seems to be more of a conflict of interest, where the IPCC’s very existence requires what the laws of physics can’t provide. Other than complete incompetence, there can be no other explanation for how climate science per the IPCC got to be so incredibly wrong. By this I mean an ECS that violates every known law of physics as it defies the data. The fact that the science is so incredibly wrong contributes to why so many have a hard time accepting how wrong it is. After all, how can ostensibly intelligent scientists be so incredibly wrong about something so important to the future of mankind.
If you don’t think the science is horribly broken, then answer the question I’ve posed many times and that nobody who accepts the IPCC’s fake science has been able to answer, including well known alarmist ‘scientists’:
How can the planet tell one Joule from another such that the next W/m^2 of solar input (forcing) will increase surface emissions by 4.4 W/m^2 (0.8C) while all the other W/m^2 arriving from the Sun only contribute 1.62 W/m^2 each to the surface emissions?
If every W/m^2 of solar forcing increased surface emissions by 4.4 W/m^2. the surface emissions would correspond to a temperature close to the boiling point of water. The scientific method calls the results of this test of compliance with COE falsification.
In the final analysis, the scientific truth will always win. It’s too bad none of us will still be here to say ‘I told you so’ when kilometers thick glaciers are descending on Manhattan once again.
It’s odd that so many deny the conflict of interest shaping climate science. The IPCC’s charter is to identify science supporting the UNFCCC whose transparent agenda is to destroy wealth using the pretext of saving the planet as the IPCC’s self serving consensus claims is ‘most likely’ required. In light of this conflict of interest, how did the IPCC ever become the arbiter of what is and what is not climate science by what they publish in their reports?
Reason can not prevail against stupid, Dr Ball.
Now you know how silly was the notion you could fix anybody.
Fighting and winning are 2 entirely different propositions.
The fighting was fail.
Your intransigent devotion to the truth was win.
What makes you a hero, Dr Ball, is that you refused to compromise your principles.
You asserted irrevocable sovereignty of your mind. You own your self.
There is nothing greater to be won.
Dear Mr. Ball,
Your efforts and those of others that share your understanding of climate science have certainly not been in vain. The most powerful government in the world is actively dismantling the fake science and policies which would flow therefrom. The American people know its a scam, hence no serious national policy response. Only the lunatic fringe in blue states are attempting to perpetuate this windmill tilting. They will fail as these policies will make life unbearable and unaffordable.
Thank you from a grateful citizen. There are many like me.